|
In these letters, Merton makes arrangements for the publication of his article "Blessed are the Meek". Best forwards a letter to him from Lillian Marks, who had read his article in Fellowship and complains about a comment about Jews that she considers inappropriate.
Jim Best was Director of Publications for the Fellowship of Reconciliation in New York and their magazine Fellowship.
Please click here for general restrictions concerning Merton's correspondence.
See also "Marks, Lillian" file.
If the person in correspondence with Merton has full text records in the Merton Center Digital Collections, there will be a numeric link to them below.
This Record Sub-Group is not divided into Series and is arranged chronologically.
Click icons for links: ✓="Published | Library Record", ✉="Scanned" | 🗷="Scanned, Viewable Only at Merton Center"
| # | Date | From/To | First Lines | Pub ✓ | Notes |
| | y/m/d | Merton | | Scan ✉ | |
| 1. |
1966/12/16 |
TLS to Merton |
I feel very apologetic this morning. It could be that the copy of your paper "Blessed are the Meek" |
|
apologies of the delay in seeing "Blessed are the Meek" article and its late anticipated publication in the March 1967 issue of Fellowship magazine - John Heidbrink gave Best the article and Jim Forest reminded him of what it was - article's contribution to the theology of non-violence / Catholic Peace Fellowship
«detailed view» |
| 2. |
1966/12/23 |
TL[c] from Merton |
About the paper "Blessed are the Meek". I am under the impression it was printed in amagazine [sic] |
|
possible publication of "Blessed are the Meek" in Cowley by the Cowley Fathers - possibility of Jim Forest putting out article as a pamphlet
«detailed view» |
| 3. |
1967/01/16 |
TALS to Merton |
I've written Cowley for permission and will use the article in March, and in such form as can |
|
permission from Cowley to use article in March - reprint as pamphlet - Jim Forest getting art and money to publish pamphlet
«detailed view» |
| 4. |
1967/07/28 |
HLS from Marks, Lillian |
I had set aside the May issue of Fellowship in order to read Thomas Merton's article, |
|
[sent by Best to Merton with Best's 1967/07/29 or 1967/07/31 letter] objects to Merton's use of "international Jewry" between the words "traitors" and "racists" in a sentence in the article "Blessed are the Meek" - does not think his criticism of "pharisaism" in the peace movement is appropriate for the audience of Fellowship
«detailed view» |
| 5. |
1967/07/29 |
TLS to Merton |
I expect you too will want to answer Lillian Marks. I hope I did not apologize unduly but I feel we |
|
feels that he and Merton made a mistake by Merton's remark appearing in Fellowship to which Lillian Marks objects
«detailed view» |
| 6. |
1967/07/31 |
TL[c] to Marks, Lillian |
I am sending your letter, with considerable distress, on to Thomas Merton. The distress I feel is |
|
apology by Best to Marks concerning the decision to include Merton's remarks / clarifies that Merton was using terms "conjured up in the minds of those who fail and look for scapegoats" and not an expression of his own sentiments / feels Merton's words were insensitive and likely to be misconstrued, even given the context
«detailed view» |
| 7. |
1967/08/04 |
TL[c] from Merton |
Thanks for your note and the letter of Lillian Marcks [sic]. I am sending a carbon of my reply to |
|
apology for inclusion of his remark - written for a different audience than Fellowship and realizes that some would not know when he is speaking ironically / Merton's pain in getting this kind of reaction
«detailed view» |
|
 |
|
 |
|