The problem of synthesis between the individual and the group, man and society, the one and the many, may be solved by the application of the thomist social principle of self-sufficiency. We may state it in terms of the relation between the land and the city.

Against the many thomist enthusiasts who are also land enthusiasts it is sometimes pointed out that St. Thomas himself had no love for agriculture and regarded it as tending towards the work of the beast. Troeltsch has written in this respect: ‘In contrast to the inclination of modern Catholicism towards the rural population and its specific Ethos, it is solely the city that St. Thomas takes into account. In his view man is naturally a town dweller, and he regards a rural life only as the result of misfortune or of want ‘(Social Teaching of the Christian Churches, II, p. 318). The rude tiller of the soil degenerates through continual contact with the lesser creation, animals and the soil; he is to be pitied much in the same way as the modern ‘thomist ‘often pities the factory worker.

There is surely some truth in the assertion that those who cultivate the land lack the human delicacy of mind and soul that is to be found in the town dweller. The rustic may often be soil-sodden and unresponsive. The land and the things that grow and live on the land do not necessarily humanise; they do not inevitably of their nature tend to deepen the understanding and quicken the perception of the labourer. Experience often shows the contrary, the slow yokel more at home with his animals than with his fellows.

In order to understand what St. Thomas means by affective knowledge ‘or knowledge by ‘inclination ‘or ‘connaturality,’ something must first be said of what he understands by ‘knowledge,’ and what by ‘affect,’ ‘inclination,’ or ‘connaturality.’ Readers will not expect in this short article a full and detailed account, let alone a justification, of St. Thomas’s theory of knowledge and of appetite. A brief survey of some salient points such as is required for our present purposes is all we shall attempt; and to obviate the necessity of explaining St. Thomas’s medieval terminology we shall frankly paraphrase his thought in less unfamiliar language. Those readers who wish to study the matter further in St. Thomas’s own words will find at the end of the article a selection of ‘readings ‘in which they may investigate the various points raised.

St. Thomas’s account of the nature of knowledge is much more ‘phenomenological ‘than is often supposed by those who have not studied him closely. Nothing could be further from the truth than that St. Thomas’s epistemology is based on an a priori ‘ faculty psychology,’ or that he short-circuits the ‘critical problem ‘of knowledge by unwarranted assumptions based on illegitimate abstractions. It is a first principle with St. Thomas (as it had been with Aristotle) that potencies can be affirmed only as inferences from actualities; and” the whole structure of his ‘faculty psychology ‘(if such it can indeed be called) is based on a thoroughgoing empiricist scrutiny of the ‘given ‘fact of knowledge.

We have used the two words ‘motive ‘and ‘meaning’ ‘; although in the matter of the Resurrection the two words have but one meaning.

The Resurrection of Jesus Christ is a deliberate act of the will of Jesus Christ. Now when we ask, What does X (a human being with a will) mean by doing this or that? ‘we are asking, ‘What is the motive of X in doing this or that?’

We must first say that Jesus Christ did not rise again in order to prove that He is God. When we reflect a little we begin to see that his Resurrection by itself could not prove that he is God. Even Catholics allow themselves to be confused in this matter. Thus they sometimes say ; ‘But if Jesus had not risen he would not have been God.’—Granted; because he had prophesied that he would rise from the dead. Clearly if he had not kept his word of phophecy he would not have been God.

But the fallacy misleading even some Catholics is the quite common fallacy ‘that what is necessary is also sufficient.’ Thus we cannot argue : ‘If a being has not two eyes it is not a man. But this being (a dog) has two eyes, therefore it is a man.’ So, too, we cannot argue : If Jesus Christ had not risen from the dead he would not have been God. But he has risen from the dead. Therefore he is God.’

An diesem jüngsten Tag.
Du hast ibn uns herabgesandt auf Erden,
Dass alle Vŏlker, die lebendig sind,
Gezählt, gewogen und befunden werden
Und nichts mehr gelte, was nur Spreu im Wind.

The newest judging, weighing and numbering of the peoples differs from the trial described in this poem of the last war in its greater severity and in its terrible finality. There is no second chance for Christendom. The present conflict is not simply a period of testing from which Europe will emerge, purified or in a worse decline. It is the end of Europe, or it is the painful prelude to a glorious renewal. The very Christianity of Christendom is to-day in question. That is the tremendous theme of Mr. Christopher Dawson’s newest, most carefully written and most readable book.

The essence of the problem is stated squarely. This is neither a war of nations in the old imperialist style, nor even a war of ideologies in the crude sense of Democracy versus Fascism. ‘The conflict which threatens to destroy civilisation to-day is not a conflict of race or culture, or even ideology. It is a conflict of the naked will to power which has swallowed up all the ostensible ideological issues : the racial issue of Aryan versus Semite, the social issue of Communism versus Fascism, and the international issue between the supporters and opponents of the League of Nations.’

As might have been expected the successful participation of the U.S.S.R. in the Second World War has proved a godsend to the Communist Party of Great Britain. It was claimed in August that over 30,000 had joined its ranks since the beginning of the year, bringing total membership up to well over 50,000. Literature sales by Central Books amounted to £92,000 in that half-year : despite the paper shortage plans are announced for increased output. It may be of value to attempt an analysis of the current communist appeal as it is put forward in this propaganda. This analysis is given without comment. Its aim is not to confute communism but to provide information for those who lack time or opportunity to examine the literature themselves.

The readiest objection likely to be made against the Party is that of tergiversation. It is met by the explanation that Communist Party policy is to suit tactics to circumstances while always keeping the final goal of socialism in view. The circumstances of the war have changed : it was an imperialist war until June 22nd, 1941, and as such opposed : since that date it has been supported because it has become a People’s War of Liberation. Similarly the Soviet Non-Aggression Pact with Germany in 1939 is justified as having shattered plans for an imperialist anti-Soviet coalition. Our present Russian alliance is established on a basis of ‘temporary common interests ‘and ‘the mass of the people ‘desire co-operation to continue beyond the war and peace settlement. New members are however reminded that ‘socialism cannot be won by votes, but only by the workers setting up their own Government, with armed strength behind it to put down any attempts by the rich to overthrow it.’

Jesus came into the world to give light. He was prefigured by the golden candlestick, which was placed in the Temple with seven lamps, and gave light to the whole Temple. And (he seven lights which enlighten the temple of Holy Church are the seven words which Christ spoke from the Cross.

The first darkness in this world is the way enemies are treated. The minds of many are obscured by passion, and they think it is lawful to hate those that would hurt them. These people answer an offending-word with evil deeds; they will strike with a knife those that have struck them with a blow; they will never forgive until they have revenged themselves; they will pray God not for the forgiveness, but for the destruction of their enemies.

Jesus enlightens this most obscure darkness of Egypt when He speaks the first word from the Cross : ‘Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do. . . .’ And this is how He revenged Himself for all the injuries they did Him : He prayed for them,

‘Father, forgive them.’ Learn this lesson then from Him. Fulfil it, for such is His will.

The second darkness of the world is the fact that each one cares only for himself and neglects to help his neighbour in his spiritual and temporal needs. ‘To-day,’ said Christ to the good thief, ‘thou shalt be with Me in Paradise.’ This is the second word spoken from the Cross, and it will enlighten your steps in your journey through this life, so that they may not be entangled; for, as the psalmist says, ‘Thy word is a lamp to my feet.’