The Reconciliation of Tradition

in the Modern Age

Chris Butynskyi

CHRIS BUTYNSKYI is a Lecturer of European History at Eastern

University. He holds an M.A. in early modern European History from
University of Maryland, Baltimore County, where he wrote his thesis on
the Catholic Pyrrhonism of Michel de Montaigne. He is currently ABD
in modern European History through the Great Books programme at
Faulkner University. During this time he has published articles in the Uni-
versity Bookman and The Journal of Faith and the Academy.

The modern age has brought about an interesting turn in the ac-
ceptance of knowledge and technological advancement. Even with an
abundance of empirical data, does man know anything more about
his meaning and purpose? The spirit of the modern age maintains that
the present age or present world is all that belongs to reality. Does that
mean that man is a chance occurrence of molecules and atoms that
simply drift through space and time? Or is he rather a creation with a
uniquely distinct relationship to the Creator of the universe? It is pos-
sible that the Western world has lost its awareness of the importance of
participation in the transcendent. Theosis is described as the individuals
participation in the process of reconciliation and deification. Christian
humanism recognises the importance of the Incarnation for the con-
dition of man and actively seeks an understanding of both God and
self in the humane. The modern age has traded higher standards and
the humanities for the sake of progress through humanitarianism and
utility. The responsibility of Christian humanists is one of activity and

Landscape in New Zealand

147
 The Chesterton Review

contemplation due to the nature of the ideas they cannot divorce from
their understanding of humanity. In most cases Christian humanists do
not wish to create a theocracy, nor do they want simply to wait for mes-
sages from heaven. They do, however, wish to participate in being hu-
manpolitically, economically, intellectually and spiritually. In order to
fulfil the command of Christ to act. Christian humanists seek to find a
way to re-establish a dialogue of reconciliation without narrow-minded-
ness. The participation of traditional conservative authors Christopher
Dawson (1889-1970), Russell Kirk (1918-1994) and G. K. Chesterton
(1874-1936) creates an awareness of what they call the crisis of West-
ern civilisation with the hope of reforming education in order to redi-
rect Western culture towards a reconciliation with Christian humanism.
Their works discuss the interaction of their Christian humanism with
the modern age in matters of permanence (Dawson and Kirk) and the
natural tradition of man (Chesterton).

Man, in general, feels a need to reinvent the wheel. This reinvention,

or at the very least upgrading, especially for modern man, has become
the measure of progress. Is progress defined only by the act of always
moving forward in the attempt to change and improve existing method-
ologies? Those who believe in the tenets of tradition and conservatism
would argue that progress should be defined as a rediscovery of the per-
manent tenets of humanity. They are tenets that are consistent with de-
fining what it means to be Western and more importantly human. The
foundational ideas of the West are conveyed and cultivated through hu-
mane learning. According to Christopher Dawsons The Crisis of West-
ern Education (1961) and Russell Kirks Prospects for Conservatives: A
Compass for Rediscovering the Permanent Things (1954), the West has
lost its way and is in need of something to re-establish the virtuous and
humane construct that it once forged. Their evaluations of modernity
are critiques that show how mans progressive endeavours have begun
to hurt the West rather than promote its advancement. The rediscovery
of tradition can be found through a commitment to uphold tradition,
conservatism, and Christianity.

Dawson, Kirk, and Chesterton utilise a similar vocabulary in dis-

cussing the crisis of Western civilisation. They have similar definitions
of the three main ideas involved in their respective works: tradition,
conservatism and liberal learning (Christian humanism). The ideologies

148
The Reconciliation of Tradition in the Modern Age

established by tradition and conservatism are conveyed through the pre-

modern curriculum of liberal learning. For both Dawson and Kirk, the
manifestation of Western values and ideas is indicative of a Christian
culture. Over time, the Christian culture has decreased in the public eye
into a largely separate and private issue. The arenas of politics, educa-
tion, and economics affect culture more significantly than religion in
the modern era. Such has not always been the case; the Church, specifi-
cally the Catholic Church, once had a significant influence on culture.
Dawson argues that the majority of Western Europeans identified with
Catholic culture: In Europe it was the peasants who remained most
loyal to the Church and who probably provided the greatest number
of religious vocations, while in the great cities the Church had to face
the growing opposition of the forces of anticlericalism and irreligion.1
Culture began to take its cues apart from the Church at the end of the
Renaissance with the rise of the Protestant Reformation. This is one
of many results, but it is interesting to note Kirk and Dawson came to
essentially identical definitions of tradition, conservatism and humane
learning.

Tradition has become a foul word in political and educational con-

versations. It is characterised as old-fashioned or stagnant. The mod-
ern obsession with progress perpetuates the distaste for the things of the
pastwhere Kirk finds the permanent things. If the modern world
does not prize the heritage of the past then Kirks definition of tradition
ceases to have value for modern society:

In common usage, tradition implies the spiritual and cultural in-

heritance which the existing generation has received from previous
generations. It implies acceptance, preservation, and passing on.
Tradition gives permanence to customs and ideas; it confers upon
change the element of continuity, keeping the alteration of society
in a regular train. Everything which the living possess has roots in
the spiritual and intellectual achievements of the past.2

This is all well and good unless the current generation wants noth-
ing to do with their inheritance. If tradition is a tool for understanding
culture, does a culture lack insight if it ignores or devalues its past? Kirk
points out that tradition is not opposed to changes that avoid constant
alteration with no reference to the past.3 Tradition preserves the perma-

149
 The Chesterton Review

nent things to provide a level of continuity for culture. When a society

begins to break down and remove portions of tradition for the sake of
progress it removes elements of meaning and purpose as well.

The elements of culture most susceptible to constant alteration, for

both Dawson and Kirk, are education, politics and economics. The sys-
tematic approach to crafting a perfect society most likely came out of
the combination of English empiricism and French rationalism (realised
in the birth of the Age of Enlightenment).4 The Enlightenment sought
to eradicate metaphysics from humane learning and politics; thus, faith
would take a back seat to reason. For the encyclopdistes,5 a reordering
of the Tree of Knowledge would create a new order and system of value
that put the catalysts of progress directly in the hands of man while
denying any influence from faith and the Church; Science and industry
were two wings of the army of progress which were to be coordinated
and united by a reformed system of rational education.6

Conservatism undergoes similar effects when society reorders its

priorities. The effects on conservatism appear in economic and educa-
tional reform even if, as an ideology, it has nothing to do with socio-eco-
nomic status. The ideas brought forth by modern liberalism are fixated
on creating equality and wider sociability through progress. Modern
conservatism is a level-headed response to this idealism. Conservatism
is a system of beliefs intent on understanding the story of man and
human nature.7 It is not focused on fiscal spending by government or
small-government policies. Liberalism promotes the idea of economic
equality as a possible cure-all for societal problems and disparity. For
example, if utility and profitability are taught in institutions of learning,
then their graduates by their vocational choices and economic activ-
ity will feed consumerism. In short, a liberal ideology will support the
practical and democratic needs of modern society instead of perpetu-
ating an outdated system that favours an educated aristocracy steeped
in the humanities.8 The reality, as Dawson sees it, points to a different
outcome. It is an outcome that is not in line with human nature and in
fact becomes so divorced from its foundations that the [participants]
become physically exhausted and spiritually depressed by the structure
they have to bear. For it is an abnormally expensive economy which
uses up both human and natural resources more rapidly than anything
hitherto known.9

150
The Reconciliation of Tradition in the Modern Age

For modernity, the epitome of progress is evidenced through educa-

tional and economic reform that promotes liberty, equality, and justice.
Economically, it means closing the gap in the class system and elimi-
nating disparity. In education, this is done through a broad definition
of achievement that makes success in education accessible to a greater
portion of the population. Not only does education become more ac-
cessible; it also becomes more pragmatic and secularisedcertainly
less conservative.10 For Dawson and Kirk, the key to rediscovering the
permanent things (tradition and conservatism) is the ability to cultivate
culture through liberal studies (i.e., Christian humanism). It is through
humane learning that one learns to be a free-thinking citizen who can
discern the foundation from the decoration. The allure of economic and
educational equality at the cost of quality can be masked by propa-
ganda promoting certainty through empirical means. The importance
of humane learning has declined throughout the modern era. The re-
discovery of this permanent characteristic of humanity, according to
tradition and conservatism, begins in the university.

From the inception of universities, the Church has been involved in

founding and developing the curriculum and culture of higher learning.
Starting with the French Revolution, the attempt to rid the university of
Catholic and Protestant influence has been a success.11 Many universi-
ties maintain their religious affiliation, but it is generally not reflected
in the curriculum or campus culture. Slowly but surely the humanities
have become less of a focus, and the sciences (both physical and social)
have been advertised as more lucrative and useful to society, thus fulfill-
ing modernitys movement away from tradition and conservatism. Kirk
and Dawson discuss the consequences of the blatant attack on humane
learning as nearly irreparable. The modern sentiment has always been
presented in light of the creation of a democratic community, especially
through education.

Kirk and Dawson each point out that modernitys definition of a

democratic community is not the definition attached to tradition and
conservatism, and it certainly does not incorporate humane learning.
These authors believe that this new community is better defined as
collectivism12 (Kirk) or national education13 (Dawson). Historically,
the Catholic Church has been the most efficient at keeping education
anchored in Christian humanism at a regional level through parochial

151
 The Chesterton Review

schools. Dawson actually sees it as a mark of a higher culture to focus

on intellectual and spiritual elements.14 Kirk maintains a similar senti-
ment, in that humane liberal learning disciplines free minds and trains
them in the meaning of things by challenging the higher faculties of
the intellect and the imagination.15 Even though the future seems bleak,
both authors believe that the rediscovery of tradition and conservatism
can save Western culture. The catalyst for this rediscovery can be found
in the universityboth secular and non-secular institutions have their
virtues. Dawson, Kirk and Chesterton rely, specifically, on virtues of
the non-secularised university committed to liberal learning for its own
sake. In order to construct an appropriate curriculum, an understanding
of mans natural tradition needs to be defined by a dialogue with mans
natural state. This is a task for the philosophers committed to rediscov-
ering the natural state of man.

G. K. Chesterton was on a quest to rediscover the permanent foun-

dations of Western culture and wrestle it from the grip of modernity.
Chesterton did not focus on education or politics but used the tools
of philosophy and theism. Through this life-long endeavour he man-
aged to criticise contemporary modernity, while initiating a dialogue to
rediscover the past and the true intentions of humanity. Chestertons
body of work is extensive. This article will look at twoHeretics (1905)
and Orthodoxy (1908)to ascertain Chestertons perspective. Chester-
ton uses similar wording in discussing these topics, but it is important
to keep in mind that, for him, orthodoxy referenced the origins of man
whereas heresy referred to what these traditional ideas had become in
the modern age. Chestertons twofold approach produced a rooted and
fruitful discussion of tradition, conservatism and Christian humanism.
Ultimately, his humanism superseded all other aspects of his ideology.
For Chesterton, the final goal was the comprehension of man and his
reconciliation with his Creator. There are many threads to follow, as
Chesterton has woven into his text many one-line (often paradoxical)
quips, but essentially his message is focused on a few key ideas. Like oth-
ers cut from the same cloth, Chesterton was concerned with the crisis
of Western civilisation and unearthing a rational plan to preserve those
core beliefs concerned with the relationship of man to his Creator.

It is important to understand what Chesterton was attempting to

achieve and the methodology he implemented in order to address prop-

152
The Reconciliation of Tradition in the Modern Age

erly the crisis provoked by the rise of modern Western culture. Like many
other traditionally minded conservatives, Chesterton pointed out the
problems with modernity, but was clear that he did not wish to destroy
his contemporary culture. He would rather point out its breakdown in
morality and letting loose of vices16 in order to reform culture so that
it is geared more towards the transcendent and divine instead of the
finite world. In order to do so, Chesterton asserted that these short-
comings lie in modernitys insistence that it is concerned with the prog-
ress of man, when in actuality it is not. Modernity is more concerned
with the appearance and rhetoric of truth.17 In reality, modern culture
avoids truth for the sake of accepting all points of view. For Chesterton,
standards could not be developed (specifically dogmatic tradition) by
avoiding what it meant to be truly human. Crafted and planned societies
based on science eliminate the religious component of culture, and thus
eliminates the truth of humanity:

He is making himself inhuman in order to understand humanity.

An ignorance of the other world is boasted by many men of sci-
ence; but in this matter their defect arises, not from ignorance of
the other world, but from ignorance of this world. . . . all attempts,
therefore, at a science of any human things, a science of history, a
science of folklore, a science of sociology, are by their nature not
merely hopeless, but crazy.18

The recognition of modern sciences inadequate understanding of

man leads to an explanation of what man is, and thus the road is paved
towards an apologetic regarding Christian humanism.

Chesterton reacted against the secularism of Western culture more

than the use of science and philosophy as systems of understanding.
These are tools of man that can be used to understand God and self-
better, but if used to perpetuate the elimination of spiritual truth they
become engines of self-serving regimes, idealists and opponents of re-
ligion. Chesterton responded by offering orthodoxy as a solution that
guards the liberty, creativity and innovation of man because it is explic-
itly concerned with preserving his true nature. Orthodoxys concern is
the divine, and, since the divine cannot be destroyed by the temporal,
the battle is continued in humanism. Chesterton writes, The secular-
ists have not wrecked divine things; but the secularists have wrecked
secular things, if that is any comfort to them. The Titans did not scale

153
 The Chesterton Review

heaven, but they laid waste the world.19 Cosmic truth is meaningless
to modernity because it is not completely quantifiable. If the ability to
assess and diagram objectives as opposed to outcomes is not achieved,
then any such knowledge lacks utilitarian value. Thus, for Chesterton
the application of such knowledge was not to be denied as it was largely
formulaic and empirical, but its principles were deeply flawed. He saw
it as a concerted effort to replace the humane components of Western
society with the terrible quality of a machine.20

If man becomes more or less a machine, he becomes a sterile and

emotionless being with one repetitive purpose. Christian humanism
describes a reconciliation of man to his Creator to the point of deifi-
cation; hence the Incarnation is the key component to the God-man
relationship. A machine is not endowed with faith or the exercise of
will. Modernity would interject that it actually fulfils the definition of
free will because it allows for man fully to explore all the world has
to offer. Chesterton was quick to point out that this was exactly what
orthodoxy was not. True orthodoxy had been corralled, by the modern
age, into a definition that intended to make belief in the transcendent a
heresy, which made dogma a heresy rather than a necessity. Modernity
was truly caught up in a crisis of meaning. The modern definition of
progress continues to regard dogma and tradition as a sort of heresy
by convincing and in some sense indoctrinating modern man with the
idealism of pure democracy. Seriously to embrace progress and lib-
erty, for the modern, is to avoid the real questions of permanence and
instead to concern oneself with the direction and sensation of moving
forward.21 In light of modernitys acceptance of relativism, how can any
direction take shape? It is in this argument that Chesterton explained
that orthodoxy was mans adherence to creed and dogma (the Apostles
Creed). Creed and dogma are historic constants that provide ammuni-
tion to those fighting against the reliance on only the self and mankind:

It would be much truer to say that a man will certainly fail because
he believes in himself. Complete self-confidence is not merely a sin;
complete self-confidence is a weakness. Believing utterly in ones
self is a hysterical and superstitious belief.22

Modernity relies on the ideas of fixed scientific laws based in empir-

ical facts that exclude the fantastic, imaginative and miraculous. Such

154
The Reconciliation of Tradition in the Modern Age

characteristics have no place in a modern scientific society and are filed

under magic and superstition. As a voice for imaginative conservatives,
Chesterton pointed to a distinct flaw regarding this exclusion. By ex-
cluding these possible characteristics, the intellectual is actually unintel-
lectual because of his inability to attach law, order, etc. to something
beyond the self or the human systems of knowledge.23 The belief in the
transcendent extends beyond the tendency to associate one thing to an-
other in order to achieve a sense of certainty in the explanation. The
quantity of associations within the natural world attempts to give the
modern man a feeling of connectedness similar to the deep connection
achieved through Christian humanism.

The willingness to accept magical or imaginative ideas anchors

orthodox-minded conservatives in the Incarnation as they investigate
the paradoxes inherent in the world. Christian humanism investigates
the uniqueness of the paradox of the Incarnation in Western history.
Modernity has abandoned what it has deemed primitive and supersti-
tiousto some degree it has denied its humanity. Orthodoxy (tradi-
tion), on the other hand, has maintained its commitment to dogma
as appropriately humane in its understanding of the link between
the divine and the temporal.24 If Chesterton defined Christianity as
human, then secular thought logically is inhuman. Without dogma,
existentialism turns out to be one of the few remaining options for
Western society. Still, Chesterton found room for existentialism, as
in Bernard Shaws character of the sad Caesar; He who has never
hoped can never despair.25 Christian humanism seeks the meaning
and purpose of human existence despite limited access to knowledge.
For Chesterton, orthodoxy led to the recognition that man is an active
participant in the recovery and reconciliation of humanity to God.
Modern-scientific man either cannot or will not define human exis-
tence as anything more than the accumulation of knowledge for the
sake of progress carried out through science and technology. Ortho-
doxy, as expressed in Christian humanism, is quite comfortable with
dealing in the imaginative.

Acceptance of the imaginative and mystical also allows for the

acceptance of paradoxes as real truths that define the foundational
characteristics of orthodoxy. First and foremost, the Incarnation is a
paradox owing to the fact that Christ was both divine (transcendent)

155
 The Chesterton Review

and completely human (a participant). Science wishes to observe the

world objectively while moving on to something better. The reality, pos-
sibly the paradox, is that one cannot remain an objective observer if
one wishes to participate. In the eyes of Chesterton, paradox abounds,
but the paradox of Christianity is key to understanding his devotion
to orthodox thought: The primary paradox of Christianity is that the
ordinary condition of man is not his sane or sensible condition; that the
normal itself is an abnormality.26 Modernitys philosophical response
to the Absolutes held up by orthodoxy rests on pragmatism. Again,
Chesterton pointed out that even the careful and simplistic philosophy
of merely tending to human needs is affected by paradox. Pragma-
tism teaches its followers to focus on the needs of man, but Chesterton
pointed out that the needs of man revolve around the transcendent, and
therefore they naturally require what is beyond the needs of man.27 If
paradox affects philosophy and science at every obvious juncture, then
it is indeed an ally of Truth. The Christian paradox is only fitting since
it aids in defining the purpose of human existence.

Chesterton was not at war as much with the scientific man, although
he had much to say about him, as with modern systems of understand-
ing. Both Heretics and Orthodoxy address the ways in which these sys-
tems have hijacked tradition and the meaning of humanity. Modernity
has convinced Western culture that liberty and progress are the
truly humane virtues brought forth by secular knowledge. Chesterton
(eventually echoed by Dawson and Kirk) saw implications for ortho-
doxy affecting education and politics, but his main concern was man
and the purpose of human existenceChristian humanism centred on
philosophy. His concerns and explanations tied the ideas of tradition
(orthodoxy), conservatism (a system of morality tied to tradition) and
Christian humanism to an essential definition of paradox; that pagan
virtues are the reasonable virtues, and that the Christian virtues of faith,
hope, and charity are in their essence as unreasonable as they can be.28
For a secularised society the greatest offences are the obstruction of
justice, the hindering of liberty and the breaking of laws. Chesterton did
not take issue with ideals of order but rather doubted that they are the
most important, in that he identified the most egregious fault of society
as the process of becoming less human. The true definition of humanity
is more concerned with the power of hope and reconciliation than with
the power of empirical laws.29 The definition of Christian humanism

156
The Reconciliation of Tradition in the Modern Age

parallels this sentiment, but it also embraces (with discernment) numer-

ous points of view as they are all part of human insight.

Christopher Dawson, Russell Kirk and G. K. Chesterton basked

in the possibilities created by the light of Christian humanism. These
authors shared an affinity for the discovery of what it means to be hu-
man through the active and contemplative life. The crisis of Western ci-
vilisation is not merely apathy in the classroom or the celebration of the
wider sociability at the expense of complex ideas. The crisis affects the
core of what it means to be human. For much of its history, the Western
world has been characterised by the Christian Church. It is only within
last few hundred years that the Churchs voice has been consciously si-
lenced from public forum for the sake of progress towards a more
universal humanitarianism. Progress is not the enemy of the likes of
Dawson, Kirk and Chesterton. They saw the enemy as the thoughtless
secularisation of the definition of man. This is not to say that secular
humanism does not have a place in the definition of humanity, but it is
certainly not complete. These Christian humanist authors meant to pre-
serve the conviction that humanity cannot possess a complete definition
of itself without the transcendent truth found in Christianity.

1 C. Dawson, The Crisis of Western Education (Catholic University Press: Wash-

ington, 1961), p. 71.
2 R. Kirk, Prospects for Conservatives: A Compass for Rediscovering the Permanent
Things (Imaginative Conservative Books: Houston, 2013), p. 215.
3 R. Kirk, Prospects for Conservatives: A Compass for Rediscovering the Permanent
Things (Imaginative Conservative Books: Houston, 2013), p. 217.
4 C. Dawson, The Crisis of Western Education (Catholic University Press: Wash-
ington, 1961), p. 40.
5 Denis Diderot and Jean dAlembert, editors of LEncyclopdie: Dictionnaire rai-
sone des sciences, des arts et de mtiers (1751-1772).
6 C. Dawson, The Crisis of Western Education (Catholic University Press: Wash-
ington, 1961), p. 42.
7 R. Kirk, Prospects for Conservatives: A Compass for Rediscovering the Permanent
Things (Imaginative Conservative Books: Houston, 2013), p. 20.
8 R. Kirk, Prospects for Conservatives: A Compass for Rediscovering the Permanent
Things (Imaginative Conservative Books: Houston, 2013), p. 49; C. Dawson, The Crisis of
Western Education (Catholic University Press: Washington, 1961), p. 64.
9 C. Dawson, The Crisis of Western Education (Catholic University Press: Wash-
ington, 1961), p. 65.
10 C. Dawson, The Crisis of Western Education (Catholic University Press: Wash-

157
 The Chesterton Review

ington, 1961), p. 135; R. Kirk, Prospects for Conservatives: A Compass for Rediscovering
the Permanent Things (Imaginative Conservative Books: Houston, 2013), p. 19.
11 C. Dawson, The Crisis of Western Education (Catholic University Press: Wash-
ington, 1961), p. 43.
12 R. Kirk, Prospects for Conservatives: A Compass for Rediscovering the Perma-
nent Things (Imaginative Conservative Books: Houston, 2013), p. 106.
13 C. Dawson, The Crisis of Western Education (Catholic University Press: Wash-
ington, 1961), p. 78.
14 C. Dawson, The Crisis of Western Education (Catholic University Press: Wash-
ington, 1961), p. 115.
15 R. Kirk, Prospects for Conservatives: A Compass for Rediscovering the Perma-
nent Things (Imaginative Conservative Books: Houston, 2013), pp. 44-5.
16 G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (Amazon Digital Services, Seattle, 2012), p. 22.
17 G. K. Chesterton, Heretics, edited by Jim Manis (Pennsylvania State University
Press: Hazleton [PA], 2014), p. 5.
18 G. K. Chesterton, Heretics, edited by Jim Manis (Pennsylvania State University
Press: Hazleton [PA], 2014), pp. 71-2.
19 G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (Amazon Digital Services, Seattle, 2012), p. 133.
20 G. K. Chesterton, Heretics, edited by Jim Manis (Pennsylvania State University
Press: Hazleton [PA], 2014), p. 27.
21 G. K. Chesterton, Heretics, edited by Jim Manis (Pennsylvania State University
Press: Hazleton [PA], 2014), p. 16.
22 G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (Amazon Digital Services: Seattle, 2012), p. 6.
23 G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (Amazon Digital Services: Seattle, 2012), p. 44.
24 G. K. Chesterton, Heretics, edited by Jim Manis (Pennsylvania State University
Press: Hazleton [PA], 2014), p. 145.
25 G. K. Chesterton, Heretics, edited by Jim Manis (Pennsylvania State University
Press: Hazleton [PA], 2014), p. 43.
26 G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (Amazon Digital Services, Seattle, 2012), p. 151.
27 G. K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy (Amazon Digital Services, Seattle, 2012), p. 28.
28 G. K. Chesterton, Heretics, edited by Jim Manis (Pennsylvania State University
Press: Hazleton [PA], 2014), p.79.
29 G. K. Chesterton, Heretics, edited by Jim Manis (Pennsylvania State University
Press: Hazleton [PA], 2014), p.79.

Reflection of Irish lake

158
159