"..it uses Spring as a symbol of Easter; not Easter as a symbol of spring."

Christians and all inhabitors of the ancient culture feel that Spring is the symbol of Easter. Materialists, notably all sorts of atheist anthropologists, hold that Easter was only the symbol of Spring. Professors of folk-lore insisted that primitive men (with whom they seemed to be on very intimate terms) had made up a rather unnatural masquerade of myth, merely to cover the natural facts of experience. They concealed the fact that the flowers return, under the parable of a god returning. By the time that commonsense began to pluck up courage to question what were called the Conclusions of Science, it became apparent that there were a good many questions which Science could not answer; and a good many points on which her conclusions were anything but conclusive. Why should anyone want to cover up ordinary facts with an extraordinary story? Why should anybody think he could keep the grass a secret, by the invention of a grass-god? And why could not primitive men be primitive enough to leave plain facts as they were? Was it not much more natural to imagine flowers or foliage as ornaments for a god or hero, than to imagine a hollow idol invented only to stand between men and flowers? Is it not more sane to say that the visible renewal of the earth gives hints or signs to those who already believe in heaven?.......There is nothing but nonsense, therefore, in all pretences that the mere round of Nature itself is the source of our highest hopes; or could by itself have evolved all that is meant by Resurrection. It is the soul that has received an unspeakable secret from heaven, which it can only express in images of the earth; and naturally expresses in terms of the temporary resurrections of the earth. In other words, it uses Spring as a symbol of Easter; not Easter as a symbol of Spring.

March 26, 1932, G.K.'s Weekly

...And the whole object of real art, of real romance - and, above all, of real religion - is to prevent people from losing the humility and gratitude which are thankful for daylight and daily bread; to prevent them from regarding daily life as dull or domestic life as narrow; to teach them to feel in the sunlight the song of Apollo and in the bread the epic of the plough. What is now needed most is intensive imagination. I mean the power to turn our imaginations inwards, on the things we already have, and to make those things live. It is not merely seeking new experiences, which rapidly become old experiences. It is really learning how to experience our experiences. It is learning how to enjoy our enjoyments. As it is, we are surrounded by a riot which is excused as the only way of being young, but which seems really to be a rapid way of growing old.

-September 20, 1924, Illustrated London News

...the only truly traditional tradition is one that is still a living thing.

-August 30, 1924, Illustrated London News

As a matter of fact, of course, all education is religious education- and never more than when it is irreligious education. It either teaches a definite doctrine about the universe, which is theology; or else it takes one for granted, which is mysticism. If it does not do that it does nothing at all, and means nothing at all, for everything must depend on first principles and refer to some causes, expressed or unexpressed.

-July 26, 1924, Illustrated London News

"....he is really a liberal and reasonable man. But by being perpetually in office he has let that pompous manner get worse and worse, till it seems to grow on him....What is needed in such a case?....A few healthful weeks... meditating on that fine shade of distinction between oneself and God Almighty, which is so easily overlooked."

-Four Faultless Felons (1930)

[An excerpt from a GKC essay with the paradoxical title (and thesis) "That an Irregular Expenditure Improves the Morals"]

I believe that a very irregular division, a very up and down life, a life lived in extremes of wealth and poverty is far the most moral and improving....For let us consider the two sides of the matter: the first is the necessity of the human spirit for some degree of abnegation, the second the necessity for some degree of excitement. Does the man of regular life learn abnegation? Not in the least. He has never tasted of extravagance and therefore does not miss it. He does not miss it, and therefore does not, properly speaking, give it up at all. If a thing is very remote indeed from a man's whole mode of life, as remote as a different century or continent, it is absurd to say that he renounces it. It is absurd to say that I am so simple in my mode of life that I have lived a year in Battersea without a gondola. It is nonsense to say that I think of my wife and my small income, and resist buying an Indian elephant....And now contrast with this easy and self-indulgent life of the respectable middle classes, the dark heroism, the iron self-sacrifice, the religious austerity of the extravagant man who is hard up. He passes temptations by, but like the saint in the Church Triumphant, he knows what they are, and what is their beauty and their pathos. He abandons the cigar, but not with ignorance, but with a sad and sacred knowledge. He is really an ascetic....And by the effect of his former extravagance on his present resources, he really gains a grip of himself, a knowledge of hard and wholesome human life, as it has been for all men since the beginning of the world.......I believe that a stricter and finer moral character is produced by being extravagant one day and parsimonious the next. For thus we develop both the Pagan and the Puritan virtues. And we keep the one essential of life, wonder; we know when we see it on the darkest night; the low and neglected hedge that lies between earth and elfland.

-March 14, 1903, Black and White

[found in the book Chesterton in Black and White (2021), edited by Geir Hasnes]

"Yes," said Hood, "your expert is very expert, isn't he- in writing books?" 

Sir Samuel Bliss stiffened in all his bristles. "I trust," he said "you are not implying any doubt that our expert is an expert." 

"I have no doubt of your expert," answered Hood gravely, "I do not doubt either that he is expert or that he is yours."

"Really, gentlemen," cried Bliss in a sort of radiance of protest, "I think such an insinuation about a man in Professor Hake's position---" 

 "Not at all, not at all," said Hood soothingly, "I'm sure it's a most comfortable position."

-Tales of the Long Bow (1925)

A little early for Christmas, but I just came across this wonderful narration on Youtube of GKC's Christmas "ghost story" (from his book Tremendous Trifles), called "The Shop of Ghosts". The narration is done by Edward E. French:

Etymology

The people who trust to derivations are always wrong: for they ignore the life and adventures of a word, and all that it has done since it was born. People of that sort would say that every man who lives in a villa is a villain. They would say that being chivalrous is the same as being horsey.

Alarms and Discursions (1911) 

But there is not only doubt about mystical things; not even only about moral things. There is most doubt of all about rational things. I do not mean that I feel these doubts, either rational or mystical; but I mean that a sufficient number of modern people feel them to make unanimity an absurd assumption....[T]his scepticism is throwing thousands into a condition of doubt, not about [mystical] but about obvious things. We shall soon be in a world in which a man may be howled down for saying that two and two make four, in which furious party cries will be raised against anybody who says that cows have horns, in which people will persecute the heresy of calling a triangle a three-sided figure, and hang a man for maddening a mob with the news that grass is green.

-August 14, 1926, Illustrated London News

[I]magination is the signal of instinct. Journalism only tells us what men are doing; it is fiction that tells us what they are thinking, and still more what they are feeling...[A]ll fiction is only a diary of day-dreams instead of days. And this profound occupation of men's minds with certain things always eventually has an effect even on the external expression of the age. 

-April 21, 1923, Illustrated London News

Every kind of bureaucratic busybody has swarmed round the poor man's house until his whole authority in it has been hollowed out and eaten away. Children cannot treat parents as authorities whom authorities treat as slaves. The consequence is that nearly the whole normal business of looking after children has passed from the parent to the policeman.

-March 24 1923, Illustrated London News