The Catholic Book Club discussion

6 - In February 2018 we read The Great Heresies by Hilaire Belloc, which deals with the same subject. How do you compare both books? Do you think Belloc's is better, or did you like best this book we are now reading? Please explain your reasons.

I may reread Belloc’s book to compare. It has been a while.

I don't have a clear memory of Belloc, but much of what Weidenkopf deals with is not "heresies" but corruption, secular powers trying to control the Church, etc.
I do wish he'd dealt with some of the things most frequently criticized in the history of the Church, e.g. the Inquisition, Crusades, etc. (though he does have another whole book about the Crusades).

Since Belloc is one of the references used in this book, it is likely that Weidenkopf’s goal was to talk about crises that have not been discussed in other books, not to repeat Belloc’s.

Similarly, since as Jill mentioned, a probable reason he does not talk about the crusades is that he does it in another book.

Also, I think that this book is aimed to Catholics who are dismayed about current crises and need reassurance that the Church has overcome hard times. On the other hand, a book explaining the crusades would be aimed to Christians who want to be historically informed to be able to respond to the frequent criticisms.

Mariangel wrote: "Similarly, since as Jill mentioned, a probable reason he does not talk about the crusades is that he does it in another book."

I don't see the Crusades as a crisis in the history of the Church. In fact, it was an element that contributed to the unity of the Catholic Church, and was used by the Popes as means to stop dissensions and even wars between Catholic rulers.

Therefore I don't think the Crusades should have been included in this book in any case.

Sorry, I am personally scandalized by Popes or any Church leaders advocating violent warfare, no matter how "noble" the goal they want to achieve.

Jill wrote: "Sorry, I am personally scandalized by Popes or any Church leaders advocating violent warfare, no matter how "noble" the goal they want to achieve."

Yes, this is another case of a change in the general opinion of society. Today pacifism seems reasonable (to a point). Then it was almost nonexistent, with the possible exception of Saint Francis of Assisi.

Manuel wrote: "Jill wrote: "Sorry, I am personally scandalized by Popes or any Church leaders advocating violent warfare, no matter how "noble" the goal they want to achieve."

Yes, this is another case of a chan..."

If Western Civilization collapses because it has become too pacifist to defend itself, the institutional church in Europe will not be far behind.

Jill, look at the Battle of Tours in the seven hundreds, the Battle of Lepanto in 1571 (which Chesterton immortalized in one of his great works). Had they not been fought and won, Europe would be Muslim today. The tragedy was Constantinople, lost to Muslim invaders.

Jill wrote: "Sorry, I am personally scandalized by Popes or any Church leaders advocating violent warfare, no matter how "noble" the goal they want to achieve."

One must remember that regarding the Crusades, Catholics were being victimized in the first place. We have a right to defend ourselves. There is such a thing as the "just war" doctrine (see Catechism of the Catholic Church paragraph 2309).