What do you think?
Rate this book
Šventasis Pranciškus iš Asyžiaus
Vieno iškiliausių XX amžiaus katalikų mąstytojų G. K. Chestertono knyga apie šv. Pranciškų – daugiau nei vien įprasta biografija. Nepakartojamas autoriaus rašymo būdas, žaižaruojantys netikėti palyginimai ir metaforos, žaismingas pasakojimo stilius yra bene geriausias įvadas į Šventojo pasaulį šių laikų žmogui, kuris dažnai pats nebežino, kuo tiki ir apskritai, ar dar kuo nors tiki. Šventasis Pranciškus dažnai tikėjimui žmones augino per draugystę. Jei jums pavyktų susidraugauti su šia knyga, neabejojame, pasaulį išvystumėte šiek tiek kitaip.
192 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1923
1979 people are currently reading
15899 people want to read
About the author
G.K. Chesterton
4,546 books5,711 followersGilbert Keith Chesterton was an English writer, philosopher, lay theologian, and literary and art critic.
He was educated at St. Paul’s, and went to art school at University College London. In 1900, he was asked to contribute a few magazine articles on art criticism, and went on to become one of the most prolific writers of all time. He wrote a hundred books, contributions to 200 more, hundreds of poems, including the epic Ballad of the White Horse, five plays, five novels, and some two hundred short stories, including a popular series featuring the priest-detective, Father Brown. In spite of his literary accomplishments, he considered himself primarily a journalist. He wrote over 4000 newspaper essays, including 30 years worth of weekly columns for the Illustrated London News, and 13 years of weekly columns for the Daily News. He also edited his own newspaper, G.K.’s Weekly.
Chesterton was equally at ease with literary and social criticism, history, politics, economics, philosophy, and theology.
He was educated at St. Paul’s, and went to art school at University College London. In 1900, he was asked to contribute a few magazine articles on art criticism, and went on to become one of the most prolific writers of all time. He wrote a hundred books, contributions to 200 more, hundreds of poems, including the epic Ballad of the White Horse, five plays, five novels, and some two hundred short stories, including a popular series featuring the priest-detective, Father Brown. In spite of his literary accomplishments, he considered himself primarily a journalist. He wrote over 4000 newspaper essays, including 30 years worth of weekly columns for the Illustrated London News, and 13 years of weekly columns for the Daily News. He also edited his own newspaper, G.K.’s Weekly.
Chesterton was equally at ease with literary and social criticism, history, politics, economics, philosophy, and theology.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,200 reviews
February 10, 2011
I have one tremendous criticism to make of this book. If you have some perfectly good, bitter resentment towards the Franciscans (entirely legitimate), or towards St. Francis himself, or even the Jongleurs de Dieu, this book will take that exquisite resentment and turn it into an entirely unsatisfactory mushy benevolent feeling.
Another of Chesterton's brilliant works. Frederick Buechner once fondly criticized Chesterton with the comment that he'd written entirely too much for all of it to be excellent. I can sympathize, so long as I mention the fact that I've not yet found any of his "less than excellent" work. This book was delightful, short, and densely packed--the written version of a small piece of extremely rich cheesecake. One of the lines that stuck with me: "He could only be tempted by a sacrament."
However, being Chesterton, it does have the one typical criticism (other than making other writers boring), that the tremendously fat Catholic lightly leaps from topic to topic like the mountain goat from crag to crag, or the Hollywood star from blonde to blonde, and we end up not really knowing a whole lot more about St. Francis. But who reads books by Chesterton in order to learn about some narrow topic? You might as well hike solely in order to lose weight, or make love to your wife for the sole purpose of manufacturing babies, ignoring all of the pleasure to be gained from how delightful God made the path.
Another of Chesterton's brilliant works. Frederick Buechner once fondly criticized Chesterton with the comment that he'd written entirely too much for all of it to be excellent. I can sympathize, so long as I mention the fact that I've not yet found any of his "less than excellent" work. This book was delightful, short, and densely packed--the written version of a small piece of extremely rich cheesecake. One of the lines that stuck with me: "He could only be tempted by a sacrament."
However, being Chesterton, it does have the one typical criticism (other than making other writers boring), that the tremendously fat Catholic lightly leaps from topic to topic like the mountain goat from crag to crag, or the Hollywood star from blonde to blonde, and we end up not really knowing a whole lot more about St. Francis. But who reads books by Chesterton in order to learn about some narrow topic? You might as well hike solely in order to lose weight, or make love to your wife for the sole purpose of manufacturing babies, ignoring all of the pleasure to be gained from how delightful God made the path.
October 25, 2013
This is my second complete read of G.K.Chesterton’s classic treatment of the “Angelic Doctor” – as St. Thomas is sometimes referred to – and I do not plan on it being the last. In fact, I suspect subsequent reads to be even more fruitful than this one which was a significant improvement on my introduction to the work back in the 1990’s.
As St. Thomas is considered one of the greatest minds to have ever lived and his biographer, Chesterton, not a slacker himself when he puts pen to paper, the reader can expect to work for everything gleaned from this excellent biography—however much the author downplays the difficulty in all Thomistic writings and emphasizes the inadequacy of his own treatment. Even so, the book is a pleasure to read from start to finish, chock full of interesting tidbits on the saint, philosophy, religion, science, and a myriad of other subjects which Chesterton brings to bear on the reality of reason and fidelity of faithfulness.
Étienne Gilson, the leading Thomistic scholar of the twentieth century (and someone I am struggling to even to begin to understand!) called it ‘as being without possible comparison the best book ever written on St. Thomas’.
To that I can only add, it is also the most enjoyable to read and/or listen to. My husband and I were listening to the Blackstone Audio version of it and chuckling at the subtle (and sometimes not-so subtle) Chestertonian witticisms which are packed into the text like an overripe fruitcake.
Pure delight!
‘Trace even the Puritan mother back through history and she represents a rebellion against the Cavalier laxity of the English Church, which was at first a rebel against the Catholic civilisation, which had been a rebel against the Pagan civilisation. Nobody but a lunatic could pretend that these things were a progress; for they obviously go first one way and then the other. But whichever is right, one thing is certainly wrong; and that is the modern habit of looking at them only from the modern end. For that is only to see the end of the tale; they rebel against they know not what, because it arose they know not when; intent only on its ending, they are ignorant of its beginning; and therefore of its very being.’
As St. Thomas is considered one of the greatest minds to have ever lived and his biographer, Chesterton, not a slacker himself when he puts pen to paper, the reader can expect to work for everything gleaned from this excellent biography—however much the author downplays the difficulty in all Thomistic writings and emphasizes the inadequacy of his own treatment. Even so, the book is a pleasure to read from start to finish, chock full of interesting tidbits on the saint, philosophy, religion, science, and a myriad of other subjects which Chesterton brings to bear on the reality of reason and fidelity of faithfulness.
Étienne Gilson, the leading Thomistic scholar of the twentieth century (and someone I am struggling to even to begin to understand!) called it ‘as being without possible comparison the best book ever written on St. Thomas’.
To that I can only add, it is also the most enjoyable to read and/or listen to. My husband and I were listening to the Blackstone Audio version of it and chuckling at the subtle (and sometimes not-so subtle) Chestertonian witticisms which are packed into the text like an overripe fruitcake.
Pure delight!
‘Trace even the Puritan mother back through history and she represents a rebellion against the Cavalier laxity of the English Church, which was at first a rebel against the Catholic civilisation, which had been a rebel against the Pagan civilisation. Nobody but a lunatic could pretend that these things were a progress; for they obviously go first one way and then the other. But whichever is right, one thing is certainly wrong; and that is the modern habit of looking at them only from the modern end. For that is only to see the end of the tale; they rebel against they know not what, because it arose they know not when; intent only on its ending, they are ignorant of its beginning; and therefore of its very being.’
March 26, 2013
Chesterton has only a few things to say about Aquinas, really, but that’s the way it is with all his books: the ostensible subject is most of the time fondly neglected for the atmosphere surrounding it. And while from most writers behavior of this sort would be intolerable, from Chesterton, somehow, it’s better than tolerable; because almost no one else is this fun to read.
Chesterton’s Aquinas is no vague hypothesizer of miniature angels traipsing about in Nana’s sewing kit, but the champion of common sense philosophy, out to rescue medieval Christendom from the slow creep of Platonism, and to return it – with some help from Aristotle – to an affirmation of the reality and value of the material order, and a reasonable sense of our place within it.
My grasp on medieval philosophy is perhaps a little rusty, but I recall enough to know that Chesterton is simplifying things. I also know that the compellingly baited hooks of our own “age of uncommon nonsense” (Chesterton’s phrase) are sometimes difficult not to swallow. Nonetheless, this is a bright, bracing book and it’s got me excited to pick up some of Chesterton’s other titles again.
Chesterton’s Aquinas is no vague hypothesizer of miniature angels traipsing about in Nana’s sewing kit, but the champion of common sense philosophy, out to rescue medieval Christendom from the slow creep of Platonism, and to return it – with some help from Aristotle – to an affirmation of the reality and value of the material order, and a reasonable sense of our place within it.
My grasp on medieval philosophy is perhaps a little rusty, but I recall enough to know that Chesterton is simplifying things. I also know that the compellingly baited hooks of our own “age of uncommon nonsense” (Chesterton’s phrase) are sometimes difficult not to swallow. Nonetheless, this is a bright, bracing book and it’s got me excited to pick up some of Chesterton’s other titles again.
September 28, 2018
A book published almost 100 years ago I read in my small room. Last few days it was a wonderful experience with Sir Chesterton and his St. Francis of Assisi. I am feeling little desperate after reading this book because I am part of the Franciscan culture and unable to live like St. Francis lived. Lord's little poverlo lived his life completely in accord with the Gospel values. When Chesterton presents those days of St. Francis earthly life it was really a moment of inspiration for me.
I read many books about St. Francis, heard many stories about him in my first year onwards. During novitiate time our batch completed the book St. Francis of Assisi: Writings and Early Biographies, English omnibus of the sources for the life of St. Francis. There were so many interesting stories about him we heard on those days. Non while I was reading through this book it was really a brushing up of what we read and heard early. Chesterton told the story of St. Francis in an entirely different manner. Great concentration is required to grasp the great teaching he conveyed through this book. There were several things he told which is in view of an apologetic attack on atheist authors of the time. Especially when he spoke about the miracles and stigmata of St. Francis he showed an apologetic refute against all those speaks against the miracles of the saints.
St. Francis is really a great inspiration for all. He started so many traditions in the Church. That itself makes the person unique. I got a chance to look into my vocation after reading this book. It will help me to think more seriously about the Franciscan way of life.
I read many books about St. Francis, heard many stories about him in my first year onwards. During novitiate time our batch completed the book St. Francis of Assisi: Writings and Early Biographies, English omnibus of the sources for the life of St. Francis. There were so many interesting stories about him we heard on those days. Non while I was reading through this book it was really a brushing up of what we read and heard early. Chesterton told the story of St. Francis in an entirely different manner. Great concentration is required to grasp the great teaching he conveyed through this book. There were several things he told which is in view of an apologetic attack on atheist authors of the time. Especially when he spoke about the miracles and stigmata of St. Francis he showed an apologetic refute against all those speaks against the miracles of the saints.
St. Francis is really a great inspiration for all. He started so many traditions in the Church. That itself makes the person unique. I got a chance to look into my vocation after reading this book. It will help me to think more seriously about the Franciscan way of life.
August 22, 2024
Very disappointing. So much of it is padding and verbose navel gazing!
The great man deserves better. I’m pleased I came to Bishop Moorman’s book on St Francis first.
Chesterton was a little more cogent when assessing Francis’s legacy and looking critically at the fortunes of his Order after the Saint’s death:
“St Francis was so great and original a man that he had something in him of what makes the founder of a religion. Many of his followers were more or less ready, in their hearts, to treat him as the founder of a religion. They were willing to let the Franciscan spirit escape from Christendom as the Christian spirit had escaped from Israel. They were willing to let it eclipse Christendom as the Christian spirit had eclipsed Israel. Francis, the fire that ran through the roads of Italy, was to be the beginning of a conflagration in which the old Christian civilisation was to be consumed. That was the point the Pope had to settle; whether Christendom should absorb Francis or Francis Christendom. And he decided rightly, apart from the duties of his place; for the Church could include all that was good in the Franciscans and the Franciscans could not include all that was good in the Church”.
The great man deserves better. I’m pleased I came to Bishop Moorman’s book on St Francis first.
Chesterton was a little more cogent when assessing Francis’s legacy and looking critically at the fortunes of his Order after the Saint’s death:
“St Francis was so great and original a man that he had something in him of what makes the founder of a religion. Many of his followers were more or less ready, in their hearts, to treat him as the founder of a religion. They were willing to let the Franciscan spirit escape from Christendom as the Christian spirit had escaped from Israel. They were willing to let it eclipse Christendom as the Christian spirit had eclipsed Israel. Francis, the fire that ran through the roads of Italy, was to be the beginning of a conflagration in which the old Christian civilisation was to be consumed. That was the point the Pope had to settle; whether Christendom should absorb Francis or Francis Christendom. And he decided rightly, apart from the duties of his place; for the Church could include all that was good in the Franciscans and the Franciscans could not include all that was good in the Church”.
March 10, 2010
I am a huge Chesterton fan, and I've been wanting to read more about the men and women of faith who have come before us. This seemed the perfect book to fit the bill. I WISH, however, that I was far more well-read than I am, and that I had actually read St. Thomas Aquinas' work first. I own a copy of Summa Theologica, but it's rather daunting, and I have to admit that I've never taken the time to delve into it. Chesterton assumes you already know the work - this book, although it claims to be a biography, is more of an analysis of the man as revealed through his work. It doesn't delve deep into his philosophy or theology, but it does paint a picture of him assuming that the reader already KNOWS his philosophy and theology. And also knows alot of other things - like the writings of Aristotle, Plato, and Pliny, to name just a few. Chesterton writes for the "every man" of his day, who, I'm finding, was much more well-educated in the classics than the "every man (or woman)" of today. That said, I DO plan on going back and reading Aquinas' work. His central premise was logic and reason applied to faith, something I feel is often missing in today's Christianity.
August 1, 2021
E quando eu achava que ninguém conseguiria narrar a vida de Tomás de Aquino em forma de uma aventura divertida e emocionante, eis que encontro este livrinho de Chesterton.
A sua escrita divertida, mordaz e reverente tem a capacidade de nos ter ali, atentos e felizes, até ao fim.
À primeira vista, poderia parecer difícil descortinar o que resta do tomismo no mundo do pensamento de hoje; contudo, há muito a aprender com Tomás de Aquino, sobretudo no que toca ao escrutínio da Razão.
Tomás de Aquino ganhou o epíteto de "boi mudo da Sicília" pela sua lentidão e silêncio, mas produziu uma obra cheia de rigor. A sua vida monástica (preferiu os Dominicanos ao Beneditinos) começou com muitas turbulências familiares, mas a sua escolha foi triunfante. Este doutor da igreja tem uma vasta obra e uma vida feita de disputas intelectuais e posições firmes (da luta contra o pensamento averroísta à restauração daquela que seria a verdadeira filosofia aristotélica).
Chesterton vai traçando um paralelismo interessante com a filosofia de Agostinho de Hipona (um claro seguidor da filosofia platónica).
Um livro muito interessante que restaura este grande filósofo da era escolástica. Muito, muito bom!
--
"Uma senhora minha conhecida encontrou um livro com excertos comentados de São Tomás, e começou esperançosamente a ler um passo com o inocente título de "A simplicidade de Deus". Daí a pouco pôs o livro de lado, com um suspiro, e disse:
- Ah! se a simplicidade de Deus é assim, que será a sua Complexidade!?..."
A sua escrita divertida, mordaz e reverente tem a capacidade de nos ter ali, atentos e felizes, até ao fim.
À primeira vista, poderia parecer difícil descortinar o que resta do tomismo no mundo do pensamento de hoje; contudo, há muito a aprender com Tomás de Aquino, sobretudo no que toca ao escrutínio da Razão.
Tomás de Aquino ganhou o epíteto de "boi mudo da Sicília" pela sua lentidão e silêncio, mas produziu uma obra cheia de rigor. A sua vida monástica (preferiu os Dominicanos ao Beneditinos) começou com muitas turbulências familiares, mas a sua escolha foi triunfante. Este doutor da igreja tem uma vasta obra e uma vida feita de disputas intelectuais e posições firmes (da luta contra o pensamento averroísta à restauração daquela que seria a verdadeira filosofia aristotélica).
Chesterton vai traçando um paralelismo interessante com a filosofia de Agostinho de Hipona (um claro seguidor da filosofia platónica).
Um livro muito interessante que restaura este grande filósofo da era escolástica. Muito, muito bom!
--
"Uma senhora minha conhecida encontrou um livro com excertos comentados de São Tomás, e começou esperançosamente a ler um passo com o inocente título de "A simplicidade de Deus". Daí a pouco pôs o livro de lado, com um suspiro, e disse:
- Ah! se a simplicidade de Deus é assim, que será a sua Complexidade!?..."
August 29, 2011
This isn't a biography; it is an adventure story!
Of course, Chesterton would have scoffed at calling this small book a biography in any case. But what it severely lacks in biographical data (which, of course, was not the author's aim) it makes up for in immense creative use of certain significant events in the great saint's life. Between dinner with St. Louis and his arguments against the Augustinians, to choosing the life of a poor Dominican monk instead of following the rich life of an abbot supplied by his father; G.K. Chesterton gives no short supply of wonderful and exasperating examples of who this large man (who was no doubt much larger on the inside than he was on the outside) chose to be against every outside influence. In the face of the Manichees, of Plato, of all culture and irrationality and misused tradition; yes, even in the shadow of the great accidental determinist St. Augustine himself, Thomas Aquinas boldly (but always humbly, so humbly as to hardly be matched) proclaims the universality of reason, the love of God, the beauty of the cosmos, and the gorgeous but deadly free will of man. Before much time passes at all we realize that it is no longer Aquinas who stands in the shadow of Augustine, but Augustine and the whole Church who stand in the valley below the feet of the great giant, the feet of the 'Angelic' Doctor who hardly spoke of his angels, who saw something (or Someone) which made all his writings as straw.
We meet a man in these pages who raised the long-dead champion of rationale, Aristotle himself, from the grave, and proceeded to baptize him into the faith. We meet a man who would stop at no boundary in his quest for truth, who would passionately defend against insane and unimaginable errors. We meet a man who contrasts so with all the saints, all the history of the Church herself, that he fills all history with his hugeness. We are introduced, as if at a quiet dinner party (perhaps, we think, the very same party with St. Louis and his French friends), to a man who could touch the stars and the moons with his very mind, and who would treat you as if you were Christ Himself, who would wash your very feet if only you would allow it.
In this book, this small and inconceivable book, G.K. Chesterton reveals all this. And what he has opened is a floodgate, momentarily blockaded by a post-it nailed to a door, but unleashed again with all the fury and calm and strength of the Genesis Flood.
Of course, Chesterton would have scoffed at calling this small book a biography in any case. But what it severely lacks in biographical data (which, of course, was not the author's aim) it makes up for in immense creative use of certain significant events in the great saint's life. Between dinner with St. Louis and his arguments against the Augustinians, to choosing the life of a poor Dominican monk instead of following the rich life of an abbot supplied by his father; G.K. Chesterton gives no short supply of wonderful and exasperating examples of who this large man (who was no doubt much larger on the inside than he was on the outside) chose to be against every outside influence. In the face of the Manichees, of Plato, of all culture and irrationality and misused tradition; yes, even in the shadow of the great accidental determinist St. Augustine himself, Thomas Aquinas boldly (but always humbly, so humbly as to hardly be matched) proclaims the universality of reason, the love of God, the beauty of the cosmos, and the gorgeous but deadly free will of man. Before much time passes at all we realize that it is no longer Aquinas who stands in the shadow of Augustine, but Augustine and the whole Church who stand in the valley below the feet of the great giant, the feet of the 'Angelic' Doctor who hardly spoke of his angels, who saw something (or Someone) which made all his writings as straw.
We meet a man in these pages who raised the long-dead champion of rationale, Aristotle himself, from the grave, and proceeded to baptize him into the faith. We meet a man who would stop at no boundary in his quest for truth, who would passionately defend against insane and unimaginable errors. We meet a man who contrasts so with all the saints, all the history of the Church herself, that he fills all history with his hugeness. We are introduced, as if at a quiet dinner party (perhaps, we think, the very same party with St. Louis and his French friends), to a man who could touch the stars and the moons with his very mind, and who would treat you as if you were Christ Himself, who would wash your very feet if only you would allow it.
In this book, this small and inconceivable book, G.K. Chesterton reveals all this. And what he has opened is a floodgate, momentarily blockaded by a post-it nailed to a door, but unleashed again with all the fury and calm and strength of the Genesis Flood.
November 19, 2017
Il santo non è un superuomo, è un uomo vero
Questa non è una biografia vera e propria, direi che si tratta di una specie di ricerca del luogo della santità in Francesco partendo dal suo sguardo sul mondo, dal suo sentire, dal suo operare, partendo cioè dal suo essere uomo.
E' un libretto esile, di poche pagine, ma ricco dell'intelligenza debordante dell'autore, della sua ironia esuberante, del suo gusto per il paradosso e anche della sua schietta e semplice religiosità.
Come si fa a non amare Chesterton?
Questa non è una biografia vera e propria, direi che si tratta di una specie di ricerca del luogo della santità in Francesco partendo dal suo sguardo sul mondo, dal suo sentire, dal suo operare, partendo cioè dal suo essere uomo.
E' un libretto esile, di poche pagine, ma ricco dell'intelligenza debordante dell'autore, della sua ironia esuberante, del suo gusto per il paradosso e anche della sua schietta e semplice religiosità.
Come si fa a non amare Chesterton?
June 25, 2009
I hadn't thought seriously about Francis for a while and this book makes me think I've never thought seriously about him at all. GK rescues Francis from fuzzy Victorian myth and returns him to a most severe Christianity. By reading Francis in the light of him time period (the medieval) and in the light of the troubadour movement, GKC reveals the romantic passion underlying the saint's religious severity. The Franciscans were born as a romantic movement, sacrificing all for the Beloved. Francis lived the romance of the spiritual, in contrast to the troubadour's limitations of mere earthly love. Love makes sacrifice a joy. If sacrifices made to please or protect a human lover are good, how much better are those same sacrifices when made to honor and please Love himself? Love is a paradox of suffering and joy. The paradox of love is only resolved in a life of love.
The opposite of this all-embracing love is heresy. All heresy is in essence a narrowing of faith and truth. The heretic sees the truth but not all of the truth. His partial truth blinds him to the whole. The fullness of life and truth and God is beyond what the heretic can understand. The one thing a heretic cannot worship is that which is beyond him. The heretic, by narrowing God, wants to control Him. The heretic will not embrace a fullness of truth if that Truth is bigger than the heretic himself. It's an ego thing really. The greatest heresy of them all, Islam, is the result of Mohamed's inability to accept that God may be bigger than what he, Mohamed, can understand. Mohamed wants to control God, to contain God within the confines of his own mind. Mohamed wanted to simplify God and make him more rational, more understandable, more sensible. More like Mohamed. But God cannot be contained by any one mind. Simplifying Him is nothing more than ignoring Him.
Rather than ignore Him or, worse, trying to domesticate Him, Francis obeyed Him. Francis' loving, joyful obedience lead to a renewal of faith after the great trials of the Dark Ages. The Dark Ages, though not as dark as we like to think, were a great purge. The bloody battle for the survival of Christianity, lead to the purgation of paganism and the birth of modern Europe. The tainted traces of pagan naturalism were washed away, freeing nature to be seen as itself. Pagan myth had suffused nature with pre-ordained images and associations. Most of those images were poisoned by a decadent sensuality, the sensuality of tragedy rather than love. Once those images were purged from the mind, man could see nature in its pre-pagan innocence.
The opposite of this all-embracing love is heresy. All heresy is in essence a narrowing of faith and truth. The heretic sees the truth but not all of the truth. His partial truth blinds him to the whole. The fullness of life and truth and God is beyond what the heretic can understand. The one thing a heretic cannot worship is that which is beyond him. The heretic, by narrowing God, wants to control Him. The heretic will not embrace a fullness of truth if that Truth is bigger than the heretic himself. It's an ego thing really. The greatest heresy of them all, Islam, is the result of Mohamed's inability to accept that God may be bigger than what he, Mohamed, can understand. Mohamed wants to control God, to contain God within the confines of his own mind. Mohamed wanted to simplify God and make him more rational, more understandable, more sensible. More like Mohamed. But God cannot be contained by any one mind. Simplifying Him is nothing more than ignoring Him.
Rather than ignore Him or, worse, trying to domesticate Him, Francis obeyed Him. Francis' loving, joyful obedience lead to a renewal of faith after the great trials of the Dark Ages. The Dark Ages, though not as dark as we like to think, were a great purge. The bloody battle for the survival of Christianity, lead to the purgation of paganism and the birth of modern Europe. The tainted traces of pagan naturalism were washed away, freeing nature to be seen as itself. Pagan myth had suffused nature with pre-ordained images and associations. Most of those images were poisoned by a decadent sensuality, the sensuality of tragedy rather than love. Once those images were purged from the mind, man could see nature in its pre-pagan innocence.
December 10, 2013
Read this for a retreat I took with John Michael Talbot back in 1998. Finally reread it or rather re-listened to it. In light of our new Holy Father's choice of a namesake, I want to listen to it again. Chesterton's writing is dense and needs a great deal of unpacking. It includes a long introductory explanation about how a biographer might approach the life of this unusual historical figure. Francis of Assisi, born Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone, has so many popular legends and untruths associated with him that most people, especially Catholics, have no idea what the man (much less the saint) was really like. As such we moderns like to pick and choose aspects of medieval lives we understand and disregard the rest.
Chesteron's biography is devoted to highlighting the ambiguities associated with clinging to some partial view of St. Francis to the expense of his totality, however challenging it may be for us. For example, we may find it easy to accept his total vow of poverty and devotion to the sick and yet eschew his strict obedience to the Pope and Church teachings, or vice versa. And yet we cannot call ourselves true sons/daughters of Francis without embracing his complete vision.
Excellent read but not recommended as a first book about St. Francis.
Chesteron's biography is devoted to highlighting the ambiguities associated with clinging to some partial view of St. Francis to the expense of his totality, however challenging it may be for us. For example, we may find it easy to accept his total vow of poverty and devotion to the sick and yet eschew his strict obedience to the Pope and Church teachings, or vice versa. And yet we cannot call ourselves true sons/daughters of Francis without embracing his complete vision.
Excellent read but not recommended as a first book about St. Francis.
March 21, 2021
I love Chesterton. Let's just start with that.
In this book, Chesterton takes on a really hard topic--St. Francis. Who has been both reduced to a hippie and deified in various depictions. And he deals with Francis in neither way, but makes him his own person--a servant of the Most High God, but a good one at that.
I was especially interested in this book because (besides the fact that it's Chesterton and Megan Chappie recommended it) we live in a Dominican parish, and the Dominicans always speak of "Our Holy Father Dominic", but ALSO "Our Holy Father Francis", and I was...honestly kind of skeptical of St. Francis? And so I wanted to learn more about him from someone I trusted to be rational. :) I still don't particularly love the Franciscan charism (sorry, Steubenville), but I like St. Francis himself a whole lot better now.
There are so many amazing parts to this, so I'm just going to highlight some of my faves, in no particular order...
The part where he talks about how Francis isn't led to God by creation, but he sees creation because of his love of God!
The part where he talks about how Franciscanism could have become a heresy except for the way the Church absorbed it!
The part where he talks about the gratitude of St. Francis.
The part where he talks about how St. Francis's love for Lady Poverty was real in the way that chivalric love is real, and I'm not expressing this well, but it was awesome.
Also! The part where he talks about how ludicrous it is for people to dismiss the miracle accounts in medieval literature without dismissing the whole work.
And the part where he talks about how it's ludicrous to give an account of St. Francis without talking about everything that led up to him, and he talks about how St. Francis is the fruition of "fasting from creation" as penance for the nature worship of the ancients; but then goes on to talk about how that's also an integral part of our heritage and we can't just reject it, using Dante as an example...and the sheer balance that is Chesterton just absolutely astounds me.
Also, all of Chesterton's ironic humor and the way he uses parallelism to great effect.
As for rating...it's Chesterton. Five stars.
In this book, Chesterton takes on a really hard topic--St. Francis. Who has been both reduced to a hippie and deified in various depictions. And he deals with Francis in neither way, but makes him his own person--a servant of the Most High God, but a good one at that.
I was especially interested in this book because (besides the fact that it's Chesterton and Megan Chappie recommended it) we live in a Dominican parish, and the Dominicans always speak of "Our Holy Father Dominic", but ALSO "Our Holy Father Francis", and I was...honestly kind of skeptical of St. Francis? And so I wanted to learn more about him from someone I trusted to be rational. :) I still don't particularly love the Franciscan charism (sorry, Steubenville), but I like St. Francis himself a whole lot better now.
There are so many amazing parts to this, so I'm just going to highlight some of my faves, in no particular order...
The part where he talks about how Francis isn't led to God by creation, but he sees creation because of his love of God!
The part where he talks about how Franciscanism could have become a heresy except for the way the Church absorbed it!
The part where he talks about the gratitude of St. Francis.
The part where he talks about how St. Francis's love for Lady Poverty was real in the way that chivalric love is real, and I'm not expressing this well, but it was awesome.
Also! The part where he talks about how ludicrous it is for people to dismiss the miracle accounts in medieval literature without dismissing the whole work.
And the part where he talks about how it's ludicrous to give an account of St. Francis without talking about everything that led up to him, and he talks about how St. Francis is the fruition of "fasting from creation" as penance for the nature worship of the ancients; but then goes on to talk about how that's also an integral part of our heritage and we can't just reject it, using Dante as an example...and the sheer balance that is Chesterton just absolutely astounds me.
Also, all of Chesterton's ironic humor and the way he uses parallelism to great effect.
As for rating...it's Chesterton. Five stars.
February 11, 2018
I listened to the audiobook. This was my first Chesterton, and I surely am going to read as many of his other books as i can. Such a natural gift for writing in a spontaneous colloquial tone and a cheerful, clever wit that never switches off.
The book is a brief outline of St. Thomas Aquinas' life, a bit of a high-level comparison with St. Francis, and, in the last few chapters, a broad but passionate look at St Thomas' theology, its sublety, its power, and an attack on Martin Luther, who, among other things, burned the Summa Theologia. In the author's words, on the map of Thomas' intellect, Luther's map is so small you would struggle to see it.
The book is a brief outline of St. Thomas Aquinas' life, a bit of a high-level comparison with St. Francis, and, in the last few chapters, a broad but passionate look at St Thomas' theology, its sublety, its power, and an attack on Martin Luther, who, among other things, burned the Summa Theologia. In the author's words, on the map of Thomas' intellect, Luther's map is so small you would struggle to see it.
January 29, 2011
I started reading "Aquinas: A Beginner's Guide" by Edward Feser around the same time as this. Though I haven't finished Feser's book yet (I'm a little more than halfway through), I like his book much better than Chesterton's. It seems like Chesterton spends too much time talking about stuff that isn't very important to Aquinas or his philosophy or his theology. Had he spent less time going after Luther (just one of his many "rabbit trails"), he could have spent more time explaining the philosophy of Aquinas.
Maybe so many people have given this book five stars because they haven't compared it with what a good introduction to a person's thought should look like. Comparing Chesterton's book to Feser's puts Chesterton's work in its proper light: as a sub-par introduction to the man's thought.
But surely someone will find this criticism unjustified. After all, Chesterton is writing with a broader scope than simply the *thought* of Aquinas. Granted, Chesterton focuses much more on the person of Aquinas and his surrondings. Chesterton is writing more of a biography and Feser more of an introduction to his philosophy.
So how can I still fault Chesterton? Because of a quote by C. F. J. Martin that Edward Feser notes in his book: "If we want to study Aquinas we should pay him the compliment of treating as important what he thought of as important. To study Aquinas as Aquinas is a poor piece of flatter, since Aquinas cared very little for Aquinas, while he did care for God and science." Martin is correct and for this reason Chesterton's biography feels lacking and subpar. Understanding Aquinas requires understanding more than simply the fantastical tales of his loins being girded by angels or of the time he levitated or what a humble and quiet man he was. If this is most of what you know about Aquinas, you don't really know much about Aquinas, at least not anything important.
I doubt anyone will finish reading Chesterton's book and have a good grasp of Aquinas's worldview (unless of course they already had that understanding prior to reading Chesterton). What they will have is a lot of stories about how Aquinas was larger than life and how much Chesterton can't stand Protestants. Mostly a poor flattery.
Maybe so many people have given this book five stars because they haven't compared it with what a good introduction to a person's thought should look like. Comparing Chesterton's book to Feser's puts Chesterton's work in its proper light: as a sub-par introduction to the man's thought.
But surely someone will find this criticism unjustified. After all, Chesterton is writing with a broader scope than simply the *thought* of Aquinas. Granted, Chesterton focuses much more on the person of Aquinas and his surrondings. Chesterton is writing more of a biography and Feser more of an introduction to his philosophy.
So how can I still fault Chesterton? Because of a quote by C. F. J. Martin that Edward Feser notes in his book: "If we want to study Aquinas we should pay him the compliment of treating as important what he thought of as important. To study Aquinas as Aquinas is a poor piece of flatter, since Aquinas cared very little for Aquinas, while he did care for God and science." Martin is correct and for this reason Chesterton's biography feels lacking and subpar. Understanding Aquinas requires understanding more than simply the fantastical tales of his loins being girded by angels or of the time he levitated or what a humble and quiet man he was. If this is most of what you know about Aquinas, you don't really know much about Aquinas, at least not anything important.
I doubt anyone will finish reading Chesterton's book and have a good grasp of Aquinas's worldview (unless of course they already had that understanding prior to reading Chesterton). What they will have is a lot of stories about how Aquinas was larger than life and how much Chesterton can't stand Protestants. Mostly a poor flattery.
March 25, 2014
To be honest I chose to read this book because I like G.K. Chesterton more than because I was so interested in St. Francis. I got a very entertaining dose of Chesterton, a funny paradox on every page, and after reading the book, I am also fascinated by St. Francis. The book assumes you know the broad outlines of the story. Chesterton references previous biographers, those contemporary with Francis and those Victorians such as Matthew Arnold in the then recent past (St. Francis of Assisi was first published in 1923.) I did not know the broad outlines of the story but had no trouble following along. I just know where to go when I want more details.
The writing is charming and incisive and gives you a sense of the kind of spiritual earthquake one eccentric individual can make. Chesterton's unique and imaginative analysis of that time and place - 11th century Italy - was equally as valuable to me as the history and analysis of the man who now most often appears in our world as a garden statue. By the time you finish the book you can easily believe that the spiritual seeds Francis sowed during his brief life are still bearing fruit.
Of course with any human system, things degenerate in the end as some followers become fanatical and lose the original vision in the passion for their own agendas, and in the last chapter Chesterton deals with how this began to happen with the Franciscan movement about the time of Francis' death. It sounds like some of the followers wanted to break off from the Church and start a new radical religion that hated people who did not follow their rules. Chesterton makes a case the the Pope and the Catholic Church did the right thing by incorporating the movement into its fold and giving it the official stamp. Chesterton believed that the Church throughout history has generally upheld balance and inclusiveness and has kept the ship of Christianity from listing to far to the right or the left.
The writing is charming and incisive and gives you a sense of the kind of spiritual earthquake one eccentric individual can make. Chesterton's unique and imaginative analysis of that time and place - 11th century Italy - was equally as valuable to me as the history and analysis of the man who now most often appears in our world as a garden statue. By the time you finish the book you can easily believe that the spiritual seeds Francis sowed during his brief life are still bearing fruit.
Of course with any human system, things degenerate in the end as some followers become fanatical and lose the original vision in the passion for their own agendas, and in the last chapter Chesterton deals with how this began to happen with the Franciscan movement about the time of Francis' death. It sounds like some of the followers wanted to break off from the Church and start a new radical religion that hated people who did not follow their rules. Chesterton makes a case the the Pope and the Catholic Church did the right thing by incorporating the movement into its fold and giving it the official stamp. Chesterton believed that the Church throughout history has generally upheld balance and inclusiveness and has kept the ship of Christianity from listing to far to the right or the left.
July 29, 2024
ENGLISH: Chesterton's biography of St.Thomas Aquinas is not a typical biography, but it is typical Chesterton. Rather than telling us about the life of his "hero," starting at his birth and ending at his death, Chesterton uses him to attack several current mistakes, such as considering the philosophy of Aquinas outdated because modern philosophers say outraging things about the world.
The only defect in the book I could find is the fact that Chesterton should have made it longer. It is scarcely outdated. Just a couple of mentions about Mussolini and Hitler, plus the references to the economic crisis, which curiously could also be applied now (although we know he was speaking about the 1929 crisis).
ESPAÑOL: La biografía de Santo Tomás de Aquino por Chesterton no es una biografía típica, aunque sí es una típica obra de Chesterton. En lugar de contarnos la vida de su "héroe", desde su nacimiento hasta su muerte, Chesterton se dedica a atacar varios errores actuales, como considerar que la filosofía de Tomás de Aquino está obsoleta porque los filósofos modernos dicen cosas absurdas sobre el mundo.
El único defecto que pude encontrar es mi sensación de que Chesterton debería haberlo alargado más. Apenas ha perdido actualidad. Sólo un par de menciones a Mussolini y Hitler, más las referencias a la crisis económica, que curiosamente también podrían aplicarse ahora (aunque sabemos que hablaba de la crisis de 1929).
The only defect in the book I could find is the fact that Chesterton should have made it longer. It is scarcely outdated. Just a couple of mentions about Mussolini and Hitler, plus the references to the economic crisis, which curiously could also be applied now (although we know he was speaking about the 1929 crisis).
ESPAÑOL: La biografía de Santo Tomás de Aquino por Chesterton no es una biografía típica, aunque sí es una típica obra de Chesterton. En lugar de contarnos la vida de su "héroe", desde su nacimiento hasta su muerte, Chesterton se dedica a atacar varios errores actuales, como considerar que la filosofía de Tomás de Aquino está obsoleta porque los filósofos modernos dicen cosas absurdas sobre el mundo.
El único defecto que pude encontrar es mi sensación de que Chesterton debería haberlo alargado más. Apenas ha perdido actualidad. Sólo un par de menciones a Mussolini y Hitler, más las referencias a la crisis económica, que curiosamente también podrían aplicarse ahora (aunque sabemos que hablaba de la crisis de 1929).
September 3, 2023
Old Review:
Chesterton at his most anti-pomo. The last two or three chapters alone worth the price of admission. Devastating, absolutely devastating. They are also the chapters that do the bulk of explaining Thomistic philosophy; beyond that most of it is autobiography, but for that reason, might even be good for the high school student.
That said, Chesterton gives some amazingly good descriptions of Luther the Augustinian monk; that's my guy. Of course, he's wrong, quite wrong, that Luther was against the use of the reason or will, but a bit closer to home when he says it was a matter of emphasis in many ways. Some stereotyping and fanciful historical broadstrokes, but you need those every once in a while to be able to go beyond facts to the invisible logic that joins those facts together; it's called 'history'.
New review:
I was zoned out on coke intellectually speaking when I wrote this review. This book, as I remember, is just G.K. spouting his opinion. It's sometimes good when it's about Aquinas and how Thomistic philosophy is not really abstract or anti-body. But it is garbage about Luther, and the history is pretty bad.
Chesterton at his most anti-pomo. The last two or three chapters alone worth the price of admission. Devastating, absolutely devastating. They are also the chapters that do the bulk of explaining Thomistic philosophy; beyond that most of it is autobiography, but for that reason, might even be good for the high school student.
That said, Chesterton gives some amazingly good descriptions of Luther the Augustinian monk; that's my guy. Of course, he's wrong, quite wrong, that Luther was against the use of the reason or will, but a bit closer to home when he says it was a matter of emphasis in many ways. Some stereotyping and fanciful historical broadstrokes, but you need those every once in a while to be able to go beyond facts to the invisible logic that joins those facts together; it's called 'history'.
New review:
I was zoned out on coke intellectually speaking when I wrote this review. This book, as I remember, is just G.K. spouting his opinion. It's sometimes good when it's about Aquinas and how Thomistic philosophy is not really abstract or anti-body. But it is garbage about Luther, and the history is pretty bad.
May 20, 2017
Chesterton has spoiled me with this enchanting story of the remarkable personality of St. Thomas Aquinas.
March 14, 2023
G. K. Chesterton is perhaps the only writer who can edify me while calling me a Manichean and a fool and a person wholly alien to human affections. A masterpiece.
January 11, 2023
I'm reading this for an upcoming podcast episode. I've read a good deal of Chesterton since way back in 2013 (review below) when I first cracked the cover on this one, thanks to my book club. I'm looking forward to rereading this one.
=================
Read this for our July book club. It did a great job of forcing me to read Chesterton's nonfiction, which has always eluded me when I've tried it before. Until the very end, when he was summing up Aquinas's philosophy I enjoyed the book a great deal. I am sure the end was praiseworthy as well, I was just not mentally prepared enough.
It seems to me that Chesterton assumes a level of knowledge of Aquinas's life and work which is just not a standard in these modern times. For my own part, I know a little, but I felt it was a very little as I occasionally had to hang on for dear life, pulling meaning from context rather than facts.
That is not to say that the book wasn't good, but it did mean that I will be reading another book to actually get a more linear biography of Aquinas's life.
I foresee many pleasurable rereadings of this book, which I am sure will reward me increasingly each time.
Also, I really appreciate this book for forcing me to come to grips with Chesterton's nonfiction, as I mentioned above. In particular, I am looking forward to reading his commentary and biographical writing about another "new" classic favorite of mine ... Charles Dickens.
=================
Read this for our July book club. It did a great job of forcing me to read Chesterton's nonfiction, which has always eluded me when I've tried it before. Until the very end, when he was summing up Aquinas's philosophy I enjoyed the book a great deal. I am sure the end was praiseworthy as well, I was just not mentally prepared enough.
It seems to me that Chesterton assumes a level of knowledge of Aquinas's life and work which is just not a standard in these modern times. For my own part, I know a little, but I felt it was a very little as I occasionally had to hang on for dear life, pulling meaning from context rather than facts.
That is not to say that the book wasn't good, but it did mean that I will be reading another book to actually get a more linear biography of Aquinas's life.
I foresee many pleasurable rereadings of this book, which I am sure will reward me increasingly each time.
Also, I really appreciate this book for forcing me to come to grips with Chesterton's nonfiction, as I mentioned above. In particular, I am looking forward to reading his commentary and biographical writing about another "new" classic favorite of mine ... Charles Dickens.
December 24, 2016
Second Reading Dec 2016
First reading Dec 2015
I think that this may be one of my favorite Chesterton works. The first book written after his conversion to Catholicism but supported by his still Anglican wife Frances, this book has universal appeal for Protestants and Catholics.
Francis is a mysterious creature. A true mystic and a genuinely beautiful soul. I have struggled in vain to understand our new Holy Father (Pope Francis) and have mostly been confused by his actions. This text, however, has helped me to understand what any good lover of St. Francis is going after - Francis's radical and humble Christian witness.
Francis loved a gospel that was so simple that the village idiot could understand it. "St. Francis walked the earth as the pardon of God."
There is much to love in Francis and much mimic in his walk towards Christ.
GKC, however, goes a bit further. He explains that it makes perfect sense that this first Italian poet (Francis) should never have heard of Virgil. His service to our Lord was one in opposition to books. But, his is not the only path to Christ. GKC wisely points out that it would make no sense of Dante would not have heard of Virgil. Each man serves God in truth, goodness and beauty but on separate and equally relevant paths.
First reading Dec 2015
I think that this may be one of my favorite Chesterton works. The first book written after his conversion to Catholicism but supported by his still Anglican wife Frances, this book has universal appeal for Protestants and Catholics.
Francis is a mysterious creature. A true mystic and a genuinely beautiful soul. I have struggled in vain to understand our new Holy Father (Pope Francis) and have mostly been confused by his actions. This text, however, has helped me to understand what any good lover of St. Francis is going after - Francis's radical and humble Christian witness.
Francis loved a gospel that was so simple that the village idiot could understand it. "St. Francis walked the earth as the pardon of God."
There is much to love in Francis and much mimic in his walk towards Christ.
GKC, however, goes a bit further. He explains that it makes perfect sense that this first Italian poet (Francis) should never have heard of Virgil. His service to our Lord was one in opposition to books. But, his is not the only path to Christ. GKC wisely points out that it would make no sense of Dante would not have heard of Virgil. Each man serves God in truth, goodness and beauty but on separate and equally relevant paths.
December 15, 2012
This book read more like one of Chesterton's personal dilemmas - complaining that historians write about historical figures without giving historical context. He rambles on about how to write a good biography rather than teaching the reader. I found it difficult to read. St. Francis is awesome though.
March 23, 2024
I find the “Summa Theologica” a must read and have only the fifth and final volume to go before I’m finished. I wanted to read this book by Chesterton for awhile and thought it would be best after I had read most of the Summa so I could follow this book and besides this version was free from Audible for me.
Chesterton mars his own narrative when he appeals to Christian tropes against atheists while making silly statements such as ‘atheists think something came from nothing and that proves they have no ultimate meaning.’ Chesterton would reach for his bag of Christian polemic nonsense to support his beliefs while not realizing that they are just silly musings at best. I can with certainty state that in the ‘Summa’ Aquinas never would stoop to such juvenile arguments.
Though, overall Chesterton did Aquinas justice in explaining him in Christian terms. I read Aquinas because he is fundamental to all of Western Philosophy that follows; the Wiki says that and I agree. I get the feeling that Chesterton hasn’t read as much Aquinas as I have nor as much Aristotle and at best, he was superficially familiar with the other scholastics, Maimonides, pseud-Dionysus, the Commentator (Averroes), or Avicenna.
Aquinas uses reason before faith and analogously demonstrates the properties of God and the theological underpinnings for Christianity. Chesterton mentions Duns Scotus and Bonaventure frequently but at times he didn’t seem to understand the connections. Scotus through contingent chronicity shows the absoluteness of God and separated thatness from whatness, and Bonaventure brings mysticism back for his theological understanding.
Chesterton didn’t understand the reason for Aquinas talking about angels as much as he did. The Bible demands it and Anselm leverages angels as the intermediary between him and humans (chain of being) and the relationship between man and God, and Aquinas knows it is important as to if they are sui generis (one of a kind) or a species.
Today’s question would be how many Bosons can fit on the head of a pin, and the answer might surprise you when I respond an infinite number, or just as many angels. It’s a way for medieval men to determine their place in the world and Aquinas had a reason for his discursions, and Chesterton should have understood that.
The meaning of being and being’s meaning are fundamental to philosophy (see Heidegger’s ‘Being and Time’) and God’s essence is his existence for Aquinas. Aquinas follows the tradition that the truth is out there and that it is knowable. Descartes will wall off the world from his own thoughts and state cogito ergo sum (thinking equals being), but it takes Kant to break the tradition, and Kant creates a Copernican Revolution by centralizing man as truth’s nexus with intuition, space and time being ontologically primal.
Augustine also said ‘cogito ergo sum’ and defined the dark ages until Anselm started to think about angels. I mention this because at times Chesterton seemed to downplay Augustine and Plato and for me Aquinas gave them their due when required within the Summa.
Aquinas is a victim of his background and was for slavery, misogynistic, homophobic to the degree he would agree with Dante that homosexuals belonged in a circle of hell lower than pederasts, or that demons were real and speaking in tongues was how the holy spirit talked to us and earthly authority both divine and secular must be obeyed. Aquinas reached those conclusions because that was his culture, society and background foisted upon him and coupled that with using reason to justify his faith through what the Bible would have necessitated to be true since he would have wrongly believed the Bible to be inerrant and infallible.
What most bothered me about Aquinas is his belief that anyone who does not believe in the substance of things not seen is not worthy of things hoped for, and for Aquinas that meant no eternal life in heaven. Aquinas’ arguments for the requirements for salvation are very similar to the same shallow arguments that I just read in the awful book “Evidence demands a verdict” by Josh McDowell. I’m forgiving of Aquinas because in his time the historicity of the Bible wasn’t a thing. Today theologians such as Josh and Sean McDowell should know better. I’d even say Chesterton would have known that in his time, and at least for Chesterton he was aware that for Aquinas God is Good and a Good God would never withhold goodness and the absence of the good because of the skeptic’s own volition would be the punishment for the one who did not believe in the sinner’s prayer.
Chesterton doesn’t connect the pieces within the context that they deserve, and at times his juvenile Christian arguments against skeptics was bothersome, but overall, this short book is a fun read and can be profitable for the casual reader.
Chesterton mars his own narrative when he appeals to Christian tropes against atheists while making silly statements such as ‘atheists think something came from nothing and that proves they have no ultimate meaning.’ Chesterton would reach for his bag of Christian polemic nonsense to support his beliefs while not realizing that they are just silly musings at best. I can with certainty state that in the ‘Summa’ Aquinas never would stoop to such juvenile arguments.
Though, overall Chesterton did Aquinas justice in explaining him in Christian terms. I read Aquinas because he is fundamental to all of Western Philosophy that follows; the Wiki says that and I agree. I get the feeling that Chesterton hasn’t read as much Aquinas as I have nor as much Aristotle and at best, he was superficially familiar with the other scholastics, Maimonides, pseud-Dionysus, the Commentator (Averroes), or Avicenna.
Aquinas uses reason before faith and analogously demonstrates the properties of God and the theological underpinnings for Christianity. Chesterton mentions Duns Scotus and Bonaventure frequently but at times he didn’t seem to understand the connections. Scotus through contingent chronicity shows the absoluteness of God and separated thatness from whatness, and Bonaventure brings mysticism back for his theological understanding.
Chesterton didn’t understand the reason for Aquinas talking about angels as much as he did. The Bible demands it and Anselm leverages angels as the intermediary between him and humans (chain of being) and the relationship between man and God, and Aquinas knows it is important as to if they are sui generis (one of a kind) or a species.
Today’s question would be how many Bosons can fit on the head of a pin, and the answer might surprise you when I respond an infinite number, or just as many angels. It’s a way for medieval men to determine their place in the world and Aquinas had a reason for his discursions, and Chesterton should have understood that.
The meaning of being and being’s meaning are fundamental to philosophy (see Heidegger’s ‘Being and Time’) and God’s essence is his existence for Aquinas. Aquinas follows the tradition that the truth is out there and that it is knowable. Descartes will wall off the world from his own thoughts and state cogito ergo sum (thinking equals being), but it takes Kant to break the tradition, and Kant creates a Copernican Revolution by centralizing man as truth’s nexus with intuition, space and time being ontologically primal.
Augustine also said ‘cogito ergo sum’ and defined the dark ages until Anselm started to think about angels. I mention this because at times Chesterton seemed to downplay Augustine and Plato and for me Aquinas gave them their due when required within the Summa.
Aquinas is a victim of his background and was for slavery, misogynistic, homophobic to the degree he would agree with Dante that homosexuals belonged in a circle of hell lower than pederasts, or that demons were real and speaking in tongues was how the holy spirit talked to us and earthly authority both divine and secular must be obeyed. Aquinas reached those conclusions because that was his culture, society and background foisted upon him and coupled that with using reason to justify his faith through what the Bible would have necessitated to be true since he would have wrongly believed the Bible to be inerrant and infallible.
What most bothered me about Aquinas is his belief that anyone who does not believe in the substance of things not seen is not worthy of things hoped for, and for Aquinas that meant no eternal life in heaven. Aquinas’ arguments for the requirements for salvation are very similar to the same shallow arguments that I just read in the awful book “Evidence demands a verdict” by Josh McDowell. I’m forgiving of Aquinas because in his time the historicity of the Bible wasn’t a thing. Today theologians such as Josh and Sean McDowell should know better. I’d even say Chesterton would have known that in his time, and at least for Chesterton he was aware that for Aquinas God is Good and a Good God would never withhold goodness and the absence of the good because of the skeptic’s own volition would be the punishment for the one who did not believe in the sinner’s prayer.
Chesterton doesn’t connect the pieces within the context that they deserve, and at times his juvenile Christian arguments against skeptics was bothersome, but overall, this short book is a fun read and can be profitable for the casual reader.
March 18, 2024
I absolutely fell in love with Chesterton and his writing style so I can say without a doubt that while this was my first time reading his work, it will not be my last. I couldn’t help but chuckle at his wit and creativity—man, does he have a way with words.
Chesterton’s unique approach made it so you weren’t learning so much about Aquinas the man or Aquinas the Saint but Aquinas the philosopher. Thus, I would not recommend this to readers who are not interested in philosophy. With his pen, which Chesterton treats more like a paintbrush, he illustrated a portrait of a Saint and a landscape of The Church and religion. His expressions and impressions gave me a great deal to think about and helped put to words some thoughts, questions, and ideas that I was incapable of articulating.
In reading The ‘Dumb Ox,’ I almost felt as though I got to know the author of the subject more than the subject himself, as it was written in an aloof, reverent, and circumspect manner. And yet, the entire book was written with a forcefulness that radiated gratitude for and humility towards STA and his work. This left the life of STA shrouded in a mantle of subtlety and the reader eager for more.
A few of my favorite quotes:
- “falsehood is never so false as when it is very nearly true.”
- “Any extreme of Catholic asceticism is a wise, or unwise, precaution against the evil of the Fall; it is never a doubt about the good of the Creation.”
St. Thomas Aquinas, pray for us!
In the words of @Connor Helson, #CanonizeChesterton!
Chesterton’s unique approach made it so you weren’t learning so much about Aquinas the man or Aquinas the Saint but Aquinas the philosopher. Thus, I would not recommend this to readers who are not interested in philosophy. With his pen, which Chesterton treats more like a paintbrush, he illustrated a portrait of a Saint and a landscape of The Church and religion. His expressions and impressions gave me a great deal to think about and helped put to words some thoughts, questions, and ideas that I was incapable of articulating.
In reading The ‘Dumb Ox,’ I almost felt as though I got to know the author of the subject more than the subject himself, as it was written in an aloof, reverent, and circumspect manner. And yet, the entire book was written with a forcefulness that radiated gratitude for and humility towards STA and his work. This left the life of STA shrouded in a mantle of subtlety and the reader eager for more.
A few of my favorite quotes:
- “falsehood is never so false as when it is very nearly true.”
- “Any extreme of Catholic asceticism is a wise, or unwise, precaution against the evil of the Fall; it is never a doubt about the good of the Creation.”
St. Thomas Aquinas, pray for us!
In the words of @Connor Helson, #CanonizeChesterton!
March 8, 2021
Entrega o que promete
Etienne Gilson, talvez o maior tomista do século 20, recebeu com assombro o despretensioso livro de um certo polêmico jornalista inglês. Conta-se que Gilson, depois de o ler, não conseguiu conter palavras para expressar sua admiração:
Considero-o, sem a menor possibilidade de comparação, o melhor livro jamais escrito sobre Santo Tomás… Chesterton foi um dos pensadores mais profundos de todos os tempos…
Pois li o dito livro de Chesterton sobre São Tomás. Na verdade, li duas vezes em sequência e meu livro ficou cheio de post its com anotações e linhas marcadas. Não há como não entrar no universo de São Tomás e se deixar impregnar com todo aquele universo da idade média, e tudo isso em menos de 200 páginas. Só os grandes conseguem tal feito, ainda mais quando o retratado é uma figura tão complexa e que produziu tanto como Aquino. Chesterton conseguiu deixar o pensamento do doutor angélico ao alcance de quem quiser entendê-lo.
Sao Tomás não estava anos luz a frente de sua época; ele está anos luz à frente de qualquer época que já existiu. Na verdade ele previu com assombroso acerto a cilada intelectual que nós cairíamos e se penitenciou por isso. Sua filosofia não só estava certa, mas é a única que pode ser chamada de certa. Os grandes filósofos que vieram depois se perderam em coisas pueris, em abstrações desconectas da realidade, pois se afastaram da única coisa que jamais poderiam duvidar _ não sem contradizer a si próprios _ se afastaram da saudável sabedoria do homem comum, daquela que diz que o que é, é.
De forma não linear, Chesterton nos conduz por episódios decisivos da vida de São Tomás, faz uma inusitada comparação com São Francisco de Assis, mostra seu combate com os maniqueus, como compreendermos mal o casamento dele com Aristóteles, o nominalismo, sua filosofia, enfim, uma introdução ao essencial da obra desse monstro que foi São Tomás de Aquino.
Existem obras que nos impactam profundamente. Essa é uma delas. A forma de olhar o mundo é diferente após a experiência de ler esse livro. É impossível olhar as coisas da mesma maneira depois que se começa a penetrar na mente de Tomás de Aquino, uma mente que nunca caiu nas armadilhas do intelecto pelo simples motivo de que foi fiel ao que lhe dava sanidade, segurando como uma rocha o fato triunfante que o mundo é real e estamos nele. Tudo se resume nisso e quando a realidade é colocada de lado, mesmo que por um segundo, a tragédia acontece e nós nos perdemos.
Chesterton foi tão certeiro ao chegar na essência de um pensador tão complexo e profundo que o seu maior estudioso, um acadêmico, só pode se espantar e dizer que daria um braço para ter escrito esse livro. Ele conseguiu mostrar que o complicado na verdade era simples, depois que você consegue a chave para compreender as coisas simples. E a chave era manter-se fiel à realidade.
© MARCOS JUNIOR 2013
Etienne Gilson, talvez o maior tomista do século 20, recebeu com assombro o despretensioso livro de um certo polêmico jornalista inglês. Conta-se que Gilson, depois de o ler, não conseguiu conter palavras para expressar sua admiração:
Considero-o, sem a menor possibilidade de comparação, o melhor livro jamais escrito sobre Santo Tomás… Chesterton foi um dos pensadores mais profundos de todos os tempos…
Pois li o dito livro de Chesterton sobre São Tomás. Na verdade, li duas vezes em sequência e meu livro ficou cheio de post its com anotações e linhas marcadas. Não há como não entrar no universo de São Tomás e se deixar impregnar com todo aquele universo da idade média, e tudo isso em menos de 200 páginas. Só os grandes conseguem tal feito, ainda mais quando o retratado é uma figura tão complexa e que produziu tanto como Aquino. Chesterton conseguiu deixar o pensamento do doutor angélico ao alcance de quem quiser entendê-lo.
Sao Tomás não estava anos luz a frente de sua época; ele está anos luz à frente de qualquer época que já existiu. Na verdade ele previu com assombroso acerto a cilada intelectual que nós cairíamos e se penitenciou por isso. Sua filosofia não só estava certa, mas é a única que pode ser chamada de certa. Os grandes filósofos que vieram depois se perderam em coisas pueris, em abstrações desconectas da realidade, pois se afastaram da única coisa que jamais poderiam duvidar _ não sem contradizer a si próprios _ se afastaram da saudável sabedoria do homem comum, daquela que diz que o que é, é.
De forma não linear, Chesterton nos conduz por episódios decisivos da vida de São Tomás, faz uma inusitada comparação com São Francisco de Assis, mostra seu combate com os maniqueus, como compreendermos mal o casamento dele com Aristóteles, o nominalismo, sua filosofia, enfim, uma introdução ao essencial da obra desse monstro que foi São Tomás de Aquino.
Existem obras que nos impactam profundamente. Essa é uma delas. A forma de olhar o mundo é diferente após a experiência de ler esse livro. É impossível olhar as coisas da mesma maneira depois que se começa a penetrar na mente de Tomás de Aquino, uma mente que nunca caiu nas armadilhas do intelecto pelo simples motivo de que foi fiel ao que lhe dava sanidade, segurando como uma rocha o fato triunfante que o mundo é real e estamos nele. Tudo se resume nisso e quando a realidade é colocada de lado, mesmo que por um segundo, a tragédia acontece e nós nos perdemos.
Chesterton foi tão certeiro ao chegar na essência de um pensador tão complexo e profundo que o seu maior estudioso, um acadêmico, só pode se espantar e dizer que daria um braço para ter escrito esse livro. Ele conseguiu mostrar que o complicado na verdade era simples, depois que você consegue a chave para compreender as coisas simples. E a chave era manter-se fiel à realidade.
© MARCOS JUNIOR 2013
January 8, 2022
I....love this book. So much. It might actually be my favorite Chesterton? Overall? Fiction and nonfiction included? Which is saying a lot???
The first time I read it, what grabbed me most was the chapter about being a fool and humility and gratitude--the Chapter "Le Jongleur de Dieu," I think? This time around, I particularly liked the bit towards the end about how the Franciscan spirit could have become a heresy if it had absorbed the Church instead of being absorbed by the Church. It's just...the whole book is so beautiful. I love it immensely.
And St. Francis' death makes me cry EVERY TIME. (As in, both times. But...actually cry. Weep. Copiously, for me. I....it's so beautiful.)
The first time I read it, what grabbed me most was the chapter about being a fool and humility and gratitude--the Chapter "Le Jongleur de Dieu," I think? This time around, I particularly liked the bit towards the end about how the Franciscan spirit could have become a heresy if it had absorbed the Church instead of being absorbed by the Church. It's just...the whole book is so beautiful. I love it immensely.
And St. Francis' death makes me cry EVERY TIME. (As in, both times. But...actually cry. Weep. Copiously, for me. I....it's so beautiful.)
February 21, 2013
An amazing and insightful spiritual biography that's light on factual details, heavy on context and depth and chock full of Chestertonian wit and wordplay.
August 25, 2021
Chesterton can really write. But, as a poet, he seems to prize eloquence over clarity and it is thus not the most informative of histories.
December 23, 2020
We get less insight into St. Francis from this volume than we do into a certain kind of early 20th-century Englishman. Chesterton's flowery prose is so inflected by the conventions of his time that it is hard to penetrate it for a greater understanding of the timeless Saint. Particularly bewildering is Chesterton's choice to include little actual description of Francis's life -- he seems to assume that everyone already knows all the stories about Francis (which this reader does not). He instead chooses a handful of vignettes and then riffs on them for pages trying to convey to the reader a sense of who the saint really was or what it would be like to be in his presence, rather than sticking to the historical record such as it is.
I knew exactly two things about St. Francis before I picked up the book - I know that he had a great affection for animals, because the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York used to hold an annual blessing ceremony for animals (maybe still does?) in his honor. And secondly, I knew the so-called Prayer of St. Francis (Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace) having encountered it in different musical settings. Chesterton can hardly be blamed for not including anything on the said prayer, which was not written by Francis and in fact seems to have been written and popularized after the 1924 publication of Chesterton's book. With regard to the animals, Chesterton is practically mute although he makes a passing reference to an incident where Francis interceded with the Pope on behalf of the birds. Would have liked to have learned more about that episode, but alas no details here about it.
Unrelated to St. Francis but Chesterton also uses this book to put forward a rather bizarre and doctrinally questionable theory of history - asserting that the Dark Ages were a period of penance mankind needed to go through because of the excesses (and in particular the sexual excesses) of the Greeks and Romans. Putting aside the outdated assumptions that the so-called Dark Ages produced no important advancements in science or the arts - why would God need to enforce a thousand-year long universal penance to redeem the world from the idolatries of Greece and Rome? I thought that was what Jesus came to do.
I knew exactly two things about St. Francis before I picked up the book - I know that he had a great affection for animals, because the Cathedral of St. John the Divine in New York used to hold an annual blessing ceremony for animals (maybe still does?) in his honor. And secondly, I knew the so-called Prayer of St. Francis (Lord, make me an instrument of thy peace) having encountered it in different musical settings. Chesterton can hardly be blamed for not including anything on the said prayer, which was not written by Francis and in fact seems to have been written and popularized after the 1924 publication of Chesterton's book. With regard to the animals, Chesterton is practically mute although he makes a passing reference to an incident where Francis interceded with the Pope on behalf of the birds. Would have liked to have learned more about that episode, but alas no details here about it.
Unrelated to St. Francis but Chesterton also uses this book to put forward a rather bizarre and doctrinally questionable theory of history - asserting that the Dark Ages were a period of penance mankind needed to go through because of the excesses (and in particular the sexual excesses) of the Greeks and Romans. Putting aside the outdated assumptions that the so-called Dark Ages produced no important advancements in science or the arts - why would God need to enforce a thousand-year long universal penance to redeem the world from the idolatries of Greece and Rome? I thought that was what Jesus came to do.
June 14, 2018
Chesterton is always a roller coaster ride to read. I read somewhere that he dictated all of his writing to a secretary with no revising. While this does prove what an amazing genius Chesterton is, it also helps to understand why you feel as though you are racing around inside his head, plucking one idea out of another.
His turns of phrases are fantastical and are so well stated, sometimes hard to understand, but mostly proverbs that leave you thinking, "Yes! That is very true and I never thought about it that way."
While this is a life of Saint Thomas, an actual chronology of the saint's life is quite minimal. What the bulk of substance is about is a critical analysis of St. Thomas' theology compared and contrasted with St. Augustine's and also later Martin Luther's. Mostly, though, it is like all of Chesterton's literary essays, which are a comparative and contrast to the Spirit of the Age, which dares to call itself rational and enlightened.
Chesterton is a Catholic, through and through, and while I don't hold that against him, I must confess I am more in Augustine and Luther's camp than Aquinas'. I would not mind reading another biography or at least a book about Aquinas' doctrines to get a better idea of how well supported his theses are.
His turns of phrases are fantastical and are so well stated, sometimes hard to understand, but mostly proverbs that leave you thinking, "Yes! That is very true and I never thought about it that way."
While this is a life of Saint Thomas, an actual chronology of the saint's life is quite minimal. What the bulk of substance is about is a critical analysis of St. Thomas' theology compared and contrasted with St. Augustine's and also later Martin Luther's. Mostly, though, it is like all of Chesterton's literary essays, which are a comparative and contrast to the Spirit of the Age, which dares to call itself rational and enlightened.
Chesterton is a Catholic, through and through, and while I don't hold that against him, I must confess I am more in Augustine and Luther's camp than Aquinas'. I would not mind reading another biography or at least a book about Aquinas' doctrines to get a better idea of how well supported his theses are.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,200 reviews