This article summarizes research on the natural knowledge of God and the construal of sacred doctrine in question one of the Summa Theologiae and chapter 1 of Thomas's Romans commentary, with a comparison to Karl Barth. It takes as its challenge and motivation to uncover some of the affinities (indeed, to create a convergence) between Karl Barth and Thomas Aquinas just where both modern Barthians and modern Thomists would have thought convergence least likely: on the natural knowledge of God. It seeks to do so on the basis of their reading of Romans 1:20 in Barth's Shorter Commenta and Thomas's Super epistolam S. Pauli ad Romanos? where each of them ends up saying surprising things about the natural knowledge of God under the pressure of following Paul. Part II of the article simply asserts the reading of Thomas on Romans and takes theologian's licence to do so in theses defended elsewhere. Part III makes the comparison of the two commentaries (Barth's and Thomas's), arguing a convergence, and it too concludes in theses. Some readers may find the procedure circular. If so, I can only hope the circle is attractive enough to make them curious enough to seek more information. Part of what I hope to do is provide a reading of Thomas's theological procedure that resembles in a smaller way Barth's account of Anselm's
