The Principles of Catholic Apologetics ‘su of Modernism a chiefly on the Lectures ly iy wusLagrange, O.P. “De Revelatione per | propasiia”” adapted and re-arranged Wy J. WALSHE, M.A. Author of he Principles of Cision Agaegatics, '. hossex (" Prosogium”) London: SANDS & Co. 15, KING STREET, COVENT GARDEN and EdinburghNikil Obsta T. George, DD, ‘Censor Deputatus. Imprimatur: 1% Fredericus Gulicimus, Archiepiscopus Liverpolitanus. Liverpoli, die 27 Maii, 1926. ‘Printed in Guernsc bythe Star and Gasets Co.,Ltd. PREFACE ‘Tit present compendium based chielly on the works of Pore Garrigou-Lagrange isa defence of Divine Revelation ieike reins Fide” I's intended wo bes supplement to the Principles of Christian Apologetics published in the Westminster series of Messts. Longmans, Green & Co, ‘he latter volume was to shew the rationed fost truths of the fist importance regard: ind the relations between God and man.» stress the fact that advance. in. the of Natural Science, so far from being a cdiinctly a help to Religious and Super: lf. More than thirty years ago the late, Pro. f Huxley, ablest of English Agnostics, wrote : THe fxtant forms of supernacuralism sin these atGe days Ihave to cope with an enemy whose full strength is ony just Deginning to be put out, and whose forces, gathering iirength year by year, ae hemming them round on every Bids. This enorny te Science” ("Lesage wpe some Coe. troverted Subjects,” p. 29). ‘He proceeds: The first chapter of Genesis teaches the supernatural cretion of the resent forms of life; modern science teaches that they have come about by evohition”” (p. 31). Would not the rofessor have been astonished if he had been told that reat Fathers of the Church, such as Gregory of Nyssa find Augustine held views on that question which Teave foom for Evolution in its fullest form—an Eyolution from inorganie mater right up to the body of man, no special “intervention of God being necessary?" The conservation Of creatures, the concursus with their activity and finally the creation of the human soul when the disposition of matter calls for it, are the thtee acl of the natural govern- ment of the world by God. . . « Thuis the necessary order Of development ofthe word included in what Se Grogory Of Nyssa terms the primary impulse of the Divine Wil.” (Ch, ‘Darwinism and Cathotic Thought, ps 11%, by Canon Henry de Dorlodot, Professor at Louvain University)vi PREFACE ‘This is a typical case where the supposed conflict between Religion and Science is due (0 ignorance of the teaching, of those who are accredited representatives of Religion. Professor Husley proceeds to point out that whereas the fate Mr, Gladstone interpreted the first chapter of Genesis, as giving @ chronology of the creation of organisms—a, Chronology in harmony with Science (vis. 1. Plants; 2. ‘Aquatic and Aerial Animals; 3. All Terrestrial Animals) fence shews that plants and animals, aquatic, aerial and terrestrial existed contemporancously. "The Catholic posi tion on thig matter is that the author of Genesis had no intention, fo write a scientific statement. He aimed at ‘emphasising the Divine origin of the world, the mode being outside his purview, In confirmation of this fact, amongst. the decrees of the Pontifical Commission for Biblical studies published on the goth June, 1900, fe Bnd the following : "Since it was not the intention Of the sacred writer to teach the inmost constitution Of visible things, or the complete order of creation, fh a scientific manner, but rather to give to his countey- fen a. popular noticn, conformable to. the ordinary Tanguage of those times, and adapted to their opinions and intelligence, we must not always and regularly look for Selentiie exactitude of language when interpreting this Chapter,” Were Professor Huxley alive to-day, it would be interesting to know on what grounds he, undoubtedty A lover of truth, would withhold his assent from this, the Catholic interpretation of Mosaic cosmogony. Again, egarding the geographical universality of the Flood, Father Hevvenauer writes: ‘