adding, “It was an advantage when there was one common discipHnernand ever}’ nation studied the doings of hvo states. Now,rnthe}’ learn how to mend motor cars.”rnOf all the differences between the old college and the new,rnthe most obxious is the absence of Jesus Christ from the presupposihonsrnthat underlie academic life. Thomas Arnold, thernemblematic English schoolmaster, saw his purpose as the curernof souls. His aim was not an institution in which Christianit}rnwas the subject of the curriculum, but one in which Chrishanitvrnwas the context for learning. Where Christ cannot bernnamed, theology cannot be taught, and philosoph’, wliichrnleads the intellect into that borderland bevond which lie answersrnthat can only be given b}’ God, becomes rationalistic, thenrnrelatiistic, and ultimately damaging.rnThese were the forces that undid collegiate learning. Therncolleges changed because die culture changed, and the culturernchanged because the colleges changed. The attempt to discoverrncausal priorit}’ is unrewarding. But the only way to have anotherrnkind of culture is to have another kind of college. Bookrnclubs mav help, and the Church itself may carr^• in its sacredrnrhetoric memories of the great tradition, but what is rec[uired isrna seminarv for the reawakening of another kind of culture, anotherrnkind of college, one in which God is honored as thernsource of truth and students are made citizens of the great civilizationrnthat began in Sinai and Athens. Such colleges must ine’rnitabK’, for the Hme being, be countcrcultural in the sense inrnwhich the 1960’s revolutionaries, then already a kind of incipientrnestablishment, merelv pretended to be. These new collegesrnwill be located at the periphen’ of cosmopolitan postmodernih’.rnThey will be staffed by men and women who see themselves asrnmissionaries of the great tradition, and who will bear gladK thernmodest hardships of such missions. Wlierever they are found —rnand sometimes thev are within the walls of the regnant culture’srnuniversihes—these are die unlike)}’ monastics of the 21st century,rnkeeping alight the flame of learning amidst the bright darknessrnof the secular cit}’. They are responsible not only for maintainingrnthe great tradition but for enlarging it by incorporatingrnthe literature of the greatest intellectual event of modernit}’: thernCatholic revival begun in the mid-19th century b’ Newman,rnMigne, and Leo XIII, w hich produced such rare spirits as Eliot,rnFlannery O’Connor, Maritain, Etienne Gilson, Allen Tate,rnMaurice Baring, G.K. Chesterton, Evehn Waugh, GerardrnManlev Hopkins, Walker Perc} —the list goes on.rnTo hope diat these colleges, if the}’ are loval to Christ and tornVergil, v’ill be cnthusiasdcally nurtured by the crdture of ourrnage is an illusion. Their secondar’ purposes arc the first itemsrnin the list of parents’ goals: Getting along, knowing others fromrndi’erse backgroiuids, problem solving, and die rest. But thisrncommonalit} of purpose makes the countereultural college arnmarginal member of the American collegiate enterprise.rnThey—ive —will do well to live quiedy, thereb}’ escaping (atrnleast for die Hme being) the tods of compidson’ diversib,’ and toleration.rnAnd if dieir real purpose—the reading of the great traditionrnin the light of Christ—becomes obvious and the collegesrnmust forego the appro’al of the citizens of the secular eih’, thesernlittle commonwealths will shll enjoy the approval of that morernsignificant polihcal culture: the Cih’ of God.rnHow Metaphors Are Madernby Gail WhiternIn Turkey I was gi’en a silk cocoon:rna small white oval, a hummingbird’s egg in thread.rnInside it the silkworm rattled like a beanrn(naturalh I assumed the thing was dead).rnIt came home in ni}’ jewelr’ box. Weeks later,rngoing to bed, I found a white moth perchedrnon the white cocoon, a resurrection mthrnindeed. Now what to do with it? I searchedrnthe reference books. It seemed the silkworm fedrnon mulberrv leaves. Here in the moss-hung Southrnstarvation seemed assured. Nevcrdieless,rnI put die white thing out in the night’s wet mouthrnfor what slim chance it had. By morning, bothrncocoon and moth were gone. Perhaps a nestrnwas richer for the silk. For bats or owlsrnperhaps cocoons are easy to digest.rnBut now imagination was at workrnand soon a host of things —poetry, love,rnRussia, geometry, the Aztecs, evenrnthe unixerse itself as seen b’ God —rncordd be regarded in a single light:rnsurprising silknioths, thrown to an alien night.rnSEPTEMBER 2000/1 5rnrnrn