G. K. Chesterton's Cause for Sainthood will not be advanced. . .

at least for the time being.

Chesterton is somebody we quote here a lot.  Indeed, he might be the most quotable speaker and writer in the English language of all time.  He wrote in every genera and on every topic.

Of course, being a writer doesn't qualify a person to be considered for Sainthood, and that's not the reason he was.  Rather, his cause was open due to the requests of his modern fans (I hate to use that word in this context, but that's basically how to term it).

I always personally thought Chesterton's cause for canonization was a long shot, which doesn't mean he isn't a saint.  He's just not the kind of guy that we think of being canonized, which is perhaps the reason that the cause should have advanced further than it did.

I suppose that should take us first to the question of what is a "saint". The topic is misunderstood, particularly in this context.  A "saint", in this context, is somebody who is declared to have passed from this life to the next and be now in Heaven.

The term "saint" itself derives from the Latin "sanctus", simply meaning holy.  The Greek word that appears in the New Testament is "ἅγιος" (hagios) and has a broader use, sometimes confusing modern readers if they're aware of it, as it will be used to apply to all holy persons.  For example, it's used to refer to angles, which has carried through, in so far as I'm aware, only to St. Michael the Archangel in English.

Anyhow, the canonization of a person means that they've been officially declared by the Catholic Church to be in Heaven.  Not being canonized doesn't mean that a person isn't in Heaven, it means that there's no official declaration and therefore no official opinion.  

In the modern Catholic Church the process of canonization is a very detailed one involving rigorous study and a lengthy process.  This wasn't always the case.  In the Orthodox Churches this still isn't  the case and the process is much different.  Indeed, the one modern instance of where the Catholic process resembles the Orthodox is in the occasional instances in which an Orthodox Church comes back into communion with Rome, for which it has generally been the case that anyone declared to be a saint by that church is taken in as one by the Catholic Church.  In early times, the process was sufficiently loose that it often occurred simply by local acclimation, an element of the decision here oddly enough.

Chesterton was a convert to Catholicism and very openly Catholic.  Indeed, his conversion was so open that it was widely assumed that he was a Catholic before he was.  He was a close friend of fellow English Catholic writers J.R.R. Tolkein and Hilaire Beloc, neither of whom have been proposed for canonization, and was also a close friend of devout Anglican convert from atheism  C. S. Lewis.  Indeed, both Tolkein and Chesterton were instrumental in Lewis' conversion and they were both disappointed that he didn't become Catholic.

Chesterton was also a man out in the world who wrote prolifically and often satirically.  I think that alone makes him an unlikely candidate for canonization, not because he couldn't be a satirical saint, but because it doesn't fit the modern image of a saint very comfortably.  We just don't think of saints that way.  Maybe we should.  Some early saints were certainly pretty distinct characters, for example. St. Jerome kept a lion and was notoriously short tempered.  St. Nicholas, a bishop of the early church in real life, is alleged, probably falsely, to have punched Arias in the nose at the Council of Nicea.  Certainly a saint could be a pointed writer.

Chesterton also was a very large (i.e. fat) man and some people claimed that this disqualified him. That's pretty shocking really and I suspect only in this context could a person's weight be used against him.  You couldn't go around maintaining that people in any other category were barred from consideration for something because they're fat.  Indeed in recent years a couple of models have emerged who are fat, and that's been celebrated, although not without some controversy.

And he drank alcohol.  Chesterton, Tolkien, Lewis and Belloc used to gather at the same tavern regularly to have a few beers, which is what they drank.  That too is interesting as a claimed bar, however, as Catholics aren't prohibitionist by theology, quite the contrary and in earlier eras it would have be assumed that nearly any saint drank alcohol unless it was specifically noted to the contrary, as everyone did.  Monasteries brewed beer, for example, for eons, and of late they are returning to it.

These weren't the declared reasons, however.  The local Bishop for where Chesterton lived determined not to advance the cause further for these reasons:

I am very conscious of the devotion to GK Chesterton in many parts of the world and of his inspiring influence on so many people, and this makes it difficult to communicate the conclusion to which I have come, . . . That conclusion is that I am unable to promote the cause of GK Chesterton for three reasons. Firstly, and most importantly, there is no local cult. Secondly, I have been unable to tease out a pattern of personal spirituality. And, thirdly, even allowing for the context of G K Chesterton’s time, the issue of anti-Semitism is a real obstacle particularly at this time in the United Kingdom.”

None of which means that Chesterton isn't in Heaven, it just means he's not advancing the cause.

Of the reasons cited, the no local cult is probably correct.  A local "cult" in that context would mean a local devotion  Chesterton was English and England has not been a Catholic country in 500 years.  There probably isn't a notable devotion in the Bishop's diocese.  And that reason is probably a good one for him not to seek to advance a cause if he doesn't feel otherwise compelled to do so.  He noted that as his most significant reason.

The second reason strikes me as in error.  Chesterton clearly was outwardly and openly Catholic in a way that probably caused him to draw a lot of personal animosity in his home country.  Anti Catholicism is a definite thing in every non Catholic country, to include the United States, but it's very much a thing in the Protestant countries of Europe even now.  During his lifetime, it very much would have been a thing.  Nonetheless he was devout and was instrumental in bringing a lot of people into the Church. 

On the third item, antisemitism,  I don't know the answer to this.

I like Chesterton, but I haven't read everything he wrote.  Nobody but Chesterton has.  He wrote so much, it's impossible.  I've only read a snippet, however, and only own his book Orthodoxy.  His defenders claim this charge is false when taken out of context, for the most part. Some defenders will say no, this is incorrect and he was in fact antisemitic to some degree.  His detractors claim he was antisemitic.

The Bishop is actually saying that in the modern world he's not going to take on an action that's going to raise this issue where he doesn't have to. And he can't be blamed for that.  In other words, he doesn't want the Church accused of anti antisemitism because of Chesterton, irrespective of Chesterton's views, whatever they may be.  And has he's the bishop in an area where he still has to deal with anti Catholicism, I can understand his view.

Not everyone is.  His main backers in the U.S., a society dedicated to his memory, is upset, but polite, but has vowed to keep on keeping on, noting there are other routes to canonization (which there may be, but I don't know what they are, the role of the local Bishop is presumably critical).  But some aren't taking it well.  A Fr Benedict Kiely, who believes that Chesterton’s intercession personally helped his mother, came out in the English Catholic Herald with this:

Writing to Evelyn Waugh, Hilaire Belloc described the English Catholic hierarchy in the 1930s as ‘a fog of mediocrity’. The decision of the current Bishop of Northampton not to pursue the cause of GK Chesterton’s canonisation indicates the fog has yet to clear.

“The decision is a textbook example of the obeisance of the hapless hierarchy to the dominant PC culture.

Yikes.

Well, Chesterton was a figure of the 20th Century and it wouldn't be uncommon for a saint to be canonized decades and even centuries after his death.  His writings remain and the declaration that it won't be pursued doesn't mean that he isn't a saint.  As an towering intellectual figure, but with at least some views that trouble or should trouble, he remains with us.  We won't be hearing the last of his quotes, I'm sure, any time soon. Indeed, forgotten writings of his continue to surface fairly regularly.