by Morris West
‘So your career isn’t really finished, is it?’
‘Not my career. Just a way of life that I liked and wanted.’
‘But it’s not really the end of the world.’
He gave her an odd, searching look. ‘No. But it is the end of George Faber.’
‘Why?’
‘Because he doesn’t exist any more. He’s just a name and a suit of clothes.’
‘Is that the way you feel, George?’
‘It’s what I am, sweetheart. I knew it as soon as I sat down in Calitri’s office this morning. I was nothing – a straw man. I didn’t believe anything, I didn’t want anything, I had nothing to fight with, I had nothing to fight for. The wonder is that I feel quite calm about it.’
‘I know that calm, George,’ she told him gravely. ‘It’s the danger signal. The quiet time before the big storm. Next, you start hating yourself and despising yourself, and feeling empty and alone and inadequate. Then you start to run, and you keep running until you hit a brick wall, or fall over a cliff, or end up in the gutter with your head in your hands. I know. I’ve been there.’
‘Then you mustn’t be around when it happens to me.’
‘It mustn’t happen, George. I’m not going to let it happen.’
‘Buy out, girl!’ he told her with sudden harshness. ‘Buy out and stay out! You’ve had your storms. You deserve better now. I’ve made a bloody fool of myself, I’m the one who has to pay.’
‘No, George!’ She reached out urgent hands and forced him to turn to her. ‘That’s the other thing I’ve learned. You can never pay for anything you’ve done, because you can’t change the consequences. They go on and on. The bill keeps mounting up by compound interest until, in the end, you’re crushed and bankrupt. It isn’t payment we need, George. It’s forgiving . . . And we have to forgive ourselves, too . . . You’re a straw man, you say. So be it! You can either burn the straw man and destroy him. Or you can live with him and – who knows? – in the end you may get to like him. I’ve always liked him, George. In fact I’ve learned to love him.’
‘I wish the hell I could,’ said George Faber sombrely. ‘I think he’s a pompous, windy, gutless snob!’
‘I still love him.’
‘But you can’t live with him for the next twenty years and then come to despise him as he despises himself.’
‘He hasn’t asked me to live with him yet.’
‘And he’s not going to ask.’
‘Then I’ll ask him: he’s a straw man, I’m a straw woman. I don’t have any pride, George. I don’t have any pity, either. I’m just so damn glad to be alive . . . It’s not leap year but I’m still asking you to marry me. I’m not a bad catch, as widows go. I don’t have any children. I still have some looks. I do have money . . . What do you say, George?’
‘I’d like to say yes but I daren’t.’
‘So what does that mean, George? A fight or a surrender?’
For a moment he was the old uneasy George, running his hands through his grey hair, half-mocking, half-pitying himself. Then he said soberly, ‘It’s the wrong thing for a man to say; but could you wait a while? Could you give me time to get into training for the fight?’
‘How, George?’
He did not answer her directly, but explained himself haltingly. ‘It’s a thing hard to explain . . . I – I don’t want to lose you . . . I don’t want to lean on you too much, either. With Chiara I was trying to hold on to youth, and I didn’t have enough of it left. I don’t want to come to you as empty as I am now. I want to have something to give as well . . . If we could be friends for a while . . . Hold hands. Walk in the Villa Borghese. Drink and dance a little, and come back here when we’re tired. With you I don’t want to be what I’m not, but I’m still not sure what I am. These next two months are going to be strange. All the town will be laughing up its sleeve. I’m going to have to rake up some dignity.’
‘And then, George?’
‘Then maybe we can go home together. Can you give me that long?’
‘It may take longer, George,’ she warned gently. ‘Don’t be too anxious.’
‘What do you mean?’
But even when she had explained, she was not sure that he had understood.
EXTRACT FROM THE SECRET MEMORIALS OF KIRIL I PONT. MAX.
. . . Today has been long and troublesome. Early this morning Orlando Campeggio, editor of the Osservatore, waited upon me to offer his resignation. He told me an involved and sordid story of a conspiracy to introduce suborned evidence into the marital case of Corrado Calitri, which has just been decided by the Holy Roman Rota. Campeggio told me that he himself had been a party to the conspiracy.
The attempt was unsuccessful; but I was deeply shocked by this revelation of the tangled lives of people who are old enough and educated enough to do better. I had no alternative but to accept Campeggio’s resignation. I had, however, to commend his honesty, and I told him that his pension arrangements would not be disturbed. I understand very well the motives which led him to this breach of trust, but I cannot for that reason condone the act.
When Campeggio left me, I called immediately for the file on the Calitri case, and went over it carefully with an official of the Rota. There is no doubt in my mind that, on the evidence presented, the Rota acted rightly in issuing a decree of nullity. There was another side to the picture, however; Corrado Calitri, a man of power and influence in Italy, has been living for a long time in mortal danger of his soul. I have little doubt that his sincerity in this case is suspect, but the Holy Roman Rota can give judgement only in the external forum. A man’s soul can only be judged in the tribunal of the confessional.
So, I am brought to a curious position. As a Minister of the Republic, Corrado Calitri is not amenable to my authority. Our relationship in the temporal order is defined by treaty and limited by diplomacy. If we quarrel I may do much harm to the Church and Italy, especially as I am not an Italian. In the spiritual order, however, Calitri is subject to me. As Bishop of Rome, I am his pastor. And I am not only authorized, but obliged if I can, to intervene in the affairs of his soul. I have, therefore, asked him to wait upon me at a suitable time, and I hope that I may be able to offer him a pastoral service in the regulation of his conscience.
I have had a short but cheerful letter from Ruth Lewin. She tells me that she has finally resolved her position, and has decided to return to the practice of the Catholic faith. She was kind enough to say that she was indebted to me for the enlightenment and the courage to make the step. I know that this is only half the truth, and that I am at best an instrument for the working of the Divine Grace. I am consoled, however, that having stepped outside the rigid confines of my office, I was permitted to make contact with her and to co-operate in reestablishing her peace of soul . . .
Once more I have been brought to see vividly that the real battleground of the Church is not in politics or in diplomacy or finance or material extension. It is the secret landscape of the individual spirit. To enter into this hidden place, the pastor needs tact and understanding, and the very particular grace bestowed by the Sacrament of Holy Orders. If I am not to fail Corrado Calitri – and it is very easy to fail those who are framed differently from other men – then I must pray and consider carefully before I meet him. If I do fail, if he leaves me in enmity, then I shall have created a new problem since I shall have to deal with him in public matters for a long time.
The President of the United States has received Kamenev’s letter and my commentary on it. His reply is before me as I write:
. . . On the face of it, Kamenev does seem to offer a feasible basis for a short-term solution to our problem. I think we must get a better bargain than the one he offers. He is too good a horse-trader to offer everything at once. I am not prepared to say how much more we need without submitting the project to study and taking the advice of my counsellors.
However, you may tell Kamenev that I am prepared to open negotiations at this point, but that in my
view they should now be initiated at diplomatic level. And he must be the one to begin them. If he is prepared to co-operate in this fashion, then, like Your Holiness, I believe we may make progress.
I too am very concerned about the political climate in which these negotiations are begun. One always expects a certain amount of skirmishing and propaganda. We have to use it as much as the Russians. However, it must not be allowed to go beyond a safe limit. We shall need an atmosphere of moderation and good not only in our own negotiations but in our talks with members of the European bloc and with the representatives of uncommitted nations. In a deal like this there are so many limiting factors that it is difficult enough to maintain patience and restraint without calculated provocation.
I agree in the main with Kamenev’s estimate of the political and military situation. It is broadly confirmed by my own advisers. They agree also that if the situation still remains unsettled at the end of next March, the crisis will already be upon us.
I note with lively interest the fact that Your Holiness is considering a journey to France early next February. This would be a very notable event, and I ask myself – as I ask Your Holiness – whether it might not be possible to use it to good purpose for the whole world.
I understand very clearly that the Holy See cannot, and does not wish, to enter directly or indirectly into a political negotiation between the great powers. But if, on this occasion, Your Holiness could sum up the hopes of all men, for peace and a negotiated settlement of our differences, then at one stroke we might have the climate we need.
I know that it will not be so easy to do. The Holy See may well have to speak for those countries where she has suffered the greatest injustice, but a historic occasion calls for a historic magnanimity. I wonder whether something like this was not in Kamenev’s mind when he wrote to you first. I know that it is now in mine.
With all respect I should like to make a suggestion. The churches of Christendom are still, unhappily, divided. However, there have been signs for a long time of a growing desire for reunion. If it were possible to associate other Christian bodies with Your Holiness’s plea for peace, then it would be an even greater advantage.
I understand that a decision has not yet been made. I understand the weighty and prudent reasons for the delay. I can only say that I wish and hope that Your Holiness will finally decide to go to Lourdes . . .
Goldoni has seen the letter, and I know that he is torn between the excitement of the project and a prudent wish to consider all the possible consequences before a decision is made.
He suggested, diffidently, that I might care to discuss the matter with members of the Curia. I am inclined to agree with him. My authority is absolute, but common sense dictates that in so large and consequential a matter I should get the best advice available to me. I think also that I should call Cardinal Pallenberg from Germany and Morand from Paris to take part in the discussion. We have decided finally to name Archbishop Ellison, Cardinal Archbishop of Westminster. This might be a suitable occasion to call him also to Rome and offer him the red hat . . .
Jean Télémond came yesterday to have dinner with me. He looks thinner and rather tired. He tells me, however, that he is feeling well, and working steadily. He is very happy with Cardinal Rinaldi, and the two of them have become good friends. I am a little jealous of Rinaldi’s good fortune, because I miss my Jean, and in all this press of business I could use a little of his wondering vision of the world. Rinaldi sent me a short note by his hand, thanking me for my kindness to Leone. I have to admit that it was not so much a kindness as a calculated gesture. However, it did not go unnoticed and I am glad.
I know that Jean is still worried about the verdict of the Holy Office on his first volume. However, it is impossible to hurry an examination like this, and I have urged him to be patient. Cardinal Leone has promised to let me have an interim opinion by the end of October. I notice that he is treating the matter with extreme moderation, and is displaying personally a careful good will towards Jean Télémond. However, he is most emphatic that we should not appoint to any office of preaching or teaching until the conclusions of the Holy Office are known.
I cannot disagree with him, but I still wish I could learn to like him. I have a free and easy commerce with other members of the Curia, but between Leone and myself there is always a kind of inhibition and uneasiness. It is my defect as much as his. I am still resentful of his Roman rigidity . . .
Georg Wilhelm Forster has been to see me, and I have passed on to him the reply of the President of the United States. Forster is a strange little man who lives a dangerous life in apparently untroubled good humour. When I asked him about himself, he told me that his mother was a Lett and his father a Georgian. He studied in Leipzig and Moscow, and borrowed his German name for professional purposes. He is still a practising member of the Russian Orthodox Church. When I asked him how he squared his conscience with the service of a Godless state, he turned the question very neatly:
‘Is not this what you are trying to do, Holiness? Serve Mother Russia in the best fashion available to you? Systems pass, but the land is always there, and we are bound to it as if by a navel cord . . . Kamenev understands me. I understand him. Neither demands too much of the other . . . And God understands us all, better than we do ourselves.’
The thought has remained with me all day, mixed up with thoughts of the coming crisis, and Jean Télémond, and the pilgrimage to Lourdes, and the strange bargain of Corrado Calitri. My own understanding stumbles often. But if God understands, then we are still in hopeful case . . . When the poet writes, the pen needs not to understand the verse. Whether the pot be whole or broken, it still stands witness to the skill of the potter . . .
CHAPTER TEN
IN THE last week of October, Cardinal Leone, in private audience with the Pontiff, presented the judgement of the Holy Office on Jean Télémond’s book. Leone seemed embarrassed by the occasion. He took pains to explain the nature and form of the dorment:
‘There has been a question of time, Holiness, and a question of the special circumstances of the life of Father Jean Télémond, and the private relationship which he enjoys with Your Holiness. With reference to the time factor, the Fathers of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office have preferred to issue an interim opinion on the work in question, rather than a formal judgement. Their opinion is brief, but it is accompanied by a commentary setting down certain propositions which are basic to the whole thesis. With respect to the person of Jean Télémond, the commissioners make a special note of the evident spirituality of the man and his submissive spirit as a son of the Church and as a regular cleric. They attach no censure to him and advise no canonical process.’
Kiril nodded and said quietly, ‘I should be grateful if Your Eminence would read me this interim opinion.’
Leone looked up sharply, but the Pontiff’s eyes were hooded and his scarred face was as impassive as a mask. Leone read carefully from the Latin text:
‘The most Eminent and most Reverend Fathers of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office, acting under instructions from His Holiness, Kiril I, Supreme Pontiff, transmitted through the Secretary of the said Sacred Congregation, have made a diligent examination of a manuscript work written by the Reverend Father Jean Télémond of the Society of Jesus and entitled The Progress of Man. They take note of the fact that this work was submitted voluntarily and in a spirit of religious obedience by its author, and they recommend that so long as he continues in this spirit, no censure should attach to him, nor any process be instituted against him under the canons. They recognize the honest intention of the author and the contribution he has made to scientific research, particularly in the field of palaeontology. It is their opinion, however, that the above-named work presents ambiguities and even grave errors in philosophical and theological matters which offend Catholic doctrine. A full schedule of objectionable propositions is annexed to this opinion in the form of extracts from the author’s work, and commen
taries by the most Eminent and Reverend Fathers of the Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office. The major grounds of objection are as follows:
‘1. The author’s attempt to apply the terms and concepts of evolutionary theory to the fields of metaphysics and theology is improper.
‘2. The concept of creative union expressed in the said work would seem to make the divine creation a completion of absolute being, rather than an effect of efficient causality. Some of the expressions used by the author lead the reader to think the believed creation to be in some manner a necessary action in contrast with the classical theological concept of creation as an act of God’s perfect and absolute freedom.
‘3. The concept of unity, of unifying action, strictly tied to Télémond’s evolutionary theory, is more than once extended and applied even to the supernatural order. As a consequence, there seems to be attributed to Christ a third nature, neither human nor divine, but cosmic.
‘4. In the author’s thesis the distinction and difference between the natural and the supernatural order are not clear, and it is difficult to see how he can logically save the gratuitous nature of the supernatural order, and thus of grace.
‘The most Reverend Fathers have not desired to take, letter for letter, what the author has written on these points; for otherwise they would be forced to consider some of the author’s conclusions as a true and real heresy. They are very well aware of the semantic difficulties involved in expressing a new and original thought, and they wish to concede that the thought of the author may still remain in a problematic phase.
‘It is, however, their considered opinion that the Reverend Father Jean Télémond be required to re-examine this work, and those later ones which may depend on it, to bring them into conformity with the traditional doctrine of the Church. In the meantime, he should be prohibited from preaching, teaching, publishing, or disseminating in any other fashion the dubious opinions noted by the Fathers of the Sacred Congregation.
