The Power and the Glory
Graham Greene’s The Power and the Glory (1940) is set in a southern state of Mexico, where an anti-clerical purge has the last priest on the run. He is heading towards the northern border, across which his Bishop has already journeyed, as have those priests who have escaped with their lives. However, this last priest is in many ways morally inferior to the general literary depiction of priests during the first half of the 20th century, and the Vatican noticed.
The book was denounced and the Vatican initiated a censorial investigation. Peter Godman, granted access to the investigation archives (not normally available for consultation by outside scholars) informs us of the concerns raised by the two censors.
The first censor viewed the book as "sad," because instead of God’s power and glory being on display, as the title of the novel suggests, all that is evident is despair. Godman summarizes his views:
‘Immoral’ or married priests; the ambiguity with which the central figure refers to God and the doctrines of the faith; the conviction of the virtue attributed to Protestants and atheists— all this made it impossible for Greene’s first reader in the Holy Office to see why the book was regarded as excellent literature.
The book should have never been written, according to censor, but since it had, Greene should be admonished by his Bishop and ‘"exhorted to write other books in a different tone, attempting to correct the defects of this one."
The second censor agreed with the first and thought that Greene should be told that "literature of this kind does harm to the cause of true religion [and that] in the future he should behave more cautiously when he writes…"
At this time, the high ranking Cardinal Giovanni Batista Montini inserted himself into the debate. Cardinal Montini (who would later become Pope Paul VI) wrote to Cardinal Pizzardo who was the head of the Holy Office (and in charge of all censorial investigations). Montini writes:
I see that it is judged a sad book. I have no objection to make to the just observations in the [censure of] this work. But it seems to me that, in such a judgment, there is lacking a sense of the work’s substantial merits. They lie, fundamentally, in its high quality of vindication, by revealing the heroic fidelity to his own ministry within the innermost soul of a priest who is in many respects reprehensible; and the reader is led to esteem the priesthood even if it is exercised by abject representatives…
Cardinal Montini suggested that a Monsignor De Luca be consulted for a third opinion before any action was taken. De Luca’s response was rather unambiguous. Greene did Rome credit, he stated, and that he was a sucsessor to Chesterton and Belloc (both English Catholic authors), and that in a country dominated by Protestantism, Greene strived to influence superior intelligences towards favouring Catholicism.
To condemn or even to deplore them (here De Luca refers to Waugh as well) would be looked at askance in England, and would deal a grievous blow to our prestige: it would demonstrate not only that we are behind the times but also that our judgment is lightweight…
In the case of Mr. Greene, his harsh and acerbic art touches the hearts of the least receptive people and reminds them, however gloomy they be, of the awe-inspiring presence of God and the poisonous bite of sin. He addresses those who are most distant and hostile—those whom we will never reach…
Msgr. De Luca’s advice was never taken, and Greene was reprimanded by his local Bishop and told to take on a more constructive tone in his Books with regard to the Catholic faith.
Greene took it relatively well. He sent off a letter to Cardinal Pizzardo, slyly apologizing for not writing back sooner, saying he couldn’t because he was in the Far East doing his utmost to chronicle the "difficulties faced by the heroic Catholics of Indochina [who are] confronted by the Communist menace." He states that the aim of his book had been to contrast "the power of the sacraments and the indestuctibility of the Church on the one hand with, on the ohter, the merely temporal power of an essentially Communist state." On the advice of his friend Archbishop David Matthew, Greene also wrote to Cardinal Montini making him aware of the situation, seemingly unaware that Montini had intervened the year previous.
While Greene had interesting relationships with each of the Pope’s from Pius XII to John Paul II (John Paul II being the only one he extremely disliked), Greene felt closest to Paul VI.
In a 1965 letter to his daughter Lucy (who actually has a ranch somewhere here in Alberta…), Greene excitedly describes a recent audience with the Pope.
At the beginning of the week I went up to Rome because the Pope had sent me a message saying that he would like to see me.
The Pope talked to me for twenty minutes about why he liked my novels! He had read The Power & the Glory, The Heart of the Matter, Brighton Rock,& Stamboul Train. He gave me a rosary and a nice little case for Vivien…
In ways of Escape, Greene provides a few more details from this meeting:
When I met Pope Paul VI, he mentioned that he had read the book [The Power and the Glory]. I told him that it had been condemned by the Holy Office.
‘Who condemned it?’ [Paul VI inquires]
‘Cardinal Pissardo.’
He [Paul VI] repeated the name with a wry smile and added, ‘Mr Greene, some parts of your books are certain to offend some Catholics, but you should pay no attention to that.
Years later, when aspects of the Church really did come under Greene’s fire, he could still look back without bitterness to this whole Holy Office censorial investigation ordeal.
I wonder whether any of the totalitarian states, whether of the right or the left, with which the Church of Rome is so often compared, would have treated me as gently when I refused to revise the book on the casuistical ground that the copyright was in the hands of my publishers. There was no public condemnation and the whole affair was allowed to drop into the peaceful oblivion which the Church wisely reserves for unimportant issues…
K.
Seems like an interesting book. Perhaps even worth the read. Thanks. There will always be the ecclesiastical strain in our Church between conservatism & progressivism, gladly we know the latter will win in the end.
Comment by Andreas Saint-Prix — January 26, 2008 @ 3:31 am
that’s my favourite part, he misdirects the entire ordeal into the hands of his publishers at the end. And, after a frenzy where everyone gets their chance to voice an opinion and word of anger or support, the matter is neatly tucked away.
I also find it interesting that The Power and The Glory was written in 1940…as you’ve indicated…but the Vatican did not condemn it until YEARS later…
Comment by stephanie — January 26, 2008 @ 2:28 pm
“They have taken fourteen years to write their first letter. You should take fourteen years to reply”
heh!
Comment by stephanie — January 26, 2008 @ 2:29 pm
Waugh advised him on that I think. Greene seems not to have listened…
K.
Comment by K. — January 26, 2008 @ 5:38 pm
I think that the concerns of those who advocated rebuking Graham Greene were very real. Images of sinful priests are likely to be more persistent and more influential than the redeeming positive message that they nevertheless remained dedicated to their priestly calling. The immoral priest who stays on the job in spite of the dangers is something of a hero, but heroes like that can be found everywhere, especially in the army. That’s not what makes a priest. What makes a priest—or rather, what elicits reverence and love for the priest—is his holiness. The redeeming feature of GG’s novel was not that it had a positive message for faithful Catholics, but that it had a message that might elicit respect for the Church from alienated Catholics and others hostile to Catholicism. That may be a good reason to be happy he wrote the book, but also a good reason to discourage faithful Catholics from reading it. And if they’re likely to read it nevertheless, the damage may well be worse than anything good it accomplishes because it is much easier to undermine faith than to promote it. I hope GG took the rebuke he got to heart.
I don’t see why this story should be regarded as a triumph of progressivism. Progress toward what?
Richard
Comment by Richard — January 27, 2008 @ 12:18 am
well, it was still a good suggestion, and he should have taken it.
Comment by stephanie — January 27, 2008 @ 1:09 pm
Re. one of the comments here, No, progressiveness will not win in the end. The Word of God will win. Gods Word is very clear and spells out for us exactly what we should believe and how we are to go about our lives. Some people say progressive when what they mean is liberal, but the Bible doesn’t lend itself to watering down. Kate
Comment by Kate — January 27, 2008 @ 9:15 pm
Andreas I don’t know why this feud needs to be painted in a progressive v. conservative light, unless you have an axe to grind against one of them, and are just seeking to superimpose your pet interests in this debate. Pope Paul VI, who no doubt would warrant your suspicions of conservatism in light of his opposition to birth control, at the same time, is painted by you as being on the side of the progressives here. All this goes to show how limiting labels can be, and how often once the label is thrown a certain way, debate and considering of the views of others is rendered meaningless.
Richard, you are certainly free to come to the conclusions you have drawn (which are at odds with the Pope’s ), but I should hope that they rest on something more than this post, like for example a familiarity with the Books contents (perhaps you’ve read it?). I am curious what you make of the Pope’s defense of it, and his view that while certain parts are bound to bother some Catholics, Mr. Greene really shouldn’t worry about that.
Familiarity with the Books contents would show you how Greene contrasts sharply our “whisky priest,” with Padre Jose, who in exchange for his freedom, abandons his vows and marries. Padre Jose is presented by the Lieutenant hunting down the ‘whisky priest’ as evidence of the emptiness of the Catholic religion, and in contrasting the ‘whisky priest’ with Padre Jose, there is no question who Greene presents as the true priest, however sinful.
The holiness of the priest is rather secondary to the fact that even a sinful priest can administer the sacraments and bring about the transformation of others in the process. It is the indestructible power of the sacraments that Greene presents to his readers, not the personal characteristics of he who administers them, men who are fallible like everyone else. As Greene shows, those characteristics are secondary.
Further, rather than Greene’s work undermining the Catholic faith, the attempt at censorship probably would have been more likely to succeed in this. That’s why Msgr. De Luca stated that a negative judgment would reflect the Church’s ‘lightweight’ judgment. No fair reader of this work, in my view, could come to the conclusion that Power and the Glory undermines the faith. A conclusion that it did, in my view, would reflect simply a deficient interpretation of the work.
K.
By the way, Greene did not take the rebuke to heart in the sense that he saw it for what it was: An unnecessary intrusion. And he recognized the wisdom of the Vatican in backing off and realizing how unimportant the whole matter really was.
Comment by K. — January 28, 2008 @ 1:20 pm
Well, I was given this book along with several others a couple of years ago and remember saving “The Power and the Glory” to read last because it looked the least interesting to me. I eventually read it, and read it again, and yet again. I was touched immensely by the beauty and potency and grace in this story. Graham Greene put thoughts into words that I had never had the ability to, if that makes sence. I still remember certain lines and phrases and apply them to my own world view and the way that I see others and myself. The word “powerful” is overrated and yet this is a powerful book. Perhaps conroversial, though I never thought so. I simply thought it was beautiful and that the truth of God’s grace and compassion shone through a flawed human being, in this case, a flawed priest who was closer to God than he suspected.
Comment by Colleen — February 4, 2008 @ 2:57 am
I’ve had this book for 20 years and didn’t read it. I had a feeling it would be painful. Two years ago I became a Catholic and somehow now I have the capacity to delve more deeply into things when before I converted I lived on the surface. So I read the book, couldn’t put it down. I am also doing a paper on Ezekiel of the Hebrew Bible this month. Ezekiel is about God’s action in destroying Jerusalem 586 BC and what do you do when your world falls apart or is taken apart. I recommend everyone here read Ezekiel. Graham Greene’s novel is a description of such dissolution and very fashionable these days - eliminate God, eliminate grace and the sublime. Cardinal Montini had the right of it. The priest is acting under grace and is the latest incarnation of Christ - so human, he has a child, responsive to the divine to the end. To argue that he was not holy is completely silly. It’s deeply disappointing that the Church couldn’t recognize this. However, the church seems to have a lot fresh air flowing through it these days.
Comment by Lynn Rossiter — April 15, 2008 @ 12:00 pm