I interpret this to mean that Belloc was taking personal responsibility for what he expounded and that he was open to critique of his ideas. To be sure, Belloc was hardheaded. Though there is something deterministic and vulgar about this definition. Such a view reduces the human person to the level of crass quantity, to a kind of nerve-ending which reacts only to external stimuli, and it seems that many have judged Belloc's abilities solely upon this type of definition. In other words, they have taken his personal habit of expression for personality only in a quantitative or immanent way.
Personality is much more than sensorial tendency.
It transcends the moment and as such should be considered in a theological light. And I can think of no better person to define personality in this sense than Fr. Furthermore, a lesson might be learned when reference is made to an observation made by Newman in his Essay on the Development of Chris tian Doctrine . But even if that slight antagonism towards Belloc is still there, it should never be forgotten that he was in a large part responsible for Chesterton's conversion. Dr. Michael Morassutti is a writer on culture and works from Toronto, Canada.