The Great Heresies

by Hilaire Belloc

Hilaire Belloc examines the five most destructive heretical movements to have affected Christian Arianism, Mohammedanism (Islam), Albigensianism (Cathar), The Reformation (Protestant), and “The Modern Phase.” Belloc describes how these movements began, how they spread, and how they continued to influence the world up until the time of his writing (1936). The Chapter on Islam is especially relevant in light of current events; in it Belloc accurately predicts the renewal of Jihadist aggression towards Western Civilization.

Genres: History, Religion, Catholic, Theology, Christianity, Nonfiction, Philosophy

146 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1938

About the author

People considered Joseph Hilaire Pierre René Belloc, French-born British writer, as a master of light English prose and also knew widely his droll verse, especially The Bad Child's Book of Beasts in 1896.

Sharp wit of Hilaire Belloc, an historian, poet, and orator, extended across literary output and strong political and religious convictions. Oxford educated this distinguished debater and scholar. Throughout his career, he prolifically across a range of genres and produced histories, essays, travelogues, poetry, and satirical works.

Cautionary Tales for Children collects best humorous yet dark morals, and historical works of Hilaire Belloc often reflected his staunch Catholicism and critique of Protestant interpretations. He led advocates of an economic theory that promotes and championed distribution of small-scale property ownership as a middle ground between capitalism and socialism alongside Gilbert Keith Chesterton, his close friend.

In politics, Hilaire Belloc served as a member of Parliament for the Liberal party, but the establishment disillusioned him. His polemical style and strong opinions made a controversial figure, who particularly viewed modernism, secularism, and financial capitalism as threats to traditional Christian society in his critiques.

Influence and vast literary legacy of Hilaire Belloc extends into historical circles. Erudition, humor, and a forceful rhetorical style characterized intellectual vigor and unique perspective, which people continue to study and to appreciate, on history, society, and human nature.

Reviews

[Manuel Alfonseca · Rating 4 out of 5]

ENGLISH: Very good historical review of the five great heresies against the Catholic Church along its history:
1. Arianism, taken as a typical heresy of the first centuries that denied one or two important Catholic beliefs but kept the others.
2. Islam, which started as a simplification of Catholic tenets that started outside the Catholic realm, and ended as a separate religion. One of the most lucid historical treatments of Islam I have read, sometimes almost prophetic.
3. Albigensians (Catharism), a revival of old Gnostic/Manichaean trends, a suicidal heresy, as it forbade sex, considered as a weapon created by the Devil (the evil god), but that threatened to conquer all of Christendom. Although Belloc does not mention it, the current attempt by nationalist Catalonians to defend them is just a show of historical ignorance.
4. Protestantism (especially Calvinism), which rather than a typical heresy is a bunch of different denials of different basic Catholic tenets, its different branches united by a common hate to Catholicism. Although this has changed somewhat since Belloc wrote the book (1936-38), some sediment of this can be observed even now
5. The present attack against Catholicism by the dominant ideology. This chapter could have been written now. Things are now much worse than when the book was written, but all the trends signaled in the book are quite visible now.

ESPAÑOL: Muy buen repaso histórico de las cinco grandes herejías contra la Iglesia Católica a lo largo de su historia:
1. El arrianismo, entendido como una herejía típica de los primeros siglos, que negaba una o dos creencias católicas importantes, pero conservaba las demás.
2. El Islam, que comenzó como una simplificación de los principios católicos, que comenzó fuera del ámbito católico y terminó como una religión separada. Uno de los tratamientos históricos más lúcidos del Islam que he leído, a veces casi profético.
3. Albigenses (catarismo), resurgimiento de las viejas corrientes gnósticas/maniqueas, herejía suicida, ya que prohibía el sexo, considerado como un arma creada por el diablo (el dios del mal), pero que amenazaba con conquistar a toda la cristiandad. Aunque Belloc no lo menciona, el intento actual de los nacionalistas catalanes por defenderlos es solo una muestra de ignorancia histórica.
4. El protestantismo (especialmente el calvinismo), que más que una herejía típica es un montón de negaciones diferentes de distintos principios católicos básicos, sus diferentes ramas unidas por el odio común al catolicismo. Aunque esto ha cambiado un poco desde que Belloc escribió el libro (1936-38), aún ahora se pueden observar algunos sedimentos de ello.
5. El ataque actual contra el catolicismo por parte de la ideología dominante. Este capítulo podría haber sido escrito ahora. Las cosas están mucho peor que cuando se escribió el libro, pero todas las tendencias señaladas en él son bastante visibles hoy día.

[Ben · Rating 5 out of 5]

Another eye opening history from a very readable writer. Hilaire Belloc was half English, half French, a one time MP and a prolific writer known as "the man who wrote a library". Fortunately he did so in small volumes often broken down into self-contained chapters or essays, and wrote them very well, not only in content and structure but also with great wit and precision of language. (The size of his works belie the wealth of fact and insight they contain.)

'The Great Heresies' whilst not a book that by it's title would seem of interest or import to the average person, is by value of it's content enjoyable and informative. The five Heresies which Belloc considors are issues upon which the history of the World hinged, and so in explaining them he explains in part something of the world today, and how and why it is as it is when it could have been extremely different. His considoration of Islam (back in the late 1920's early 1930's) seems almost prescient or prophetic when read today. Though of course it was due to his historical knowlege and clear thinking, and a rejection of the confident attitude of racial and cultural superiority of his time. He clearly predicted that Islam would once again gain in strength and influence to be an important force in the world.

Adam Shaw's earlier review, though it could be said to be mostly true is misleading and less than helpfull. Yes Hilaire Belloc was Catholic, and very proud of the fact. He wrote as a Catholic, not hiding his bias and making no false claims to being impartial or without prior opinion, thus allowing all his readers to follow his thoughts with open eyes and a questioning mind. He was not afraid of holding a position and defending it, not afraid of debate, as his life well shows. If you are bigotted enough not to read him because of his Faith he himself would have been glad you have nothing to do with him. He was angry about many things as any rational man or woman who truely looks at the world around them will be, whatever time they live in. He was especially angry about the unadmitted and unacknowledged anti-Catholic bias in the officailly accepted Whig version of History. So much of his Historical work was (and still is) a reply to it from someone on the other side of the debate about what happened in the past to bring us to the present, and how and why.

Bare in mind whilst reading that he was a man of his time, before political correctness and the timidity of openly declared personal opinion which it has been one of it's fruits. Though free of many of the prejudices of his day, like anyone he was not free of them all, remember; nor are you. Also remember that Catholic enfranchisement was an issue not so far in the past as it is today and was one on which people had very strong views.

If i have not been clear above, i clearly state now that I thoroughly recommend this book.

[Matei · Rating 2 out of 5]

I wanted to like this book, but sadly Belloch climbs his high horse in the introduction, and never quite makes up for it throughout the book. It is also a weird book, I’m not exactly sure who it’s for. It reads like apologetics, with simplified arguments, relying heavily on cheap rhetoric like repeating the same point over and over again in different forms to emphasize an idea, but the method of apologetic writing is presenting a religious worldview, using secular arguments, thereby approaching and solving any objections the reader might have. Belloch just regurgitates laughably biased views, without any regard nor discipline for the line of reasoning he is presenting.(although, I must admit that his insistent bashing of Calvin is hilarious). It feels more like a book that Catholics are supposed to read for a brief moment of self-indulgence and -righteousness. Let’s look into them shall we?

The first heresy tackled is Arianism. Instead of arguing *why* rejecting the Divinity of Christ collapses the Christian religion, the process through which early doctrine was established and the turbulence and the difficulties that the early Church had to overcome to reject this heresy we learn that followers of Arianism all maintained their theological position out of selfish, social reasons, out of a desire to separate themselves from the newly converted masses and to cling to some exclusionary pagan mindset. It almost reads like a meme posting: a brave, smart, pious, humble Catholic was sitting in a class taught by a selfish, arrogant and crazy follower of Arius, etc etc. Causes of heresy are laughably overgeneralized. In fact, the situation he is presenting is completely reversed when dealing with modernism, something he acknowledges in passing too little, too late, in the final pages of the book. How many Catholics today follow the faith because of some contrarian/conservative tendency or to compensate for some social shortcomings? The arguments always cut both ways, but this is never addressed and never justified.

Ok, moving on, Islam. Er, the Mohammedan heresy. So treating Islam as a heretical movement which sprang out of Christianity brings its own questions, which again never get an answer. Can’t we also say then that Christianity is a Judaic heresy? Are we right then to distance ourselves from Judaism, the way the Church veered under Paulinian influence? These questions need to be answered for Bellochs arguments to work. A similar issue arises out of calling Islam an inherently violent religion. Critics may very well point out towards all the violence that was waged in the name of Catholicism? This needs to be addressed. Also, his criticism toward Mohammed could very well be applied to Jesus by an atheist critics, especially considering C.S Lewis lemma that He was either who He said He was, or a complete madman. Now Belloch is praised for being quite prescient in predicting the current rise of Islam which will seek to dominate the Christian world. I have three problems with this: 1. The religious reemergence in the Middle East was not as predicted a movement against the dominating colonial powers, but against the weak secular governments established after european countries decided to mingle in affairs by proxy rather than directly. Therefore strife was channelled towards these failed states rather than against Christianity. 2. The demographic changes in Europe are a by-product of the Muslim minority being stuck in an immigrant condition, sharing a lifestyle and culture with the working class, which generally has a higher birthrate than the middle class majority. 3. Violent, fundamentalist Islamic movements are characterised by being seen as heretical by all Muslim outsiders. I think Belloch would agree that it is strange to judge a faith based on its heresies.

Albigensian chapter was ok, but went downhill fast at the end when he began once more to withhold information and manipulate how the narrative is presented to drive his point home. The failures of the Catholic Church in Languedoc had important contributions to the resulting spread of the heresy(the all familiar material abuses, conflated with improper wielding of power). There is also a very important discussion to be had about the human life loss that resulted from the Albigensian Crusade. Without these things his arguments are very weak if not outright meaningless.

Reformation is better still. Belloch even shows that he understands the problems of the Church that need to be addressed, if unity and relevance should be maintained: resisting material abuses, avoiding dogmatic “ossification” as he calls it, and so on. It is rather sad that though they are enumerated, they are never contextualized within each heretical movement and its response. Some issues are ignored such as the necessity of reformers to involve secular powers, lest they are completely destroyed by a Church unwilling to change and adapt. Belloch also spends a few paragraphs judging the world in terms of a Protestant part, which fell to usury, thereby gaining power, and a Catholic part which suffered more because of its stronger dependence on a now weakened Church as an explanation of the contemporary state of the world. This approach is as ridiculous as Weber’s idea of Protestant work ethic explaining northern european countries success. The same view of a materialistic money obsessed and usury filled countries that he applies to Protestant countries, could very well have been applied to Catholic countries a few centuries earlier.

The last chapter deals with the Modern Heresy, the overall secularization of Europe and the increasing adoption of an atheist worldview by western citizens. The reason why this is happening is never really addressed, Belloch resumes to just naming the Reformation, the loss of authority by the Church as the main factors in driving this change. He ends the chapter by presenting two future scenarios, which basically reduce to “either the Church will continue to shrink, or at some point it will stop shrinking and start growing again”, but an examination of the factors which could lead to one outcome over the other is noticeably missing.

There are certain arguments or methods which are general to all chapters: that the European culture is fundamentally Catholic, the heretics are judged in terms of secular motives and the Church in terms of spiritual ones (less so in the Reformation chapter, where he surprisingly adopts a conciliatory tone) which do little to persuade. In a way Belloch seems to be driven by a desire to exalt the Church with no regard about the danger of sacrificing the very values the Church upholds in the process. This approach is damning however, it will never facilitate the institution to overcome its temporary shortcomings and adjust (as a living organism should). It is clear that God, the Holy Spirit, guides the Church, it wouldn’t have recovered so well through all its crises, nor would it have survived for so long after all the missteps it made throughout history. But the Church is not God. Too bad, for Belloc she is.

⅖ - good intention, fundamentally flawed

[Charles Haywood · Rating 5 out of 5]

For no reason that is fully clear to me, I have always been fascinated by heresies. It matters to me what the difference between a Monothelite and a Monophysite is. Hence, I thought this book (from 1938, by the famous Catholic writer Hilaire Belloc) would survey various heresies and would explain, as its title says, the “Great Heresies.” But that is not what this book is.

Instead, it is a survey of five exemplars of heresies, from earliest Christian times to the modern age, and a two-pronged argument. The five heresies are the Arian, Islam, the Albigensian, Protestantism, and the Modern. The two arguments are, first, that that these five encompass all possible basic material variations from true Christian belief. And second, that three of the five have been defeated by Catholicism, the only two remaining being Islam (which Belloc presciently predicted would regain its ancient strength) and the “Modern” heresy, which Belloc saw as the main threat to Christianity and the world, and in fact as probably the harbinger of Anti-Christ.

Belloc, of course, was a wholly orthodox Roman Catholic who believed that the entirety of what the Church taught is true. As he points out, though, this is essentially irrelevant for his book, which is not a book of apologetics, it is a book of analytical history. Belloc sees Roman Catholicism as coterminous with Christianity; he explicitly rejects that there can be varieties of Christian belief. There is one Christian belief; the rest are heresies. He characterizes the Orthodox as schismatic, not heretical, and therefore not relevant to his book (although his aside on this matter is not wholly convincing).

Belloc begins, naturally enough, by precisely defining “heresy,” noting that in modern usage it merely connotes some vague angels-on-the-head-of-a-pin theological disagreement, of no current import or relevance. Belloc believes that not only is heresy a very specific thing, but that the fact that no heresy conquered the Roman Catholic Church was essential to the creation and maintenance of Western civilization. In essence, this is the frame through which he views each heresy.

“Heresy is the dislocation of some complete and self-supporting scheme by the introduction of a novel denial of some essential part therein.” Thus, a heresy is not necessarily a religious dislocation. Moreover, “The denial of a scheme wholesale is not heresy, and has not the creative power of a heresy. It is of the essence of heresy that it leaves standing a great part of the structure it attacks. On this account it can appeal to believers and continues to affect their lives through deflecting them from their original characters.” It is that deflection that makes the heresies with which Belloc is concerned important, for his thesis is that the entire society is thereby modified, or distorted.

First up is Arianism—in essence, the denial of the divinity of Christ. Belloc attributes the appeal of Arianism to the universal appeal of rationality as opposed to mystery. “It sprang from the desire to visualize clearly and simply something which is beyond the vision of human vision and comprehension [i.e., the hypostatic union].” The impact of Arianism, according to Belloc, is to “produce a gradual social degradation following on the loss of that direct link between human nature and God which is provided by the Incarnation. Human dignity is lessened. The authority of Our Lord is weakened. He appears more and more as a man—perhaps a myth. The substance of Christian life is diluted. It wanes. What began as Unitarianism ends as Paganism.” Therefore, an Arian Europe would have been a very different place. “The point is that the doctrine (and its denial) were formative of the nature of men, and the nature so formed determined the future of the society made up of those men.”

Not that Arianism was like a modern system of rationality—that would have not had any appeal in 300 A.D. But a rationalized form of the core Christian doctrine appealed as both simpler and as better suited to the governing classes, and especially to the military, who saw themselves as less credulous than the teeming masses. This was particularly true since at the time Christianity was in no way dominant in the Roman Empire, although the time of persecutions was ending. For the elite considering converting from paganism, Arianism was attractive, since it made them less needful of accepting something that was bizarre on its face, and allowed more connection to the high old pagan culture. Belloc follows how certain emperors and the army accepted Arianism, and attempted to mandate theological compromises. These were rejected by the Church Fathers such as St. Athanasius, on the grounds even such compromises would “endanger the vital principle by which the Church exists.” This was criticized as uncooperative fanaticism, but in part due to a combination of historical accidents (e.g., the death of Julian the Apostate and, later, the rise to power of the Franks) and in part due to the vigor of the proponents of the traditional view, Arianism slowly declined to nothingness (although various other heresies in the East, such as Monophysites and Nestorians, were similar attempts to rationalize a key, but mysterious, doctrine of Christianity, and their existence contributed to the rise of Islam).

Next is “the great and enduring heresy of Mohammed.” Belloc reviews the inception and rapid spread of Islam, hard upon the heels of the ultimate decay of Arianism. In particular, he reviews the once-commonplace, and commonsense, view that Islam is a Christian heresy, with the difference that, unlike most heresies, “it did not arise within the bounds of the Christian Church,” but that Mohammed “taught was in the main Catholic doctrine, oversimplified. . . . [H]e, like so many other lesser heresiarchs, founded his heresy on simplification.” He went well beyond Arianism and denied the Trinity altogether, along with the sacramental structure of Christianity, together with adding various ancillary beliefs mostly directly or indirectly derived from Christianity and Christian writings. (Belloc does not note that much of Mohammed’s doctrine was also derived from a distorted retelling of parts of the Talmud.)

This simplified religion was attractive for much the same reason as Arianism, and when combined with the existing slavery, imperial taxation and corruption rampant in the East, and the presence of other Arian-type heresies, as well as the zeal of its first converts, Islam spread rapidly. It became fabulously wealthy and cultured, although actual conversion of conquered territories was slow and not directly encouraged. And having largely destroyed Christianity in the East, it threatened the entire West—which would, if the threat had been made good, have certainly resulted in a very different West.

Belloc clearly has great respect, if a fearful respect, for Islam. He notes that unlike other heresies, its physical, temporal power has declined, but unlike other heresies, its adherents have not diminished in numbers or zeal, and they have proven to be unconvertible. (In fact, he notes that Europeans who convert tend to convert to Islam, not the reverse. See, e.g., Muhamad Asad’s conversion memoir, The Road To Mecca). Belloc ascribes Islam’s long-standing (but now-ended, or suspended) temporal ascendancy to the continued ability of Islam to convert new, militarily-centered groups (the Mongols, etc.) and to the (unfortunate, to both Belloc and me) failure of the Crusades. The issue was even in doubt relatively recently; as Belloc says, “It is interesting to notice, for instance, that the Mohammedan call to prayer [of Algerian pirates] was heard on the coasts of Southern Ireland within the lifetime of Oliver Cromwell.” He does not know what to ascribe the spiritual vitality of Islam to, which is an interesting admission—I’m sure Muslims would be happy to supply reasons to him, and encourage his conversion! It’s a bit too late for Belloc, though, one way or the other.

Belloc rejects the common Western idea that Islam declined in temporal power due to fatalism—pointing out that the same doctrine, or set of related doctrines, characterized Islam just as much when it was at its temporal apogee. He makes the same argument about Islam’s well known tendency toward fissiparous political succession. Therefore, he concludes that the quiescence of Islam as a temporal force in the early 20th Century was destined to end, and that it is likely that Islam would rise as a modern military machine. “It has always seemed to me possible, and even probable, that there would be a resurrection of Islam and that our sons or our grandsons would see the renewal of that tremendous struggle between the Christian culture and what has been for more than a thousand years its greatest opponent. . . . Since religion is at the root of all political movements and changes and since we have here a very great religion physically paralyzed but morally intensely alive, we are in the presence of an unstable equilibrium which cannot remain permanently unstable.” In fact, unlike the West, “the whole spiritual strength of Islam is still present. . . . . The final fruit of this tenacity, the second period of Islamic power, may be delayed—but I doubt whether it can be permanently postponed.”

He took for granted that Islam would desire to continue to conquer and dominate, which is logical, considering it is an essential part of the theology of Islam. He notes that until recently, Europeans “thought of Mohammedanism as we think of Bolshevism or as white men in Asia think of Japanese power today”—and that day, he predicted, would return soon again, since there was no reason why the temporary comparative disadvantage in military technology should continue. But since 1938, such a thing has not happened—the Muslim world, or part of it, has become fabulously wealthy, but no Muslim group has arisen as the new Mamluks or Ottoman Turks. Sure, the House of Saud exports Wahhabism all over the world, and that is pernicious, but it is not a global military challenge, and shows no sign of it, all the talk of ISIS’s goals not to the contrary. Moreover, the Muslim world is split along their own doctrinal lines, and spends much of its warlike energy fighting other Muslims. So Belloc’s prediction has not come true. Islam is more relevant to the West now than in 1938, largely because of oil wealth, but the new siege of Vienna is not on the horizon (whether the same effect is achieved by Europe inviting an alien body to conquer it from within is a different question, and not one Belloc could have foreseen).

Third up is Albigensianism. Belloc notes that the dualist, anti-matter doctrines of the Albigensians have “always been latent among men in various forms, not only in the civilization of Christendom but wherever and whenever men have had to consider the fundamental problems of life, that is, in every time and place.” Albigensians were only one example; others included the earlier Manicheans, Puritanism (which seems a stretch) and Jansenism. Dualism is in essence a response to the problem of theodicy, the so-called “problem of evil.” Why does an all-powerful, all-good God permit evil and suffering? Other possible responses include Stoicism (“grin-and-bear-it”); ignoring the problem; and Buddhism and other “Eastern” philosophies, that de-focus on the individual and thereby diminish the seeming importance of the problem. If Albigensianism had conquered, Western society would have been radically transformed. But they were put down, and good thing, too.

Fourth is Protestantism. Belloc defines this as not one heresy, but a “crop of heresies.” And while many decayed quickly, their core principle, “reaction against a united spiritual authority,” continued strongly long enough to “break up our European civilization in the West and to launch at last a general doubt, spreading more and more widely.” Belloc, in a fairly lengthy historical review, claims that this split was not immediate at the inception of the Reformation (and he reviews the causes of the Reformation, as well, from undoubted extensive corruption in the Church, to the Great Schism, to the Black Death). For quite some time, both Catholics and Protestants viewed Christianity not as split, but as having a vigorous debate about what should be the universal faith. But after a long enough time and enough wars, the current view of Christianity as split into two took hold, which Belloc holds had extremely pernicious consequences for both the thinking and the organization of Western civilization. And while Belloc sees Protestantism as basically dead as a belief system, he thinks this split has had profound consequences, the chief of which is the weakening of the primacy of religious belief in the mind of Western man, and its “subordination to worldly motives.” (The fact that most modern Christians often see this as a feature, not a bug, merely proves Belloc’s point.)

Of course, Belloc was wrong in his conclusion that Protestantism is dead. Certainly the Protestantism he knew, of the Church of England and a variety of other what are now called “mainstream” Protestant churches, centered in Europe was dying then and is wholly and embarrassingly dead now, at least as institutions. But the global rise of vigorous evangelicals, Pentecostals, and for that matter Mormons (to the extent they can be considered Christian) shows that a wide range of non-Catholic Christian movements is very much temporally and spiritually alive.

Finally, Belloc covers the “Modern Phase”—“a wholesale assault upon the fundamentals of the Faith—upon the very existence of the Faith.” This is a battle for survival or destruction, and there can be only one victor. The assailant is not one modern philosophy or another, such as Communism (which Belloc presciently identifies as “only one manifestation, and probably a passing one”). It is atheistical, not interested in reason, and opposed to the “indissoluble Trinity of Truth, Beauty and Goodness”—that is, once Christianity is wholly denied, soon thereafter “there is coming not only a contempt for beauty but a hatred of it; and immediately upon the heels of this there appears a contempt and hatred for virtue.” This is certainly prophetic—we can see this in the treatment of art and culture over the 20th Century, and even more so in the utter contempt and hatred for virtue, other than the “virtue” of limitless autonomy, that exists today as the dominant ethic.

Such open assaults are merely part of it, though. Perhaps an even greater part is what Rod Dreher calls “Moralistic Therapeutic Deism,” but which Belloc identified 80 years ago. “It is essentially atheist, even when the atheism is not overtly predicted. It regards man as sufficient to himself [and], prayer as mere self-suggestion.” Talk of “assault” and “anti-Christ” perhaps casts into shade a bigger problem—the total loss of the spiritual inheritance of the West, not mostly to open subscription to a virulent opposite, but to acedia, spiritual apathy.

Belloc also correctly predicted that the impact of the Modern heresy would not be most profound in the expected areas. For example, “Those who would point to the modern breakdown of sexual morals as the chief effect of the Modern Attack on the Catholic Church are probably in error; for it will not have the most permanent results . . . . [Rather,] cruelty will be the chief fruit in the moral field of the Modern Attack . . . .” Belloc notes that it is not that Christians cannot be cruel, but it is an exception to their core beliefs, whereas cruelty is part and parcel of the Modern, “because there is no longer in force the conception that man as man is something sacred.”

The 20th Century pretty much bore this conclusion out in ways I need not explain. Similarly, the unbelievable cruelty of abortion is now unexceptional. We see ourselves as not cruel, and perhaps for now the camps are empty, but that does not mean that the modern tendency toward cruelty is ended—more likely, it is merely in abeyance, literally hidden as in abortion, or hidden under the guise of pseudo-mercy, such as in the groundswell of ever-less-voluntary euthanasia in parts of Europe (benighted parts, like Belgium and Holland, not enlightened ones like Poland and Hungary). If man is not sacred, and human dignity is nothing, necessarily the Peter Singers of this world are always hungering to begin the killing again, and nothing but force can stop them.

Belloc ends by predicting that one of two things must happen. Either the Catholic Church will be reduced to an insignificant rump, condemned to silence (but not to disappearance, since that is by definition impossible); or it will “recover and extend her authority, and rise once more to the leadership of the civilization which she made.” Neither has happened, of course, but “leadership of civilization” is certainly not what Pope Francis is giving us—more like desperate seeking of approbation from all the wrong people and hurtling headlong down the path of dead mainstream Protestantism. Belloc also name-checks Robert Hugh Benson, who wrote both Lord of the World, about the triumph of the Modern and the resulting Apocalypse (oddly perhaps, a favorite book of Pope Francis and therefore re-arisen to public view) and another book, today wholly obscure, The Dawn of All, wherein the Church resurgent triumphs. But he ends modestly optimistically, noting that a minority of men can decide a contest. “The future is not decided for men by a public vote; it is decided by the growth of ideas.” Belloc sees Catholic ideas as likely to rise, which they have not, at least since he wrote the book. But like the swordfight between Inigo Montoya and the Dread Pirate Roberts in A Princess Bride, where advantage shifts unexpectedly from side to side, as previously concealed skills are revealed, the resolution is still very much in doubt.

[Jeff Miller · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've read a good amount of Belloc but this is my favorite by far. His exploration of the various heresies - Arian, Albengensian, Islam, Protestantism, etc is greatly insightful. Especially his chapter on Islam where he predicts Islam coming back as a power. It is fascinating to read what he writes about why Islam as a Catholic heresy has been the only heresy with staying power, though he does not pretend to have all the answers. Belloc the historian is seen in force here as he discusses the distractive nature of heresy and what it does to civilization. Every chapter though has valuable information and puts a lot of things together historically.

[Celia · Rating 3 out of 5]

Joseph Hilaire Pierre René Belloc (27 July 1870– 16 July 1953) was an Anglo-French writer and historian. His Catholic faith had a strong impact on his works.

I am a Catholic and am interested in learning more about my faith. Belloc started by describing terms. Heresy is defined as 'the dislocation of some complete and self-supporting scheme by the introduction of a novel denial of some essential part therein.' How complicated!! I searched for a simpler definition. Since Belloc was talking about heresies against the Catholic religion, I wish he had used the following instead: In Western Christianity, heresy most commonly refers to those beliefs which were declared to be anathema by any of the ecumenical councils recognized by the Catholic Church.

Belloc does describe what he feels are heresies (or, as one reviewer termed them: 'the five greatest threats to the Christian Faith over the past two thousand years.'): The Arian Heresy, The Heresy of Mohammed, The Albigensian Attack, The Protestant Reformation, and the 'Modern Attack'.

I found the discussions of Islam and the 'Modern Attack' the most interesting.

Belloc surprised me when he posited that the teachings of Mohammed were not originally a “new faith”, but a distortion of orthodox Christianity. I am not sure I understand his arguments, but I did understand this much.

The 'Modern Attack' is also known as the 'Anti-Christ Attack'. Belloc describes such isms as Communism, materialism as being the core of the 'attack'. Writing in 1938, he foresaw 'the rise and fall of communism, the prominence of atheism, and the rise of hatred for the Church.'

I found the book to be over my head at times, but am still glad that I was able to get some thoughts on the subject of heresies.

3 stars

[Jamie Smith · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hillaire Belloc was a passionate defender of Catholicism, so readers should not expect dispassionate discussions of the movements he examines here: Arianism, Islam, Catharism, Protestantism, and what he calls religious Modernism. The value in this book comes from watching Belloc build his arguments and present them in well crafted prose. Even when the reader disagrees with him it is worth following along.

He begins with the concept of heresy, which he defines as any deviation from Catholic dogma or papal fiat. He gives an example of someone who does not believe in immortality, while holding to the rest of Catholic beliefs.

The man who is certain that he is going to die for good and for all may believe that Jesus of Nazareth was Very God of Very God, that God is Triune, that the Incarnation was accompanied by a Virgin Birth, that bread and wine are transformed by a particular formula; he may recite a great number of Christian prayers and admire and copy chosen Christian exemplars, but he will be quite a different man from the man who takes immortality for granted.” (p. 10)

He expands on this idea and concludes that deviations from accepted practice lead not to minor variations of belief that could be considered personal opinions, but to different Christianities altogether. And since he is a devout believer in orthodox Roman Catholicism, all variations are deficient in practice and theologically in error, and represent mortal danger to salvation.

Arianism was a major contender for leadership of the Christian world during the first centuries A.D., and was the focus of the Council of Nicea in 325 and the Synod of Tyre in 335. The Trinity is not mentioned in the Bible, and the verses used to support it are vague and open to various interpretations. Arianism held that God was One, not Three, and that Jesus Christ was a secondary creation of God. By refusing to accept the trinity, Arianism offered a simpler form of the faith. The Triune idea that God was Three and yet One has always been a problem for believers and potential converts (“So, you’re telling me God sacrificed himself to himself?”), and eventually the Church declared it a Mystery beyond the ken of humankind and told the faithful to stop questioning it.

In discussing it Belloc uses a technique he will employ with the other heresies in this book, the sweeping generalization that sounds plausible but is not backed up by evidence. In this case, “although it began by giving to our Lord every possible honor and glory short of the actual Godhead, it would inevitably have led in the long run into mere unitarianism and the treating of Our Lord at last as a prophet and, however exalted, no more than a prophet.” (p. 21) It is doubtful that any Arian would have accepted that statement.

Belloc saw the simplicity and intellectual appeal of Arianism as a weakness, not a strength. For him, Mystery was its own justification.

rationalistic efforts against the creed produce a gradual social degradation following on the loss of that direct link between human nature and God which is provided by the Incarnation. Human dignity is lessened. The authority of Our Lord is weakened. He appears more and more as a man – perhaps a myth. The substance of Christian life is diluted. It wanes. What began as Unitarianism ends as Paganism.” (p. 30)

The next heresy Belloc discusses is Islam, which he calls Mohammedism, and to the extent that his book is known today, it is because of this section. The Great Heresies was published in 1938. The Ottoman empire had collapsed, and the Western powers controlled much of its former territory, and additional lands from Iran west all the way to the Atlantic ocean. When Islamic civilization was thought of at all by Europeans, it was seen as backward and irrelevant to modern societies.

Millions of modern people of the white civilization – that is, the civilization of Europe and America – have forgotten about Islam. They have never come in contact with it. They take for granted that it is decaying and that, anyway, it is just a foreign religion which will not concern them. It is, as a fact, the most formidable and persistent enemy which our civilization has had, and may at any moment become as large a menace in the future as it has been in the past.” (p. 51)

Belloc had great respect for Islam, recognized its historical significance and repeatedly warned his readers that it had all the attributes necessary to rise again and challenge Christianity. He had studied its origins and spread and understood that its success was a result not just of religious fervor, but of its acceptance of new idea, incorporation of the best of other civilizations, and emphasis on unity and fairness. He makes a remarkable comparison: Christianity, which had sunk into a dark age of ignorance and superstition, was seen as backwards like 1930s Russia, while Islam was the powerful, dynamic equivalent of modern Germany.

He also understood that Islam would always be a part of the world.

Islam is indestructible because it was founded on simplicity and justice. It has kept those Christian doctrines which are evidently true and which appeal to the common sense of millions, while getting rid of priestcraft, mysteries, sacraments, and all the rest of it. It proclaims and practices human equality. It loves justice and forbids usury. It produces a society in which men are happier and feel their own dignity more than in any other. That is its strength and that is why it still converts people and endures and will perhaps return to power in the near future. (p. 54)

As an apologist for Roman Catholicism, Belloc could only label it as a threat, but his understanding of and sympathy for Islam is the most insightful part of this book, and political leaders would have been wise to listen to him. He also seemed to see a future that most of his contemporaries would have dismissed as ridiculous: “It has always seemed to me possible, and even probably, that there would be a resurrection of Islam and that our sons or our grandsons would see the renewal of that tremendous struggle between the Christian culture and what has been for more than a thousand years its greatest opponent.” (p. 69)

If his discussion of Islam is this book at its best, his chapter on Catharism is Belloc at his intellectual weakest. The Cathars were a Manichean sect, believing that there is a good god and an evil one, in eternal conflict, and that each individual must take a stand for light or darkness.

In Will Durant’s Our Oriental Heritage, he discusses Zoroastrianism, another form of Manicheanism, in words which could equally describe Catharism:

By picturing the world as the scene of a struggle between good and evil, the Zoroastrians established in the popular imagination a powerful supernatural stimulus and sanction for morals. The soul of man, like the universe, was represented as a battleground of beneficent and maleficent spirits; every man was a warrior, whether he liked it or not, in the army of either the Lord or the Devil; every act or omission advanced the cause of Ahura-Mazda or of Ahriman. It was an ethic even more admirable than the theology—if men must have supernatural supports for their morality; it gave to the common life a dignity and significance grander than any that could come to it from a world-view that looked upon man (in medieval phrase) as a helpless worm or (in modern terms) as a mechanical automaton.

And so the Catholic church, sensing a rival for the hearts and souls of men and women, not to mention for their money, exterminated them. Pope Innocent III used the power of the crusade to offer plenary indulgences to anyone who helped slaughter the Cathars. During this fighting occurred one of the most horrific incidents of the Middle Ages. After capturing Béziers on 21 July 1209, the Papal legate Arnaud Amalric was informed that there were loyal Catholics among the captured townspeople, and when asked what to do with them said, “Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.” (“Kill them all. God will know his own.”)

You will find none of this is Belloc’s chapter on the Cathars, which he reports as the Church Triumphant crushing a vile heresy. He attributes to Catharism an existential threat to the Catholic church far beyond its actual power, confined as it was to southern France, where its believers had lived in harmony with their Catholic neighbors. “It seemed certain that the tide would be turned and that the Albigensian cause would win. With its victory the kingdom of France would collapse, and the Catholic Cause in Western Europe.” (p. 86)

Belloc’s next chapter, on Protestantism, is odd because he writes about it as if it were a failed heresy, headed for extinction like Arianism. What he means is that after the revolutionary fire went out of it with the end of the Thirty Years’ War, it lost its intellectual vigor and subsided into an accommodating pseudo-Christianity.

within the Protestant culture, where there was less definite doctrine to challenge, there was less internal division but an increasing general feeling that religious differences must be accepted; a feeling which, in a larger and larger number of individuals, grew into the, at first, secret but later avowed attitude of mind that nothing in religion could be certain, and therefore that tolerance of all such opinions was reasonable. (p. 94-95)

Belloc, naturally, abhorred the view that that it was possible for good people to be willing to accept unsanctioned beliefs and philosophies. For him there could be only the One, and anyone not in full accord with the Catholic church was in error and in danger of damnation. He does make a good point, though, about revolutions. Many of them start as reforming movements but become more violent and more inclined to demand wholesale changes. “There appear among the revolutionaries an increasing number who are not so much concerned to set right the evils which have grown up in the thing to be reformed, as filled with passionate hatred of the thing itself – its essential, its good, that by which it has a right to survive. (p. 102)

He is also honest enough to note that there were good reasons for the anger against the Church which led to the Reformation. He fully understood that corruption was eating away at the heart of Roman Catholicism, which had become too rich and too secular, earning the contempt of peasants and nobles alike. Nevertheless, he saw Luther’s and especially Calvin’s rebellions as desecrations of the One True Faith.

The first thing is this: that the Protestant movement, which had begun as something merely negative, an indignant revolt against the corruption and worldliness of the official Church, was endowed with a new strength by the creation of Calvinism, twenty years after the upheaval had begun. ... It is the spirit of Calvin which actively combats Catholicism wherever the struggle is fierce. It is the spirit of Calvin that inhabited dissident sects and that lent violence to the increasing English minority who were in reaction against the Faith. (p. 107-108)

He is certain that Protestantism will eventually falter and wither away in the face of Catholic majesty. “This internal strength the Protestant culture retained on into modern times and has only now begun to lose it, through the gradually disintegrating effect of a false philosophy.” (p. 117) And, commenting on Luther’s tenet that people must read and interpret the Bible for themselves, “the spiritual basis of Protestantism went to pieces through the breakdown of the Bible as a supreme authority. This breakdown was the result of that very spirit of skeptical inquiry upon which Protestantism had always been based.” (p. 125)

There is a final, short chapter on Modernism. Belloc believes that rational inquiry leads to skepticism and ultimately to atheism. He sees modern man as adrift, alienated, and easy prey for godless doctrines which seem to have all the answers, and which will lead only to more suffering. “That same force which ignores human dignity also ignores human suffering. (p. 138)” He summarizes by saying “There you have the Modern Attack in its main character, materialist, and atheist; and, being atheist, it is necessarily indifferent to truth. For God is Truth.” (p. 132)

He closes the book with what is known in formal logic as a False Dichotomy, by asserting that the only choices are either to the destruction of the Church or a return to it, heart and soul. He does not appear to have ever contemplated any middle ground where people could live their beliefs and engage in the world while accepting that others believe differently, but then, he could never see any value in lives lived outside of total submission to Papal authority.

of two things one must happen, one of two results must become definite throughout the modern world. Either the Catholic Church (now rapidly becoming the only place wherein the traditions of civilization are understood and defended) will be reduced by her modern enemies to political impotence, to numerical insignificance, and, so far as public appreciation goes, to silence; or the Catholic Church will, in this case as throughout the past, react more strongly against her enemies than her enemies have been able to react against her; she will recover and extend her authority, and will rise once more to the leadership of civilization which she made, and thus recover and restore the world. (p. 139)

Belloc was a significant force in his day, a prolific and hugely popular author. He is not much read now, because his worldview was so locked into his own time and place that there is nothing universal about it, nothing which recognizes and integrates itself into a changing world.

[Kenneth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Wonderful book by Mr. Belloc. A pleasure to read just for the unadulterated polemics.

The Great Heresies spells out clearly the gravest threats to Christendom. Written in the old-style without footnotes, Belloc rips through history with a passionate zeal for Catholic truth.

Belloc is not a thorough modern historian, nor is it necessary to agree with him to enjoy his books. He is fast to read as well as a breath of fresh air.

Filled with uncommon facts or unfashionable opinions that one rarely comes across in contemporary history.

Belloc’s chief heresies that have been chosen for description more or less comprehensively cover the major “enemies” of the Church since inception at Pentecost.

First, the Arians pulled back from the “pure” doctrine of the Trinity holding out for Christ second in power to the Father, but creature nonetheless.

Then the Mohammedans stormed in from the dessert tribes of Arabia sweeping through the Levant conquering half the decaying Roman Empire.

Very interesting to note: conquered Christians often submitted to conversion not for religious reasons, but rather for the financial forgiveness of debts that is part of Islamic law.

More importantly, I cannot fathom why the following fact is never reported in the news media:

“Vienna, as we saw, was almost taken and only saved by the Christian army under the command of the King of Poland on a date that ought to be among the most famous in history – September 11, 1683”. (70-71).

Seems somewhat important to current events, but hardly anyone is aware of the significance of the date behind 911 for world history.

The Battle at Vienna as well as the Battle of Mohacs were the breaking points in the historical conflict between Mohammedanism and the West.

Vienna is the closest Islam ever came to conquering Europe on 911 . . .(Belloc wrote this in 1938). That fact was worth reading this book alone.

Belloc continues the narrative with the Albigensian Crusade against the Gnostic sect in France, extinguished for threatening the vitality of the Church.

Next, the Reformation challenged the authority of Church governance.

Finally, the modern phase opened the flood gates to private opinions of all sorts.

Belloc’s book is good informal history, very easy to read.

[Foreign Grid]

I've heard good things about Hillaire Belloc, such as that he was one of the great historians of the 1900s. A prolific writer, he seems to have written many a treatise, and, in skimming his books, you can tell he didn't neglect a fruitful reading schedule either. Every sentence seems to be a summary of a wealth of history. Furthermore, he's often called a prophet of his day, making incredibly accurate predictions of the flow of the events throughout humanity.

I was not disappointed in reading this book. He lives up to his high reputation, which is something few men can claim.

In this book, he mainly hones in on Arianism,Islam, Albigensianism, Protestantism(or more generally put, Calvinism. When referring to the former he often means the latter, and explains why in the book), and what he dubbed (and so we now call) Modernism.
He makes a couple predictions of the future of Modernism and Islam (and this is before they became what they are today) and was spot on in nearly every analysis.

His analytic presentation and style was very pleasant to read and kept me intrigued. He unveils events and factors most do not know about the heresies in questions such as: what gave them their survival power and how they might have reappeared or affected each other.

Lastly, he doesn't turn a blind eye to the faults of certain groups within the church that lead up to the Protestant reformation, which I appreciated. When I'm reading a book, there is a lists of things that produce annoyance in me and one of those things is the glorification of 'your side' because it is 'your side' and ignoring whatever faults committed by the people on 'your side.'

5 stars all in all
I don't really have any complaints.

[Scott · Rating 5 out of 5]

Each "type" of heresy represented by the five chosen examples: Arian, Mohammedan, Albigensian, Protestant and Modern Attack, has it's own effects on the world, both Catholic and anti-Catholic. Hilaire Belloc's observations of the expanding attack on culture itself is enlightening and relevant to today's plight. Highly recommended.

[Emmy]

I really wanted to like this one, and I think that I would really like it if I gave it more of a chance, but I find Belloc's writing style so dry that I can barely keep focused on the page! I'm putting this one aside for a little while, and might try again later. (As in perhaps a year or so).

[Bruno Ramos · Rating 5 out of 5]

Magnífico. De forma sencilla y amena hace un recorrido por las grandes herejías de la Historia, mostrando el hilo conductor y sus consecuencias.

[Pam · Rating 5 out of 5]

A easy and fascinating read of the 5 great heresies of Arianism, Mohammedism, Albigensianism, Protestantism and Modernism.

[Kevin Bensema · Rating 4 out of 5]

Hilaire Belloc writes on what he considers the five important heresies that the Catholic Church has faced. To me, the most interesting one was the classification of Islam as a heresy of Christianity. It does fit his definition to an extent, and Belloc does acknowledge it is a different case from all other heresies, as it arose and exists completely outside the Church. I had always considered Islam to be a false religion growing on the basis on Judaism, but Mr. Belloc does make some compelling points, especially regarding Mary. If Islam was derived from Judaism, its veneration of the Virgin is unexplained. While it does seem simpler to assume that the single-person God, absence of Christian sacraments, and man-only Jesus religion of Islam came from Judaism, I don't know how much influence the Jews had in the area at the time. I do know there was a substantial Christian presence, and any Arian heretics still lingering would pass on a Christianity that could easily morph into Islam.

The other point of interest for me was the connection between the rise of Islam, the Protestant Reformation, and the rise of modernist errors. The connection is not perfect, however. Modernism arose by the completion of Protestant questioning and rejection of central authority, and the Protestant Reformation survived in nations with weakened central governments - where power was split between nobles and kings, and the nobles could use enriching (Protestantism allowed them to cease ecclesial property) heresy to fight the kings. Northern Germany went Protestant because the Ottoman-weakened Holy Roman Empire could not put down the nobles from Vienna. However, Protestantism, such as it was, would have still arisen in England in all likelihood, since England had a weakened central government unconnected with Muslim invasions. Additionally, there was the small matter of Henry VIII's marital redefinitions...

A final note of annoyance was Hilaire Belloc's ignorance of economics. I will allow him his opposition to capitalism, but to assume that communism only fails at eradicating poverty due to the tyranny of it's administrators is to be completely ignorant of that great information aggregating and distributing network known as the price system.

[Javier Muñoz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Un ensayo muy luminoso de Hilaire Belloc, uno de los grandes apologetas católicos modernos.
En esta obra Belloc nos presenta las cinco herejías más importantes que han atacado a la Iglesia católica desde prácticamente los comienzos de su peregrinaje en la tierra. Son el arrianismo, el islamismo, los albigenses, la Reforma y la amenaza modernista.
Evidentemente, hay muchas más herejías, pero Belloc plantea que estas cinco han sido de largo las más importantes.
El libro combina datos históricos y análisis de las ideas, lo que ayuda a contextualizar perfectamente cada una de las herejías; podríamos decir que es divulgativo, pero no en el sentido peyorativo de accesible y superficial, sino que realmente consigue su objetivo de explicar estas herejías y lo que han supuesto.
A destacar muy especialmente las páginas del comienzo, en que Belloc define qué consiste una herejía, y cómo influye en la sociedad, contrariamente a lo que cualquiera de nosotros pudiera pensar sobre ellas; una mera discusión que se restringe al debate teológico sin mayor repercusión.
También son muy destacables algunas reflexiones de Belloc, que son realmente proféticas vistas con la mirada del siglo XXI; fundamentalmente, la amenaza creciente del islamismo, el ocaso del protestantismo y la pujanza del modernismo pagano. Todo esto anunciado ya en un libro escrito en 1938...
En resumen, un gran libro, muy clarificador y muy aprovechable para el mundo actual. Deja con ganas de bastante más.

[Eddie Ruminski · Rating 1 out of 5]

What would be an otherwise interesting read quickly becomes a tiresome groan-fest as the author lays his apologetics on so thick as to drown any reasonable expectation of patience from readers not sharing the same religious outlook.

There is much rich history to be found in this topic, hence why I read all I can on the subject, but any such historic value is lost due to the biased nature of the author and leads one to wonder which facts found within are being skewed and to what extent. At the very most it serves as a good example of an alternate perspective held by others on the topic - however that alone is not enough to warrant recommending it.

[Pinkyivan · Rating 5 out of 5]

His historical dialectic and clear vision of the future is unparalleled, as far as historical and philosophical movements go and his assessment of them in terms of what exactly has happened or is happening right now is truly fascinating.

[Stuart · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hilaire Belloc was an Anglo-French Catholic writer and historian. In the early 20th century, he wrote works of many different natures including poetry, satire, and politics. It was his Catholic faith that formed his views and were reflected in his works. Recently, Ignatius Press has been re-printing some of his works including Characters of the Reformation and The Great Heresies. Today, I would like to tell you about the latter.

The Great Heresies was published in 1938. In the introduction, Belloc discusses what heresy is and how most people equate it with something from ancient Christian times. He goes on to explain that it is of high importance for anyone looking to understand European history and Christian orthodoxy. He then gives us a formal definition of the term to be a denial of an accepted Christian doctrine and something which affects not only the individual but all of society. It is heresy which shaped Europe and would have made Europe a completely different world had it succeeded. The book is divided into the following chapters:

1. The Arian Heresy
2. The Great and Enduring Heresy of Mohammed
3. The Albigensian Attack
4. What Was the Reformation?
5. The Modern Phase

"The Arian heresy proposed to go to the very root of the Church's authority by attacking the full Divinity of her Founder." In layman's terms, it questioned the divinity of Jesus. "The Mohammedan attack threatened to kill the Christian Church by invasion rather than to undermine it from within." Belloc saw this as a heresy and not just a new religion attacking an old one. Belloc viewed the Albigensian heresy as the one that was nearly successful. This was a precursor to Protestantism and dealt with a duality of the universe, good and evil in an equal and constant battle with each other. The Protestant attacked authority and unity within the Church. Lastly, the modern phase has seen attacks of rationalism and positivism. Belloc chose these specific five, because they showed all the different directions from which the Church can be attacked. What I love best about reading Belloc's words are the truth they still hold today. It is nearly 80 years after this was first published, and his words still ring true.

This book was provided to me for free by Ignatius Press in exchange for an honest review.

[Bridget Jacobson · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is the only book I’ve read on the Heresies, so while I don’t have a strong base of additional study to speak from, here are my thoughts on Belloc’s work.

The Heresies are well defined from a philosophical and academic standpoint while remaining accessible to anyone who chooses to apply two brain cells in the process. If you’re an idiot; you can understand this if you try, and may learn something. If you are mired in one of these Heresies, Belloc will give you a glance at your current error in a way that an honest man can appreciate; if you are Catholic, you will grasp the truth of the threats to the faith. If you’re Catholic and don’t grasp this truth, go back to rule #1 and apply two brain cells. If that doesn’t help, bring it to our Lord and ask him to enlighten your understanding.

Enlightening of understanding will be absolutely key for comprehension of the final and most fearsome chapter; The Modern Phase. Belloc published this material in 1938, and his keen understanding of the already-dissolving culture and our connection with the long standing and life-supporting web of traditional wisdom allowed him to write this prophetic chapter.

It will absolutely turn your stomach and should bother you, as we watch the spiritual collapse - followed by the physical collapse - of the world around us.

[Matthew · Rating 5 out of 5]

Belloc is great because he is unafraid of making broad, challenging arguments that tackle the fundamental points at issue. The Great Heresies fundamentally sees religion as culture-defining and that heresies - deviations from Catholic orthodoxy - therefore introduce profound cultural changes as well as religious changes. One of his best chapters is not really about a heresy - it's "the Modern attack" which attempts to tackle the anti-Christian ideologies of the modern age, and is quite perceptive and in places, prophetic.

His treatment of Islam as beginning as a Christian heresy is actually very convincing.

[Sara · Rating 5 out of 5]

Magnificent. Erudite. Historical. Impassioned while being deeply rational. Belloc was a genius.

And, refreshingly fair. Careful to tell the story from both sides, he draws conclusions that are convicting because of their historical accuracy and theological reasonableness.

I leaned a lot and will certainly re-read. My only regret is that I read this AFTeR John Senior’s “Death Of Christian Culture.”

[Springs Toledo · Rating 3 out of 5]

A short and interesting take on several heresies, particularly Islam and the Reformation from a Catholic apologist who is rightly considered controversial. He tended to slip into redundancy a bit, though many lecture-style books tend to do precisely that. I don't like to see "again" or "as I said earlier" on a page. Even so, Belloc is formidable. He's no Chesterton, but he's formidable.

[Thomas · Rating 4 out of 5]

Belloc gives a solid overview history of Europe from a Catholic not the usual secular perspective. This text does not sugar coat mistakes and shows interesting effects of certain heresies up to the early 1900's. Good writing style, I will be reading more of his writing. Check it out.

[Lori · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fabulous book, but do not get the Stellar Editions version. They appear to have scanned the pages in and done no editing, so it was somewhat painful to get through because of that. Belloc's writing is great and thoughtful, if a little hard core at times.

[cellomerl · Rating 4 out of 5]

A marvellous book setting the record straight on the five basic heresies that have been used throughout twenty centuries to try to undermine and destroy western society. But you won’t like it if you are:
(1) not Catholic, or
(2) not considering becoming Catholic, and
(3) not interested in history, particularly medieval history, and
(4) unable to understand the tone of books written before the Second World War.

[MARY GRACE · Rating 5 out of 5]

An informative book. I think the author did well in analyzing and writing about the major heresies that have plagued the Church.

[Xenophon Hendrix · Rating 3 out of 5]

You can learn stuff from Hilaire Belloc, but beware. He is Roman Catholic first and historian a distant second. In The Great Heresies, furthermore, he makes many grand declarations with the support of nary a citation.

Nevertheless, I did enjoy the book. My life is one of perpetual doubt and uncertainty. In small doses, it is refreshing to spend time with someone, such as Belloc, who displays no such inclinations.

[Elliot Lake · Rating 4 out of 5]

I think a lot of people expect something different from what this book gives them. If you want something that categorically deals with heresies and refutes them, you want St Alphonsus Ligori's History of Heresies and Their Refutation.

This is a very interesting book, and a lot more useful to the average person than the aforementioned work. This is because it deals with the heresies it addresses through means of the mindset held by those who profess it and the conditions in which it emerged. Belloc is clever in that he doesn't attempt to argue with theological premises, which is more befitting of a church doctor like the aforementioned St Alphonsus. Instead, he points out these errors and material conditions, making you aware of the occasions to this heresy rather than the blunt, often impersonal error.

The great thing about it is that you can see yourself in many of the patterns in thought he describes because they are present in all of us to some extent. Now knowing the occasions, you can act on yourself.

In particular, I found his parts on Arianism and Modernism very interesting, as they are seemingly two opposite poles. Arianism being an over rationalisation of Christ and the Godhead, whereas Modernism is the abandonment of reason entirely. In particular, I think the section on Modernism is a must-read for everybody, catholic or not catholic.

He is prophetic in how he saw the Modern heresy develop, in all its pompous irrationality, sexuality and especially its blunt cruelty. We see it reign as we speak, although we now have far more tools to fight it than Belloc ever did.

Overall, well worth the short read.

[Yolanda · Rating 5 out of 5]

“The Great Heresies,” was written in 1938, on the eve of the Second World War. Belloc explores five significant heresies in history: Arianism, Albigensianism, Islam, the Protestant Reformation, and what is called “the modern phase”.
He examines each heresy’s characteristics and historical development, highlighting their impact on the Catholic faith, with his usual attention to military history as a catalyst for many historical changes (for example, he highlights how the entire army of the Roman Empire was Arian, and how Islam was allowed to survive due to the failure of the Third Crusade). He also identifies common traits among them, such as doctrinal simplification and rejection of authority. Despite initial success, each heresy eventually fades, leaving behind moral and social consequences in affected regions.

As always, his Catholic perspective is clear and well-presented, yet with a certain objectivity, without the coercion of someone trying to persuade another. Furthermore, each of his points is always supported by historical facts, making it truly difficult not to be “convinced.”

Belloc is truly one of those few individuals I would ask to meet for a beer to discuss various topics, if I could.

[Kenneth · Rating 5 out of 5]

A rather awesome little book, written by an Anglo-French Roman Catholic, first published in 1938. The heresies he discusses are (1) Arianism, (2) Islam, (3) Albigensianism, (4) Protestantism, and (5) the "Modern" (for lack of a better phrase). He sees heresies as having a flourishing phase and then disappearing as an organized cult, although they often have long-term effects in a culture. A major exception is Islam, which he presciently saw back in the 1930's as capable of having major revivals. This has been borne out in our own times with the Iranian revolution in 1979 and the emergence of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State (ISIS), and widespread Islamic Terrorism in a number of Western countries including America.

In discussing Protestantism, he concentrates on Calvinism and sees it dying off. In general I have to disagree with him on Protestantism being moribund, although that is true in much of Europe, where the rate of church going is quite low. Worldwide, Protestantism, especially in its Pentecostal forms, is flourishing quite nicely it seems.

His discussion of the Modern, in many respects, sounds like a lot of what is going on today.