RSS
Home
Interview with Mark Shaw, author of a new book on Thomas Merton, part 2
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
This interview is a continuation; part 1 can be found here and part 3 can be found here. For further information on Mark Shaw, his new book, his blog and more, see the end of part 3.
In talking about this cover-up of Thomas Merton's real pre-monastic life, including this powerful love affair, it seems you are also pointing toward a larger category in the Catholic Church - something you called promoting 'plastic saints' and putting priests on pedestals. Can you say more about that?
Great question. I have given this area of inquiry much thought and tried to present a balanced view of it in the book. If we look at the question as to whether the Catholic Church places it priests on pedestals on an overall basis, it is easy to point fingers and say, "yes, this occurs all time" due to ego and arrogance, and priest's perceptions that they are better than anyone else, perhaps a step above. But if we look at how the Catholic Church behaved during the Thomas Merton love affair in specific, there is specific evidence to consider. The link is heading backwards from 1966-68 when the love affair with Margie Smith occurred to Merton's days at Gethsemani when he wrote The Seven Storey Mountain.
Before SSM, he was known as Frater Louis, a contemplative monk that the world had never heard about. After SSM, he became a famous monk with a bestseller written under the name Thomas Merton. In effect, he had lost his identity and become a public figure to the delight of the Catholic Church for whom he became a "cash cow" through sale of his many books. Now the church had an interest in Merton, and had to control that interest. Merton thus became virtually imprisoned at Gethsemani where he suffered over pre-monastic, sinful conduct. His every move was watched and he was trapped into being a "plastic saint" of sorts because the church demanded this public persona. Like a good little child, Merton obeyed but it caused him turmoil and suffering beneath his mask until the love affair with Margie set him free.
The Catholic Church was certainly an enabler since, as author Russell Shaw writes, it "attempted to control the access to truth" believing, I would suggest, that Merton deserved such treatment because, as Shaw said, Merton, like other priests, was seen as "intrinsically superior" in some fashion. Merton knew this was not true, but he agreed to be promoted as being "holy" despite writing that "my life is a lie, a charade. I am fifty. People think I am happy." Later he would lament that people "still see me as the man in SSM," an admission that he knew he was not the man the Catholic Church expected him to be.
I can understand why the Catholic Church would want to maintain Merton as a plastic saint, even if I can't condone it, but I wonder why Merton himself participated in the cover-up you describe? Do you think he had internalized the idea that holiness and sexuality were irreconcilable, or did he fear loss of his position, or was it something else altogether in your view?
It does not appear that Merton ever connected the concepts of holiness and sexuality during the late 1940s when he was writing his bestseller, The Seven Storey Mountain. And when he was writing the book, he had no real "position" to be concerned about. But there is no doubt that he anguished over the castrating of his original SSM manuscript based on his own words in the private journals. I covered this in the book. Here is an excerpt:
"The story Merton told in SSM protected the good image of the Trappist order, certainly an issue if Merton’s fathering an illegitimate son was exposed. Father Basil Pennington apparently had direct knowledge of the censorship in action. He described a scene where Merton was writing SSM at a small desk in a dimly lit room, as Father Anthony, one of the Catholic censors assigned to oversee the writing, hovered. When a page was completed, Merton handed it to Father Anthony, and according to Pennington, “When Tom’s unfolding story told of the pregnancy, Father Anthony, a gentle, pastoral priest . . . was not particularly surprised.” Next, “Father Anthony, without raising any objections, sent the material on to Father Gabriel [another censor]. Gabriel’s reaction was quite different from Anthony’s. He felt that it would not be edifying for the faithful if they learned that a monk had one time fathered a child.” Father Grabriel wrote Frater Louis that he must delete the passage.46 Father Pennington made an important observation in view of later comparisons of SSM with Saint Augustine’s Confessions. According to Pennington, Merton, “fairly new at the censorship game, wrote back that if it was all right for Saint Augustine to be known to have a son out of wedlock, he didn’t see why it was so scandalous in his case.” The response, Pennington noted, was terse, with Father Anthony stating, “You’re no Saint Augustine,” with the “emphasis on the word 'saint."
How revealing Merton's words are about what his state of mind when the censors were scissoring the manuscript by removing any mention of his pre-monastic drunkenness, having fathered a child out of wedlock, having participated in a mock crucifixion and having committed adultery. He apparently had no choice but to give in to the censors decision if he wanted the book to be published. He cannot be excused for this conduct, but it is understandable. Later, he would tell fellow monk Father John Eudes that he wanted to revise SSM, but the "book no longer belongs to me." It also appears that Merton was convinced by the powers-that-be that if he told the whole truth in SSM, the public would condemn his pre-monastic conduct and no one would read the book. Worse, the image of the Catholic Church would be severely damaged. That was truly the bottom line.
One of the things that are most interesting to me about this story is that denying the least 'saintly' parts of Merton's life was a violation of his integrity as a person. The Catholic church at the time of this censorship seemed to be concerned that Merton's reputation would be compromised, and in order to keep his reputation intact, they ended up compromising his personhood. It leads me to reflect on how much our 'sins' are a part of who we really are.
Related Articles:
Add a Comment
