The Catholic Church and History is one book in the Calvert Series for which Belloc was the General Editor. The Lords Baltimore, the Calvert family, were the founders of Colonial Maryland as a refuge for English Catholics from the Penal Laws in Stuart England. Other books in the series are The Catholic Church and Conversion by G.K. Chesterton (a book we know Undset read!), The Catholic Church and Philosophy by Father Vincent McNabb, The Catholic Church and the Appeal to Reason by Leo Ward, and The Catholic Church and Its Reactions with Science by Bertram C. A. Windle.
Today Joseph Pearce is the great apologist for Hilaire Belloc's contributions to Catholic apologetics, especially in his books about history. He cites The Church and Socialism and Europe and the Faith as two important early works and then opines that Belloc
is best remembered and most justly celebrated as a historian of the Reformation, correcting the bias and inaccuracy of what he called the “enormous mountain of ignorant wickedness” that constituted “tom-fool Protestant history.”
Apart from his seminal historical works, How the Reformation Happened and Characters of the Reformation, he also wrote biographies of many key figures of the English Reformation, including Cardinal Wolsey, Thomas Cranmer, Charles I, Oliver Cromwell, John Milton and James II.
I've been appreciative of Belloc's historical work too, especially in that series of biographies Pearce lists, recently reissued by Mysterium Press (Wolsey, Cranmer, Charles I, Cromwell, Charles II, and James II). As a historical biographer, Belloc has a keen sense of character, situation, politics, economics, and social context--and military tactics when pertinent--, at least that's what I've determined after reading those books (his study of James II is still pending my review). His prose is vivid and vibrant; he sets out his purpose cogently and then makes out his argument as promised. Several years ago, we discussed every character and every chapter in Characters of the Reformation on the Son Rise Morning Show. So those are our bona fides.
Here is the Preface to The Catholic Church and History (1926/1927):
The object of the author has been to state and summarise in a brief, succinct form the arguments drawn from History in opposition to the claim of the Catholic Church: that is, to the claim put forward by that Church to speak with Divine and Infallible Authority. The author insists upon the point that he is not attempting a positive apologetic drawn from History in favour of this claim, but a rebutting of the evidence drawn from History opposed to this claim. He is engaged in examining the value of the arguments drawn from History to prove that the Catholic Church has varied or erred in her teaching or has made it depend upon immoral methods, and in showing that they have no force.According to this website, "Her library contains . . . over thirty [books] by Hilaire Belloc . . .", although I haven't found any insights into when she read any of these books by Belloc. In this book he is definitely on the defensive, presenting the arguments against the Catholic Church first and then refuting them. I would guess that Undset, who had no great connection with the official Lutheran church in Norway, agreed with Belloc that the second "general agnostic argument" was more important to refute:
The little book is divided into two parts, the first dealing with the three moral arguments: (1) that the Church has made pronouncements which History can prove to be false; (2) that the Church can be proved by History to have used material which she knew to be false; (3) that the Church, being proved by history to be not only organised but increasingly organised from the beginning of its existence, is thereby shown to be different from the simple thing which a divine institution of the sort should be.
Secondly, the intellectual argument, to wit, that the Church can be proved by History to be man-made, not God-made. This the author divides into two sections: (1) the Protestant argument that there was some original good message told by Jesus Christ, which the Church has gradually corrupted and from the origin of which she has deviated; (2) the general agnostic argument that the Church can be proved historically to be but one of many religions, to have grown up like any other religion, with the same illusions and similar rites and mysteries, and is therefore man-made—which last form of attack the author regards as to-day by far the most serious.
The Sceptical appeal to History—much the most formidable to-day, and always intellectually the most respectable—speaks in much bolder tones, thus: “The whole of the Catholic Faith from beginning to end is man-made. It is a mass of illusions: of projections of the human mind thrown by the human imagination upon the void; of deceptions, some of them conscious in some degree, many more but half-conscious; by far the most unconscious, implanted in the mind by early training. What the Catholic Church affirms is false from beginning to end, and History shows that the affirmations of the Catholic Faith have been thus man-made step by step from the very first origins we can discover. The idea of a God is man-made; so is the sacramental idea, the idea of Incarnation—the whole affair.” . . .
Perhaps Undset, a critical and intelligent reader, found this conclusion from Belloc compelling:
A man making a survey of what little is known of the old religious experiments and perversions of mankind, and being asked, as a pure hypothesis, “Suppose a divine society, corporate, distinct, highly organised, and therefore of highly differentiated function, were to arise on earth to bear witness to the Living God: suppose such a thing for the sake of argument only, what, think you, would such a body present by way of appearance, action and thought?” could not but answer that it would have of necessity present within it not only vital truths, but also practices discoverable wherever man had groped at or half remembered a revelation.
This man, with no knowledge of such a society, but considering what his fellow beings were, what the human mind is, what questions it poses, what answers it demands, would reply: “In that society you would discover the worship of a Creator, the affirmation that he had revealed himself; a mysterious link between the divine and the human, comparable to the link between the unthinking matter of our bodies and the living essence within. It would have sacrifice and veneration combined. It would sanctify objects, places, persons and rites; it would have central institutions, and in proportion to its vitality a multitude of lesser activities; it would have symbols which it would distinguish from realities and forms of reality which it would attach to symbols; for man without a soul is a corpse, and man without a body is a wraith. This supposed society which you bid men imagine would certainly present in their highest form such elements as History has also discovered, disjointedly appearing, often perverted, often degraded, in the various (and ineffective) spiritual experiments or lapses of mankind.”
Then, one might say to such a man, such a general scholar and observer of the unique animal, man, at prayer, “Should there conceivably be such a home upon the earth, how otherwise would you know it?” He could but answer, “Its nature would be such that it would satisfy to the full the demands of men; it would be unique so as to correspond to man himself who is unique on earth, and it would grant him fulness and repose.”
Image Source (Public Domain): Author and poet Hilaire Belloc (1870 - 1953), circa 1917.



_-_Google_Art_Project.jpg)







