Newspaper Page Text
4—THE CATHOLIC TIMES
Friday, May 21. 1954 THE CATHOLIC TIMES Published Ever? Week by The Catholic Times. Inc. Columbus. Ohio NOTICE Send AU Changes of Address tn P. 0 Box 636 Columbus. Ohio Executive and Editorial Offices: 246 E Town Street. Columbus 15. Ohio Telephones ADams 5195 ADams 5196 Address all communications for publication to_P O Box 636. folumbus 16. Ohio Prsee ef Th* Catholic TmM SS jcr y««r Al! nbocription* ahnnld h» to our offie* throurb Cm master* of th» tmnskM Rew^ttaneo* »h«u!d be mad* txyab to Th* Catk •ue Tlines. Anosrwioua eoNMisietHMt wil! w diaracardod n* 4c net hold ouraelveo reevotirbl* for any ’lews or ep’.ntnrs expressed in th* enmmunieatiena of our •erreipeMen ta. Entered aa Second Claae Matter at Peat Offie*. O'urr.Ba Ohio St Frane:» de Salea, Patron *f th* Catholif Fraaa Fray for u» This Paper Printed by Union Labor Toward An Integral Nation The momentous ruling abolishing segregation in public school.' handed down by the United States Supreme Court this week takes its place with the Emancipation Proclamation as a document estab lishing the morally rightful place of the Negro as a citizen of the United States. What is looked upon by some, even those who were not antagonistic, as a legal action onlj is in fact, a great spiritual victory And one that goes a long way toward vindicating this country’s avowed policy of offering equal rights and freedom to all it* citizens. The effect of this ruling will not be visibly noticeable in the greater part of the country where segregation as a policy had been abandoned In some 17 states though, great materia) and physical changes will become apparent, as the ruling goes into effect. In all areas, though, it is an unmistakable moral victory. Because of the host of problems attendant upon the eventual carrying out of the ruling specific decrees will be issued at a later date. But in itself, this ruling is the basis for righting a long standing sociological wrong— one that could never be explain ed in the light of the principles which gave birth to this count!) and which sustain its unique demo cratic form of In mg among the nations of the world On the fulfilling of principle alone, this country gained immediate stature with this ruling of the Court. A'hd the effect of right principle applied in living reality can only result in an even greater place of honor for this country of free men. Already the expected clamoi from some of those states vitally affected by the Supreme Court s action has reached the ears of the nation Many hot and bitter words have been «poken many more will follow. Bu* we trust in the general fair-mindedness of the American people to overcome feelings too often engendered solely by environment, with Chris tian good sense and good will. We have never thought that those who thrive politically on bigotry and discrimination like Hoi man Taimadge. Jim Byrnes and their ilk may their tribe decrease have ever spoken fnr all the right thinking citizens of their areas. We no uay wish to minimize the problems there will be many. Rut they will not bp as drastic and as generally widespread as the prophets of doom who have already spoken would have us he lieve. The existing population breakdown between white and Negro in the various communities af footed will be the final criterion of the amount of adjustment necessary to make the ruling workable We certainly expert feu die hards to aigue to the end that this is a problem peculiar to the South and that the South can and is solving it in its own way, i.e through the makeshift of offering equal, but separate facilities to Negroes This is a bare fiction even when carried out Which it seldom is. The Constitution in its XIV Amendment makes no mention nf ‘facilities equal or otherwise. 11 deals wuth persons human heings Equal facilities do not make persons equal. The rerogmtinn and acceptance of fundamental Christian teachings u ill insure the hippy solution to whatever problems dn arise. The dignity of the human person and the brotherhood of all men under God are the Gospel concepts which must smooth the way for an integral, democratu God-fearing America. Dr. Kinsey Gets llis Head Shrunk \l A Public Dinner Having dinner with a large group of psychiat rists must be an unnerving experience One can hardly avoid the suspicion that one s dinner com panions were eyeing one clinically and that ones neuroses were ‘howing. Our old friend Dr. Kinsey of Indiana U recently had the doublv unsettling experience nf dining with the head shrinkers and then having the chief of the tribe get up and publicly ridicule his (Kinsey’s) book on the human female. Dr Karl Mennmger called Kinsey naive in his approach,” said his book was a “shocking misrepre sentation of female sexuality.” The title ought to be changed Dr Menningei Miggcster to "What 5.000 or 6 000 Rather Talkative Indies Told Me About Sexual Behavior of Women in the I nited States I n der Certain Conditions.’’ Needless to say. Dr Kinsey was highly enraged at this mockeery from a fellow scientist. So he got up and boldly answered the criticism How? Ry charging that religious groups were trying to stop his studies. The Rockefeller Foundation and Indiana Univ are bring pressured by unnamed religious groups to cut off his funds, Dr. Kinsey alleged. That, as any fool can plainly see, took care of Dr. Wenninger's complaints. We are moved to suggest that the unnamed relig ious groups it any can relax the pressure now Kinsey's fellow scientists are beginning to do a joh on him which will 'end him back to his IBM in tcir* He might even so hark io the gall wasp4 Guest Editorial— Th* Indiana Catholic and Record Sin-111 Men io and Elsewhere A movie no,4 hem.' distributed in Columbus pui trays a situation that, no doubt, happened many times during and after World War II or any other war for that matter- far more oiten than a person would like to think It portrays a girl who is alone and friendless in Pans, with no home, no job, no money and ro food She takes up with a soldiei lives with him they live as man and wife. They fall in In, e 7 heir concubinage therefore so the implication goes n an act nf lose, i al her than an act of sin Those responsible fnr the movie tried to make the point that there i« only a thin line between an act of love and an act of sin" Fortunately, this line was not permitted to remain in the film We now read in the advertisement: "There is a world of dif ference between an act of sin and an act of love Many giris faced with this same situation after the war, did not prostitute themselves in this way They cherished their virtue more than the comforts of life. They preferred cold and hunger to sin. Not even this Is a new story. Heaven is peopled with saints who made the same choice, hard as it was To many people in «ur seculanstic society, this ]g not understandable. Being materialistic and having no respect for virtue they approye of trading in tegrity for the materia] things of life—whether these be plain meals or fancy minks. Others look upon the Moral Law, which directs and regulates men s actions, as being man made. Therefore, they think the circumstances demand that it be set aside at times. They quickly demand exceptions. This is the opinion of the reviewer in a local news paper. who feels that the Moral Law interferred with the happiness of the couple in the movie and should have been applied “with compassion.” The Moral Law comes from God. Man lives by it. It is not to be put aside just to accommodate the desires of men. It is a sure and steady guide to our eternal happiness in heaven. No matter how greatly sin is glamorized nor with Low much emo tion sinful situations are dramatized in movies or plays, an act of sin is an act of sin and its measure is the unchanging Moral Law, a Divine gift to man. Just Among Ourselves Passing Comment Considered or Inconsiderate The current issue of the magazine called Look presents the views of Dr. James H. Nich ols on "What Disturbs Protestants About Ca tholics..” In the next issue, under date of May 25, Mr. John Cogley of Commonweal will "pre sent a Catholic's views.” There is an enormous error, implied and outspoken, under any such discussion as this one. It is an error of supposing that Catholicity and Protestantism are two varieties of Chris tianity, roughly on a par, and capable of being modified in practice as to achieve a generally pleasing compromise. The instructed Catholic knows that his Church, despite all the instances of unworthi ness (some real, more fictional) in those who are to represent the Church, lay and clerical, is the only Christian Church there is. This knowledge is not a proud mental at titude. It is knowledge, not a view. It is the knowledge that comes supernaturally from faith, and naturally from the facts of history. The Catholic believes that Christ is God that He tounded one Church that He gave the Church His authority and voice, promising to be with it to the end of time. The Catholic knows that Christ tounded and guaranteed the Church to bring to all mankind the fruits of the Redemption, and to give man necessary competence and aid in his essential work of living virtuously and getting to heaven. What God has founded and guaranteed must he accepted as the institution required by all men. No other institution is of this character. The one Church founded by Christ is not on a par with other churches. Other churches are not position to bar gain or compromise with the Church to which God Hjmself has said, "He that heareth you, heareth Me.” Therefore it is fundamentally and calamitously erroneous to suppose,—as the Look discussion im plicitly supposes,-that the Catholic Church or its faithful members are tree to change their religion, to waler down the truths it leaches, or to modify its essential practice, in view of what is called social harmony but what really is mdifferentism. The title of the first Look article is unfortunate it is also revealing. It is unfortunate in its apparent supposition that members of the true Church must be careful, not to disturb the feelings or the atti tudes of their neighbors. The Apostles and the first Catholics baptized and instructed by the Apostles went through the world as a very disturbing force indeed. The pagan world was as unhappy as the mod ern world, but it wished no part of the disturbing religion which could bring K happiness. It wanted no submission of heart and mind and will to God it abhorred the business of prayer and fasting it reiected the Cross. Truth is always disturbing to people who want to nold complacently to convenient, if ultimately unsatisfying falsities, and to the deter mination to have things their own way. Thus the unfortunate title of "What Disturbs” reveals the mistaken worldly attitude and view that people are to give God such recognition as will not interfere with a free and easy life. It reveals the modern conviction that people are to "worship God as they please,” rather than to worship God as God pleases. The pride that came into the world with the first sin is still the world's most widespread and most devastating evil Men are still trying to take God's place to have things religious in their own way. to make religion a system of their own for their own consolation. But religion is objective, factual, changeless. The Church founded by Christ teaches that factual religion. The world at large recents this teaching,- for pride is resentment of God and God's works,—and says in effect what certain prideful peo ple once muttered, "This is a hard saying, and who can hear it?” There is a strange blindness in the man who, with apparent benevolence and fair-mindedness, proceeds to discuss the relations of Catholics and non-Catho lics. It permits the author of the first Look article to utter such an absurdity as this: “The great bulk of Roman Catholic teaching and preaching is Com mon Christian truth and morals. Protestants are glad that this teaching is being given .” Now. as a tact, the "great bulk" of Catholic teaching in volves these truths: the divinity or Godhead of Christ the Blessed Trinity the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist the Reality of the Mass as the identical sacrifice offered by Christ on the Cross -the priestly power to forgive sins the unique sufficiency and necessity of the Catholic Church. With one or two of those truths some non-Catholies may agree with all of them no Protestant agrees. As Chesterton once pointed out, Catholics and Protestants disagree, not in non-essentials, but essentials. If two papers or magazines, wholly in disagreement in the ends they serve, were to be called alike because they are printed on the same sort of paper with type oi the same size and style, a child would laugh at the silly assertion. The papers differ essentially in the non-essentials of mere external appearance they may differ little or not at all. But it is mere idiocy to say they are the same. w The Look article aays that Protestants are dis turbed by Catholics on the score of devotion to the democratic ideal. The word democracy is employed to cover a multitude of misconceptions it is a fog term. a blanket-term Certainly, common-sense says that if the democratic ideal (which few if any per sons can define accurately, and noboody can define in a manner satisfactory to all) does not agree with divinely revealed truth, so much the worse tor the democratic ideal Are we to suppose that Protest ants are ottering democracy (however defined) as a substitute for Christianity? And. practically, if democracy means unflinching patriotism, Catholics can point to the rolls of those who died gloriously for their country in all its wars their numbers al ways far exceed their proportion in the national census. The true religion seeks first to serve God and save souls. It also seeks social harmony in so far as this is consonant with its essential effort. But one cannot help thinking that there was little so cial harmony on Calvary, or in the arenas where more than eleven millions of Catholic martyrs died, or in the great worldly city which drove its disturbing Catholics into the eatacombs. 1 I 3 if i iri i ‘ili ®V IK i WASHINGTON/ LETTER WASHINGTON—Press reports from the Geneva Conference con tinue to confirm and deepen the pessimism that marked official and unofficial opinion in this country even before the sessions in Switzerland opened. In the light of past experien ces with the masters of commun ist imperialism, there was, no doubt, ample justification for expecting nothing fruitful and constructive from the Geneva ses sions—barring a complete rever sal of Moscow’s attitude, which was most definitely "not in the cards.” Ixioked upon in this way, the developments at Geneva should have offered no cause for sur prise or dismay at something ut terly unexpected. On the con trary. one might have expected these events to solidity American public opinion in firm support of a clear-cut foreign policy de signed to cope with Moscow's schemes and ambitions. However, even the most cas ual observer of the scene must note that neither this country's public opinion nor its foreign policy regarding the Geneva Con ference are marked for firmness and derisiveness. There appears to be rather a steadily rising, indefinable sense of uncertainty •whether the cus LOl IS I. R( DE\L While Congress has been brought to a standstill in learn mg anything about subversion, the Soviet fifth column has taken full advantage of this politi cal palsy which has struck W a s i n gton Malenkov’s fol lowers have hit home against the United States through hun dreds of tele grams and thousands of letters to senators congressmen, and the White House These communications, which public officials in Wash ington do not often recognize as Communist-inspired, have one major theme: the surrender of the United States at Geneva. On April 26. the Daily Work er commanded all Communists to move "other Americans” in this direction, ordering that mes sages be sent to Washington de manding “peace” in Indo-Uhina and recognition of the Mao Tse tung regime in China. “We must insist,” said the Daily Worker, that these messages he sent “to the White House and to every Congressman and Senator.” Even More Repulsive The big argument to be spread through the American commun ity. in order to induce these let ters and telegrams, is that "the lives of our boys” are involved. This is audacious when we con sider how the Reds in Asia have not only killed but brutally maim ed and massacred our young men in Korea It is even more re pulsive tn that this counsel of surrender will lead to the death future conflicts of hundreds of thousands of our young men. In the Soviet dictatorship we are dealing with an enemy which is driven forward by its own Improving The Pledge one natron intHvisibfe^nith Liberty onri Justice for Bo 11 U: s: I's hi I’’ k* 1.1 ••■•$1 Geneva Casts Long Shadows tomary world picture—commun ism. led by Moscow, on one side, and the free world, led by Wash ington, on the other corres ponds to reality. There are in creasing questions whether, pos sibly, there might be other fac tors complicating what at first sight looks like a very simple equation. There are gnawing doubts whether the press re ports creating and feeding pub lic opinion give a complete pic ture or merely a caricature of the truth. Faced with such a state of mind a letter from an American who has spent many years in Eu rope and is at present in Geneva may serve to indicate some of the reasons contributing to the increasing doubts and uncertain ties in American opinion. The writer of this letter is well aware of the danger of generaliz ing personal views, and impres sions. Yet. he states it is as his firm opinion that European minds, including those of per sons prominent in religious life, "simply disbelieve the American thesis that the free world must make sacrifices in order to mount a rhilitary defense against international communism.” He makes the assertion—which will he startling to many Amer icans but has been made before Soviet Mythology, U.S. Gullibility mythology. And the major item tn that mythology is the "neces sity” and 'inevitability” of the Soviet world dictatorship. We cannot obtain peace with such a power by negotiations or by sur render to it from time to time. The United States is obliged, if it intends to survive, to bring about revolt in the enslaved peo pies under the satellite regimes and in Russia itself. Only Make-Believe To get some measure of the mythology that gives stimulus to Soviet plans for world con quest. we can note in the Com inform organ for April 23 that the first session of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR held its “Fourth Convocation” on April 20. This was presented as a great “democratic” gathering. But in reporting the "victory of the Peo ple’s Bloc” in the elections which chose the personnel of this body, the New Times of March 20 had proclaimed the re sult as a triumph of “soviet So cialist democracy.” The “democratic” quality of this “election” is a strange one indeed. In the first place, the voters in Soviet Russia, the sub jects of the dictatorship, could vote only for one ticket, which was cynically called "the Peo ple’s Communist and Non-Party Bloc.” And then we learn from New Times that 99 96 per cent of the total eligible voters went to the polls. Of these. 99 84 per cent voted for the only ticket they had before them' With what might he called pride. New Times up all of this by saying: "On March 14. the Soviet people unanimously” supported Dicta tor Malenkov and his bureauc racy. “Teraion" Smoke Screen Rut Americans must under stand the type of mind which can accept such mythology as reality—that can be induced by Go/t by others equally above any sus picion of being tainted by com munist propaganda—that "Euro pean religious opinion does not seriously worry about Soviet ag gression, perhaps because Euro peans have lived next to a vol cano too long.” Europeans holding this opin ion. he says, "are convinced that the Soviets are fully occupied with domestic problems and should not be baited.” The writer believes it to be the dominant European attitude that "nothing must be done that could possibly disturb the exist ing status quo and could provoke a reaction that coyld provoke another reaction, that in turn, would provoke war.” Finally, and most disturbing of all. the writer flatly states it as his honest view that a great num ber of Europeans, again includ ing what he terms ‘‘religious opinion,” refuse to believe that “America’s motives are sincere.” One thing is certain: If the writer has presented a faithful picture of Europe’s present state of mind, then this country is faced with a reality that, before long, will require public opinion to make some of those “agoniz ing reappraisals” recently envis aged by Secretary of State‘John Foster Dulles. this mythology to use any means to bring about world conquest by this “true democracy” of the Moscow dictatorship. If the Communists deceive themselves by such make-believe, it makes them all the more cun ning in persuading non-Com munists to do what this "demo cratic” power wants them to do. That is why the Daily Worker can count heavily on the gulli bility of a certain section of Americans and American leader ship when it gives orders about messages to Washington. In August, Dictator Malenkov raised the cry of “easing inter national tension.” Under cover of that cry Communists expand ed military conflict, which cer tainly is tension, in Asia Just as the Stalinite cry of "peace” was the cover for the Korean aggression by the Com munists, so Malenkov’s utterance was the smoke screen under which the attack was stepped up in Indo-China. "Peace" Through Triumph In the New Times of April 3, coming lately from Moscow, it is solemnly stated in the chief ar ticle that all potentialities for peace must be utilized.” But when we read through the article, we quickly learn that the only pos sibility of “peace” is for com plete agreement by the United States with all Soviet demands. In the face of these continued assertions that “peace” is only attainable through complete So viet triumph, our representa tives still go to Berlin and Ge neva. This sort of farce will be pro longed until enough American community leaders are aware of their duty to transmit to Wash ington. with the same fervor as the Communists use. their insist ence that Soviet Russia. Red Chi na. and all the satellites cannot be dealt with in this sense. Inquiry Corner Q. What is the point tn hav tng a place Catholics call Ltmbo? It sounds sdly. It seems, like Pur gatory, to be a mere invention of the Church just to make religion more complicated. I believe in heaven and hell, and nothing more. A. Whatever the name may be we know from the Bible that there u ere souls neither in heav en or hell until Christ led them into heaven. (I Peter 3:18-19) He “led captivity captive” (Psalm 67:19) and the whole Christian pattern in the Bible and Tradi tion show that even the good people of the Old Testament COULD NOT enter heaven until Christ redeemed us. Where were they? The place of waiting we call Limbo. Also the name is ap plied to children who die with out Baptism, and again we know from the Bible that NO ONE can enter heaven without Bap tism (John 3:5). St. Thomas re flects the common opinion in saying that they will not be un happy, but all agree to the Church's teaching that they can not have the supernatural vision of God in heaven. If they are not in heaven or in hell where are they? The place we call Lim bo and many theologians hold that it is a place of natural hap piness. Purgatory is also a real place as indicated by the Bible (II Machabees 12:46), Christian Tradition and solid reasons. Q. What has the Catholic Church got against Masons? A. The Catholic Church is not “against” Masons, although it does forbid its members to join their lodges. This carefully-con sidered and repeated rejection of Freemasonry is based principally on its nature as a “religion of naturalism” which ignores Jesus Christ. Its oaths have been judg ed as immoral in principle i.e. no Catholic man can promise to accept and obey as they require. The Catholic Church never con demns people in any other relig ion but simply states the error of their position and the impos sibility of a person being a Ca tholic and a member of such a group. (For details see the article in the Catholic Encyclopedia or such books as “The Question Box”) Q. What is a baldachino or baldachinuin? A. It is a dome-like canopy over the high altar of a church, supported by columns or sus pended by a chain. It was origi nally designed to protect the al tar from dust or material falling from above. The most famous ex ample is that of St. Peters in MO)SIG\OR HIGGINS Of all the many books written by ex-communists in the United States during the past 10 or 15 years, Whittaker Chambers’ au tobiography is probably the only one of any pernjanent lit erary value the only one which will be on the reading list of colleges and universi ties a genera tion hence. Father Healey------------------ Within a rela tively few years the other vol umes will have been forgotten and will probably have gone out of print. That is to say, they can be expected to suffer the more or less inevitable fate of jour nalism as opposed to "literature in quotes. This is not to imply, however, that Whitlaker Chambers’ "Wit ness” is necessarily better in ev ery respect than the autobiogra phies of the many other ex-com munists who have recently tried their hand at analyzing the na ture of the communist menace. On the contrary, it might well be argued, with all due respect to Mr. Chambers’ admittedly su perior literary talents, that the people of the next generation— as well as those of our own gen eration—will be making a ser ious mistake if they restrict their study of the contemporary com munist menace Io "Witness” or any other single volume. in the interest of rounding out their understanding of a very complicated subject, they will want to check some of Mr. Cham bers. highly personalized conclu sions against the conflicting opin ions of other equally sincere and knowledgeable ex-communists who have approached the sub ject autobiographically frbm a somewhat different point ot view. A Partial Corrective In the opinion of the present writer, one recent volume in par ticular ought to be studied by our own and by succeeding gen erations as a partial corrective to some of the more controversial opinions expressed by Mr. Cham bers. This particular volume (published at the end of April by The Viking Press) is "Where We Came Out" by Granville Hicks. A member of the Communist Party from 1935 to 1939 and since that time literary editor of the vigor ously anti-communist New’ Lead. er. Mr. Hicks has played a sig nificant role in combating the communist menace at home and abroad. There u a spiritual undertone Rome. The name comes from Baldocco, the Italian name for Baghdad, from which place ma terials came to make these can opies. It is. also known as a ci horium, not to be confused with the sacred vessel of the same name. Q. Could you tell me some thing about St. Stanislaus? A. The Benedictine "Book of Saints” lists two saints of that name. St. Stanislaus, Bishop, lived in the eleventh century and was born near Cracow, of which he later was Archbishop. In resisting the impious king Boleslaus II he was killed by the king himself after the soldiers refused to carry out the kings orders. St. Stanislaus Koska lived in the sixteenth century. He was also Polish, but died in Rome as a novice in the Society of Jesus, at the age of eighteen. The earlier saint’s feastday is May seventh, tkje latters Au gust 15th. Q. Is the Church against Tem perance movements? A. The Catholic Church up holds the virtue of temperance as it does all the virtues. It does not particularly approve of socie ties which declare that total ab stinence is the only way to this virtue the matter of intoxi cating liquors. While advocating total abstinence as a means for moral progress and penance the Church has never imposed as necessary for virtue something which is only useful. Christ and the Apostles, with a great part of the human race, saints and sinners alike, have used various alcoholic beverages. Things, be ing made by God and given to us for our happiness, cannot be evil. It is only the misuse of them which leads to sin and other evils. The Catholic Church ad vocates temperance. For some this certainly means total abstin ence. Q. I have a crucifix Td like to have blessed. Could it be blessed if I just took it with me to Sunday Mass? A. No. Upon occasion of mis sions or retreats religious artic les are blessed upon being held up to view by members of the congregation. The priest bless ing anything must have the in tention and ordinarily the article to be blessed should be present ed at the rectory. Merely having it in Church during Mass would not confer upon it any of the qualities of a sacramental. Send questions to Father Ed ward F. Healey, The Inquiry Cor ner, The Catholic Times. Box 636. Columbus (16) Ohio. A Sense Of Balance in “Witness," a vague but ob viously sincere religiosity, which is lacking, or at least is not as strongly emphasized, in “Where We Came Out.” Mr, Hicks as a matter of fact is disappointingly doctrinaire in his casual agnos tic references to the subject of religion. But there is in his study a better sense of balance, a more rounded perspective, a more ju dicious weighing of the evidence on a number of important sub jects and notably on the subject of socio-economic reform. Detracts From Effectiveness Mr. Chambers, in our opinion, is anything but balanced on the latter subject. He and several other well-known ex-communista have arrived at the conclusion— largely from undocumented premises—that the great social reform movement popularly known as the New Deal was per ilously akin to communism. Un fortunately, this opinion is shar ed by a goodly number of other intellectuals who, while they were never members of the Com munist Party, were at one time or another favorably disposed to wards communism. Granting the right of honest men to disagree on the subject of politics and specifically on the subject of the New’ Deal, we fully concur with Mr. Hicks when he says that this extremist estimate of the New Deal is not only completely unreliable but detracts from the effective fight against communism. In this re spect. he very pointedly suggests, Chambers. Max Eastman, John Dos Passos and company are do ing as much harm to the anti communist cause as are the so called Retarded Liberals. "These men began, like some of the rest of us.” says Mr. Hicks, “by thinking that communism was right, and then they came to the conclusion, again like some of the rest of us. that it was wrong and had to be fought. But the more they have fought it. the bigger and more frightening it has appeared to them, and the harder it has become for them to distinguish between real dan gers and imaginary ones. The danger of communism is real enough, but it is a danger that must be carefully analyzed if it is to be successfully combated Emotional, Intellectual Balance Mr. Hicks has succeeded better than the majority of ex-commun ists in carrying out his own ad vice in this regard. He has an ex traordinary sense of balance, emotionally and intellectually. He is humble about his own opin ions and exceptionally charitable in his judgment of other people’s motive*.