The Principles of Catholic Apologetics A Study of Modernism based chiefly on the Lectures of Pore Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. “De Revelatione per Ecclesiam Catholicam prepasisa” adapted and re-arranged By Rev. T. J. WALSHE, M.A. Ath ie Principles of Chistian Apeloatic, “Rides quaerens intellects." ‘3 Anazuar (" Preslogiom"). London : SANDS & Co. 15, KING STREET, COVENT GARDEN and EdinburghUNIVERSITY, Nihil Obstat: T. George, D-D-» ‘Consor Deputatus. Imprimatur deus Galt, * Archiepiscopus Liverpolitanus. iverpolii, die 27 Mali, 926,,” Liverpoti, die 27 Mati, 1926, Prive in Gorn the Str nl Gast Co Ltd PREFACE, ‘Ts presint compendium based chiety on the works of Péce Garsigou-Lagrange isa defence of Divine Revelation “sub directione Fidei It's intended tobe a supplement to the Principles of Christin Apologetics published in the Westminster series of Messrs. Longmans, Green. & Co, ‘The aim of dhe ler volume. was to shew the rational grounds on which rest truths ofthe frst importance regards Ing God, tan and the relations between God and san, lis im ‘was also to stress the fact that advance in tne various branches of Natural Science so far fom being’ @ hindrance, is distinctly a help to Religious and. Suge patural belief, More than thirty years ago the late Pso- fessor Huxley, ablest of English Agnostic extant forms of supernaturalism « Ihave to cope with an enemy whose fall strength is only just beginning to be put out, and whose forees, gathering stength year by year, are hemming them round on every side. "This enemy is Science” ("" Essays upon some Cor troverted Subjecis,”"p. 20). ‘He proceeds: "The first chapter of Genesis teaches the supernatural creation of the present forms of life; moder science teaches that they hhave come about by evolution” (p. 31). Would not the Professor have been astonished {fhe had been told that great Fathers of the Church, such as Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine field views on that question which leave oom for Evolution in its fullest form-an Evolution from inorganie matter right up to the body of man, no special intervention of God being necessary? “The conservation of creatures, the concursus with their activity and Rally the creation of the human soul when the disposition of matter calls for ity ave the three acts ofthe natural govern= ment of the world by God. . . » Thus the necessary order (of development ofthe world is included in what Se. Gregor’ Of Nyssa terms the primary impulse of the Divine Will.” (Cl. Darwinism and Cathalic Thought, #. 117, by Canon Henry de Dorlodot, Professor at Louvain Univesity.)~ 7 ynflict between Picpsopce ahi aca at eal reted the first chapter of Genesis ‘Ail Terrestrial Animals) ‘nals, squatic, aerial and Seon ea ‘Aerial Animals 5 3+ The Catholic post Se cp ee” He 1 fe nS i en eo se of thos tn as ad ingame, we mu guage when interpreting this ene, ade kiya tay, it would chap” Were Prot a wounds he, undoubtedly Stefi nn win eae oe ot a Noaie cnmogeny. Ags Gatae ineroraation of Mrinal atthe Flood, EOE As See ae at, neha dea Fhe: Hoses re engrphiel univers SFE ef he Pat cng en ta tates a oni en do ee a = Cae Seen ion of presenta intrest 0 ‘id Aa tenon ust be given. Is tbe carly History Se ey be sol iy gelogcl rerord, fa Serna she ching af pes Mean ae Ferma?’ nok of Geno? Tn order Ip anwer l tin sir Petr gga ne sca of sa human aes ich ine sstoral £0 cx apd whi log Shiely to the Pitocene period. et a ee kind aa yon tee é \ & § 8 5 3 we 2 : feces” fms [et mac 1 ie B. & engin 8 ius $ 8 soqee0)| Sun-cone & i stomce Ee , A. PePREFACE eimission of Author and Pebihurs (Mea, Yuna nd Norgat) indieates she” ciferen seg. ian Piece and potion of the Meet BS of the Inagicaton ofthe iuce neg’ Peat, Bes Fike bloging i tee the Boman Stonegate of onan EUROPE Néolithic Culture () 1895. Titbury, skeleton; cranial capacity 1,500 c. sft. 4in in height; river-bed type. ae ° (2) igte. ‘Coldrum Monument (icent, fragments of twenty-two individvalsy only five skull compe enough for examination; "men si alin, wanes Sit. tin. in height; brain capacty of mate seule 3,600 eat, of female 1,450 ccs some long:hended, some, medium-headed. "Before the begisning of thie ‘Neolithic. period” great “numbers of. reinds headed people "had. come into. Central. Europe, Agricultural and setted communities were inven: tions of the Neolithic age, Paleolithic Cultures, L.—Azilian (from Mas d'Azil in the Pyrenees) 1909. Granial fragments from Spain; probably of river-bed ‘type. T.—Magéalenian (named after La Madeleine, a rock shelter on the river Véztre), (1) 1888. Chaneslade (near Périgueus), skeletons probably round-headed; brain-capacity 14330 €.c- Professor ‘Sollns suggested that’ the Chancclads type may be ancestral to the Eskimos. (2) 1903. Cheddar (Mendip Hills, Somerset), skeleton j rivercbed type; long-headed;’ brainscapacity. 1.450 c.c.; height sft. 4i + Ofnet (fifty miles south-west of Nurnberg), ity th lisy_mostly round but some tong= headed ; the round skulls are of Mongoloid form, the ong-headed skulls are of Nordic trpe. Evidently round-headedness (now dominant in Centeat a)PREFACE Europe) had begun at tis period 10 provall over co ene Meta (rns Boney akltons of 2 an aes orcie type (ll, dominant. in ane jewWestern rope); man sft, gine in height; RonVese i eces woman’ brain-capacity nsg0 ec jut-—Solostrean (eamed from Sotovtré, near ‘Magon) Ten, Predmost (iy miles cas of Brinn), forty 1) Soe, Pred aaded in stature tall ike the men of Cromagnon. ee (en Niles Hole Qfendn Tis, Somers soos ASCE i's brainenpacily #8 1450 04 Stull Bare cee which was ultimately €© impress round headedmeater part of the population of ‘ea on en Sommeneed apparently in the East Parone tne West of England at this period. 1v—Aurignacian (from Aurignac in Haute Garonne, ‘where remains were found in 1860). {Q) 1822, Paviland Cave (near Swansea), skeleton, but ‘hall not found; perhaps of Cromagnon race. (2) dss. Bogis (Lidge), skull found by Ds, Schmerl- Tae reas of riverbed type; long-headed ; brain. capacity 1500 cc. Huxley wrote: "This shull afght hove belonged to a. philosopher, or might have contained the thoughtless mind of savage." Sir Arthur Keith remarks: "Huxley's statement refers to the average brain, which is equal to the preeds of both philosopher and savage. It does not in any way invalidate the truth that a small brain with a simple pattern of convolutions is. less ipable organ than a large brain with a complex pattern." (3) 1858, “Cromngnon (near the village of Les Byits, Dordogne), five skeletons, four being adults} hse Tonge-lieaded ; braineeapa n their proportions; not ‘ft Worthing), two inv height Fony.eheacded @) © @) ®) (9) PREFACE 5 cepa. 3.859 je oe akon ofa woman, Sire gs brlospacy pe en bah ofthe 191, Brin (Czecho-Stovakia), skull; fong- headed; brain-eapacity 1000 cc") variant of Ce magnon. ‘The presest day Patagonian skulls are Solana fact which scemé to akow thatthe Pate gonians ae amv of Paoli see, wa tnade their way into Armerica from Mongolia in Paleolithic times. Mongol {epsi902,. Grimaldi (Menton), Steen individuals israel canes Tn" Gite ds Ee fants atthe level of the second hearth) was foun fie kalten's'om ld woman of soll anes Ct the love! ofthe third heath) skeletons of two young thildren; (atthe level of the eighth beach, astt) Skelton of very tall man (6. a}in)—a representa~ tive of the Cromagnon race; (at the level of the nity hearth) two skeletone-one of woman of Inidle age, and the other of « youth of about 5 {eon years The. last two ere perhaps the exist ‘Aurignacian sellers. dacovered in Europe, and Fepresented a negroidy on, perhaps, a variant. of Gromagnon rave} braimeapeeity of women 1375 Se mate ging rtp ot Sige cers stature (at 16 years of age) sl 1Hin both long-headed. * ae) st 8 1009, “Combe-Capelle (Dordogne), skeleton; long Hcleds brain-capacty 1,440. 66-5 of riverbed types sit. ight. Tus. we. see that, at the beginning of the Aurighacian period ("atthe beginning,® Because Sno oF the implements which lyr mene the skeleton fos 4 Mousterian * point’™—a At scraper) the Then inthe Dordogne valley were people of modern ypescthe Cromagnon people al, the Combe Gipelte shor foop,Langwith (nese, Cresswell Cra shire), skull; river-bed type; brain- hase. Site Tpswich, skeletons, sf. tofin, in he TaatiweaettyTofgo exe Tongeheded. These fe mining: Were’ atone. time referred 10. the ¢ Bieltocene: period but Ate. Reid Moir found atPREFACE about the same level or horizon (as that occupied bons gheleton) scanty remains of an ancient floor Ceable 10 the early Aurignacian od : (00) ee ating (Sent sfcleton;, riverbed types Jee ey dinceapacity 1,500 cc+5 sft. gin. ight. (01) tong. Baker's Hole (Rent), skull; long-headed; (03) ae houieé {rear Macon), skeletons of three 2) 19° and wo babies; one man (No. 2) sft. 10.8in. Muttiaht;. the other (No. 1) sft. gin.; woman Se Mie th the mate skulls are round-hended Sie Wham seas mediumended ; brain-capacity of tefl man 1,590 ej of less tll 1,472 c.c. Hence the Avrignacian men of Europe included sve pest () allan, father negrod Cromog, aon (oper (2) robust Iarge-neaded Briinn type; (3) the riverbed type of Engis; (4) the Nordic type of Obereassel;, (G)_ the rounded-headed type of Solouiré and of Ofnet. ‘Negroid Aurignacians may have been the remote progenitors of the Bushmen; but. the remains Foard at Boskop (to be deseribed presently) indicate more direct ancestry. _—Mousterian (named from Le Moustier, Vézére). During the Movsteian period, Neanderthal men sere widely distributed. ‘The Neanderthal characterist (@) Playeepatic or Yow-domed, sls Hike those of such anthropoids as the gorilla and chimpanzee. (W) Eyebrow ridges—a supra-orbital torus. ‘Neanderthal man was a flint artisan, used fire, and buried his dead with implications of life ‘beyond death of the body. () 1848. Gibraltar shall of Drtwoun 1,a00 tnd 1,900 exc. 4 nat proynathous; the supracorbital ridge formed @ Prominent eontinnows bar of bane, (2) ths7. Neanderthal (oar Diissellort), sll right and lefties 1 Twumeras and other feayments tonluended. PREFACE z Hunley Judged that Neandetal men ws ao trome ‘ata but no's seperate spin ASS generally dstine fom Boas Sabon Co) Beer Natit Cateye ee, Beg), mand @) 1886." Spy foetr Namur), to male skeletons of Neandertal type; lager bust sklls holding Brains whieh, fe polo se, ware abene a average af the modern Europea (9) iaoetbeos “Kernpine” (Crowta)” ten indviduas, Shefchended aces” The Neate open Ia Gludedfong-headady medumeaded. Sed" sho. fended rete “Amenget the Kapiea tomsins we thooe of children whose Simian ofegow ges are masts patton tnd thearertc fo hay sober later adolescence, “Neanderthal women were less isis marked off fom te modern Ope ok tmanfind een was the ease with te mee" (6 yeh Le Mouster (Verte), skeleton of boy about Ween years of ager head remarkably large aod capucoce (>) fobs Le Chapeieaux Saints, skeleton; buried in BE a ay ato innit: oes and belts os fo | Shnehapptoed after denth; sel on the borderline whic separates fonglended and’ mediumeaded Froupes Geamaapacly was ip eoniies 12. ec. Trove the modem averages height i gins ‘ae Nemderhal was nota tall fae (9 to Ea’ Fenasss {our miles above the point Beer the Vick foise the Dordogne seeleons Brin ges 6) toes LS Ferrssie skeleton of woman. (BIB Ek Quine (Charente) shelton of woma ated alvenpecty tase ce ste agit isp shal ofa hid of about eight ears Sid sowing superba sidges. (1) Bn Bgetort (Wena human jw (mate, Trolenaoune ape ie fate ‘vie—-Aeheutean (From St. Ache, near Amiens, inthe valley of the Somme). (1) 1963, Moulin. Quignon (Abbeville), tuna IRS cissovety the = vera tersePREF! oor an Shows therefore rejected because it was De, a eet modern type cov not ave ese Ne eae tae 0 a ull roundchedded brane s y 1340. ; characters indicate a head of a I cceny, all baipeapacty oo DataSet dn yg aE 2 Eee int ney orn 7 aie eos ne an eel The igh Sarg stent Feces nine wal of he ane, cight miles east of Paris). Utne Awe, all; ext cull hen a en dy Oe see 2) 1868. Clichy (Paris), skeleton; brain-capacity 9) Clty, ars, Sa ny cack ees SRT EE leas reser et Se a re the Sri ee ne Te ge Felsina te large modern population on the Western side of i mes peptone a Hafore reds a oe fa ee te a tm Wyte gry Get SN Me ey ee rc oe a co Sera ca ay anes ga nce. (1) 1860. Castenedoto (six miles south-east of Brescia)» ty ggg sl uh Coster, fragments of stein of tw Weleda (@) 1912. (a) a) ®. @) (A) Later Pleistocerie. PREFACE xiii Piludown (Suse), skull; iete are doubs 22 (0 whelher the somethat sions mats Belongs tothe sul; sll probably tat of ears et bruncespacity to ec This ently Pinon @ Pliocene form was nore lke gurtves than aes the Neanderthal “ype of midPlsocene te "in general confrtaton in actual cmension i braimenpacty, the head of the Pitdown ae eee romarkably similar to that of modern races The rmandibie is marked’ by simian tray the, molet {eat whist "showing ‘simian chaaceiteyy ae tgoerlly human he canine tooth leavened by Father P. Teihard de: Chardon tn‘igg) 6 ape like; the’ Piltdown race tended towards round headedness. ‘AFRICA Later Pleistocene. To13- Boskop (Transvaal), skuthenps right temporal bone, a large part of the left half of the lower, jaw and. some ‘other fregments;. brain: capacity 14630 e1.7 long-hended; race anesstal Bushmen and Howtentots. rorg.” Oldoway Gouth of Lake Victoria, Attia), eclton of negro gat, Taitzikama: (100 miles est of Port Eliza. betty, remains of twenty thre individuals; skull of ‘woman; ail members of the Boskop race; woman's Bull long-headedy bratn-capacity 1,750 ©. (B) Early Pleistocene. tg2t. Broken Hill (Norther Rhodesia), skull; more ape-like, more gorillatike, than any of the modern man’s variants, living ‘or extinct; brain~ feapacity 1,300 c.c.; stature sft. roin.; medium headed; separate specios; supposed ‘to be the ancestral type of modern races; not a direct ancestor of any living race; foreshadows many features, of the modern type, particularly of the Austeatian Aborigine. ASL. 1890. Wadjak (Java), two skulls brainPREFACE seo at bp oe, empl: 29 Rh Mee % oa (B) Barly Pleistoone or Pliocene. Son, Teinil: Gava), Pilhecanthropus erect 50h. Goalie man, of mandike ape? Bi Tae apelge. some biologists are of opi pracy fe of at least 1,000 Ec. 15 necessary for 2 en The mean brain-capacity for male ee eis eux) for Europeans. n4sp ec, FREE ne 96 co of Pilhecanthropus is supposed to furnish the “missing Tink.” woos, Lake of Galilee. Fragment of Neanderthal SEG found in eave near Tiberias. see ‘AUSTRALIA mar gig. Talgai (Queensland), skull of boy; brain Gpecty 300 ¢.c.; ancestral to modern aborigines flder than Wadjak and Boskop remains. Some aim this relic to be the earliest form of Homo see Sapiens yet discovered. ‘The Tasmanian native {Grow extinct) in spite of his woolly hair came from the same stock a8 the Australian Aborigines. i i i mance elt) PLEISTOCENE—> a pntcnsoree NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA Human remains, hitherto discovered, are of later Pleistocene period, and are all of the same | Ameriean-Indian ‘The Patagonians are sue | vivals of Palzolithic race, They seem to be representatives of the proto-Mongolian type- i Fig, 2 which represents a hypothetical genealogical | ucsis dasa as arene of Re mes important described above, eae } Ccamioa Rewari In addition to the classificatic in oy S lassification just given of human coring aed prods and gp must be made sls Ge chp fins chipped by. Man oF DY ms Fetus) scorered at St, Prest, in Kent, on the uplands: oe igium, and under the eragy deposits of East Anglia — Miocene —*—— PLIoceNE. 2PREFACE. IE these eoliths are of human workmanship (there are laythorities of woight for and against) then the swords of ‘Abbe Breuil addeessed to\a friend are undoubtedly true: "Mon cher, cola viillt beaucoup THumanie ‘The bearing of these facts on. Divine Revelation has been set forth in the Principles of Christian Apologetics, chap gs “Hence i wil be Suficient to state the following (1) Te is an interesting discovery that the brain-capact ive races was, asa rule, higher than the average c.) for the modern male Buropean. Sie Arthur 1 slveannot detect any feature in the frontal, parietal, of occipital areas which clearly separates this brain cast from modern ones; nor fean T recognise any feature which has a distinct claim to be regarded as simian or primitive.” Pulling. aside Pithooanthropus as too problematieal, the characteristics of Rhodesian man seem to favour the theory of Evolution. ‘The appesrance and disappearance in_mid-Pleistocene times of Homo neanderthalensisis 8 fact on which no light can at present be thrown. {@) The numbers of years assigned by scientists for the Astgultyof Man vary So mc hat they must be regarded as little more than -guess-work.. Professor Penck’s 1,$00,000 years and Dr. Frederick Wright's 30,000 years Goth eminent men in geological science) eloquently attest the truth that data are wanting to form even an approx imate estimate. Sir Arthur Keith ({ollowing Professor Sollas) put doven in the first edition of his work 400,000 years for the Pleistocene period. In the second edition the estimate has-been reduced by half, and a further seduction is anticipated. From the standpoint of Divine Revelation it shotld be remembered that there was no intention on the part of Inspired Writers to give an accurate clironlogy of events from Adam to Abraham. (G) Hf the theory of Evolution and the consequent ‘grent antiquity of man be rigorously proved no conflict Ensues with Divine Revelation. ‘The Church has never condemned the hypothesis of the existence of pre- Adamites.* a ie obvions aly tenable tery oth ersten of pro Adams Sint {Stange enredefee Adare he et ve SSRN Avett Hs aetna. ema (rar) of {Sto nccrthans save bee fond fa Eon Assy Skanes 2 ESORES coop ystrony” aaapgesee.PRE i of ft importer ba gluten deslonnent of oganis surged Se Sr ea apt Fett hoa eat Genesis. ‘The final developments of an organie fat Cen, eh oe dacontn acne ns wher (tous bisreapacty capable oe) ae nd ue betes ee 1 en aoa taleze Baa deveopmet in te te Si ly dee ae Te et ee anathy of a mast ks Reeder re mare al ee ot erdonucn cote Beta et ae ae noted fom te ae Seat ee te et mechs cee ee Sara a a oe eeheie ahieN SS Gre | eNeeaine segs, xvi ACE ‘The miracles of the New Testamerit wore next attacked, The main indictment was that the Gospels, far from being contemporaneous records, belonged to the middle of the second century 4.5, This contention of the Tubingen school is now discredited, and Professor Harnack, leading iti of New Testament chronology, has reverted to the Catholic position that the Synoptic Gospels were writen between So and 70 4.D. In many other instances the supposed” conflict between Religion and Science. hes ‘anished, and the conclusion is borne in upon fairminds! Gees that to use the words of Profesor J: An | Thomson) “there is no fundamental antithesis between empirical description and transcendental. interpretation. | ‘The one view seeks for the empirical Lowest Common Denominator, the other secks for tho transcendent Greatest Common Measure.” Dean Inge (Oulspoket | says: Seeoiid Series, p: 98) writes: ‘The conflict religion ‘is not with’ Sciznce, but ‘materialise philosophy, built upon Seience,'a philosophy which tales | fan abstract field of enquiry ‘for the whole of reall), and ignores those spiritual values which are just | ‘much & part four Imowledge as the purely quaitiatve ily with which the natural Seiences at Alas! this admirable statement is not in harmony will | PREFACE colt ga sterancen. Weting the coneling sayin Solon Religion and Realty (Sheldon Prose Eoin, nents Die ge Tees Cina ot there ino dnger any cone aoreen Coen at ee ee ee ther oyee There ia very soe confor ead ga ee eee teat Copbmicusand Galeo" Gasp Been | a Grandson detent of Chest into Hades and ifs seat Sato Heaven aft nolessjand tig esusrt eet tae Feeoreson of Chit" inasisly ‘counted wih a Ee enn (hag Ananya aay Ste: police an eet con bey ames at Bne has been chosen as the abode of the Creator and the Salis beeray fetal (pe Gennes Sitcments ibe render rout conclude ths sgt tne Dea ee ea Setfions chat bm tin tan a ede coal epee ibe tat dor byetaetetal pause of cube Now tat uel Bef Thomson in i ect wok, See ond ahotag, eerie Jor tn flieve: sasexor {The data of Science cannot furnish a basis forthe trans seyter ioeoad atthe op Gat Taye coy mags atte coenguey te cven sowie in bat toy comet bets foendatoe bright ak by Sckece tet we ean pas tom Notre Natut's God. The pathway Wasa Se Refigious experiences” Ths Sateen, based nthe gvincip of Inbmananesy comes cutoucly nou Flom oe le hes weiten impresely and beauty athe wonders ‘hich Sconce fevel.” in one place he fertnd thas tough Seenee we are ae aware of ep eligible cena en otdely fy on edvancing moverant Biche sharon poses if which thre © ee Ghee Re noteg The move alle Inout cerebral cree Murer mere tan five mes the popultion of te ert nd ery cal fa mgrocamn. When ell there anowder aborts, inhich there te plas extatons, flatons, bpd condenentions,fewsectalons, up Frain dooncbenig al rocating st great speed il eerh lo” ten yok nor nea wi one note, “We admire complex machine and honour Hei PREFACE, javentor; why not extend our admiration more ur honour reverently io ils je\he organism and our hon ree moh a Ber eiasae age ae : ahi ESEES—0.09 vd ye he ality of he tenant infrene uted th wi plot " ary APSektions 0 far fom manifesting fondant oad fectly val the wider our contemplation of Creation, the greater wi be our conception of God"—a truth which g, modern Fhdian pfosopher stresses by inviting. us ride of the gent T AM! paling from the grand organ Satin throggh ts countess reeds in endless hareony, phe pbtaton ef the Pencplen of Chri Apologeis! suggestion was made to me from & sissies quate that a sma book, student, and the name of the author is sufficient guaran of the excellence of the work. Tt scemed to me tl ‘of Secondary Schools, sooner or Tater to Ass iate with those who hold agno i, from the Catholic. point Wire ¢o think. that wh of primary import the Religious Instruetion i | entra 1 en a Becltsoe er +h af an inch in length, that cam duplicate i sl fo do he depth of a mile” (P- 34, ain dove tte eceeen hiding God a3. medium | se ebfee ‘of the present as well as of the dane ois thatthe Natural and Supe | ag fe om mane | igh treating expressly | ‘on Divine Revelation, would be acceptable. Means | the lectures of Pere Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.. deliveree in the Collegio Angelico at Rome were published in tv farge volumes. ‘They are intended for_the theolos r fiat 2 ‘esto of these lectures would (ander competent direction) cures _ bela help to University students and advanced. pup! Y Sich students are called uPOR is ill of 2 | ic ‘of view ist 19 Catholic senior students PREFACE is admirable as a practical guide to duty, there is need that greater attention should be given fo the philosophies, foundation upon ‘which Religion is based. Kenowlsdee ot Catholic Philosophy wil assuredly (under the inuctee of Divine grace) safeguard the student from the shock of scons able en and women, hoe ers on tatters religious are frankly negative. "Nowadays, the Value of Catholic Philosophy is widely apprecited ou the Church, "Alone hat the traditional teaching of the Schools withstood the tes of ages, and the repeated onset of atiacks led by adversaries both humerous ard cubte, is it not time tht these tredwures of philosophical wadom should be known and utilised more generally in the household of the Faith? T have ventured to rearrange the matter of Pare GarrigouLagrange’s lectures to mett this heed, and hope that the section which T entitle. First Principles will be thoroughly asinilated., Words writen alewhere continue to have relevance’ If students are principles which are the support of Natural and Super- tural Religion shoud havetome share of thet ate re GarFigou-Lagrange has graciosly given, permis- sion for the Réswnd herein attempted, for which kindness Loder hina sincere tani “I vish. to thank also the" Right "Rev, Monsignor Canon Moyes forthe Summary. of "Catholic teaching’ on "Divine Faith Ghap. Rv, Art. V.. Necessrif, owing to. its aim, the Conpesun ‘shows omioont and adits. "Tae adeitions comprise chapter on the philosophy of MM. [Bergson—a system ‘of vivid interest fq tsel of wide acceptance, and. withal “admirably adapted’ for the application of the principles of Catholic Philosophy. 1 hhave endeavoured also to emphasise the objections against Divine Revelation, which proceed from English schools of thought, os o give the treatise more * actuality” forthe English-speaking student T avail myself of the opportunity afforded by. the publieation of the present Apologetic to ofler my sincere tanks o ees, inside and outside the Church, who, when the eaeier work appeared, wrote words which were not oni a'sign of thelr approval, but a strong encouragement to further ‘etort in the same direction,” ‘They ‘appreciatedPREFACE de of the conclusions of science for ily ioe poses. Tn truth the attitude of the Catholic apogee perp sied inthe well-known nes; BS ct noeegge ow from mage ero Peatead end ot eres ele ‘Pas eats og micas oor, Bx especially the use mac vate 1 Carnotse Aporocsztes.. . . CONTENTS 2 SECTION 1 First Principles 1 Covrwony or Arowocene Tescmic “3 TI Vauits, Owroiootean iv Tuanscesoberi, or Pavisky Novos > Pacis TV Payrastore Evotonow 3 V_ Acrosmci ax Ramonitian e Vi *Cuasnive Bvotinace™ br SECTION dea of Supernatural Revelation Vit Tora of Revetanow 195 VI Mysraiy axo Boos nr TK Tue Surewstrueat 6 section 11 Defence of Superuatural Revelation and its Necesiiy X Possimuiry ‘or se Revatarion oF tHe ‘Nevunst. Twos of Ratios 5 XI Possimure or sie Revetasiot or Sonex. Sarunie, Misrenies roa ml Srsnooer OF Obie ee wee ee 8 XU Posemmumy or tie Ravetasion or Sunsn: ‘avonie Diverse ost te Staorotrs or Acer sso Sune 16 XIII Sureamuny arp Nectasey of Raveuation. 344 SECTION 1V Credibity of the Mysteries of Faith XIV. Foon ato Cxuomusre Pa XV. CaspituineCONTENTS —Continued SECTION V Motives of Credibility XVI Morives Iegenxat avo EXTERNAL-INTRINSICW. pp RVI Monve Exrenvat-Extainsre: Miractes Monee Br mee Promise secriow vi Testimony of Christ ae i XK Tesrinosy oF Cust Recaspivc His Misstow ‘aso His DOCTRINE «- pies XXT Tesrmosy of Cunist Recarowa THe Insti SUTION OF THE CHURCH os ee see see oe 26 XXII Vatue oF me Testimony oF Cntist ous 28 SECTION VII Confirmation of the Testimony of Christ XXII Cosrnation row Ivrennat Crrrenia, axD ‘ROM AN EXTERSAL CRursRion INTRINSIC TO Reviotox: Sunumsiry oF DocTRING wa. + 289 XXIV. Coninuarion Prost 4 Secon Exrennat Cri ‘renion Inrmnisie ro RELIGION: Wowoan- ui Lire or mie Curent XXV_ Coxninatarion Tinoven Minactes XXVI_ Coxrimutiox Tunoueit Proriecy SECTION VIL Comparison of Christianity with Other Forms of Religion; Duty of Embracing it XAVIL Cina Coxrnasren win On Fors XXVIIL Dury or Accerrse moor? 3 me Cron SECTION T FIRST PRINCIPLESPRINCIPLES OF CATHOLIC APOLOGETICS CHAPTER 1 caTHoLic APovocerics “rie word’ Apologetic” is derived from the Greck “Grohoyia" which means“ defence.” Hence the expres: sion" Catholic Apologetics” implies. the defence of Gathotic belie “An_spologeticaleatise may confine fiself tothe setting forth ofthe rational grounds which are the bases of Chistanity-such as the witness of reason to the existence of God, io the endowments of man and to the felations betweek God ‘and than, concluding with @ genral defence of Divine Revelation. In the develop Front of such ah Apologetic an opportunity is given Thereby the assured tonelusions of the various sciences ‘Which bear upon the origin of man and upon the history Sr the earth which he inhabits receive especial attention. But an Apologetic which proposes for its specie object the defence of Revelation contines to male use of season, but ‘Feason sub directione fei es ite main instrument, "pre Supposes the truths of Natufal Religion alzeady estab: fihbd, and. proceeds. to the. detailed and. philosophical ‘exposition of the nature, possiblity, necessity and cognos- Eiblity of Divine Revelation as set forth by the Catholic Ghureh * pillar and ground and truth.” Thus the formal Objest or aim of a tentse on Catholic Apologetics is the Philosophical defence of Divine and Supernatural Revels~ Tron, andl isthe logical sequel to the Prineiples of Christian Apologetics. The seation of sch a tease fo the science Gt Theology may be briefly stated. ‘The subject mater Gf Theology-ring,. its formal object—is God as. super- fatarelly fevealod and asthe teatse in auetion defends by reason the nature, possibility, necessity and cosnosci biluy of the supernatural knowledge thus revealed, itis 354 PRINCIPLES OF CATHOLIC APOLOGE Tics | ¢ «Catholic Apologetics” form a fundamental ang ince porn ee whole Ride Pent ee Co eli een ‘petence of Divine Rovelation icy Catha Spsiegties ‘Fandaeatal Theoloes: ieee of Divino Rovelation~i egal Tee ifthe question be asked what are the theslogiat seeing ae ert inte following chart:— ea oe re tit fee: — Autry of Goneral Caines Rate ot fhe omen Ponti, ~n{ = they of the Fathers. Toplgi robattes {Rotor of Tesla fen fapodsitio: Rencon. ste ca | Paly 8 i. From which divisions the conclusion is clear that Pui imental Thelogy fe scenes ("the knowledge of things rough tet Gauss") of wide extent, and one’ Which nal vated and accurate schola'ship. i Catble Apooget may be simply defined as i rational defence of Divine Revelation.” This defence i made by reason "under the direction of Divine Fait Not indeed that a Catholic Apologist.may use Faith fo enforce reason and reason #0 establish Faith, but he chooses under the direction of Faith the special rational Srguments put forward to defend Revelation, and deveions their probative force wholly by means of the light of reason. Regarding the necessity of such a treatise, asthe | fect of Revelation is not immediately evident to us, We | need the esiablishment ofits uths hecause of their intrit~ | sie value, and because of the momentous consequences [0° ting and arity "which follow therefrom. \ 1 division of the subject matter usually followed b Catholic Apologiats is as follows ae “SY” 7 1. ‘Theoretical Part (against Philosophical Rationalism) 8 Posse ot Ravel a " ‘omteity and noc © Cognosei * ¥ Revelation” and “Fai PRINCIPLES OF CATHOLIC APOLOGETICS 27 I. Positive Part (against Biblical Rationalism). (@ Historical testimony of Christ regarding His Divine mission and regarding the tnatiuion of the Church. (©) Confiematca ofthis testimony drawn from () Satlstaction of human aspirations afforded by the teaching of Divine Revelation: (2) Sublimity of the doctrine revealed. (3) Marvellous life of the Church. (0 Confcmation of this testimony by miracles and prophecy. (@ Compatiton of Christianity with Mosse and other religions. (© Gongeatent obligation of accepting Divine Reve ation: ; Enumeration of the chit divisions ofthis treatise shews ‘that Cathole Apologetics nota subject speiteally di tinct fom Theology. As Pére Gardell reminds us just as Metaphysics has ie epistemology (citeriology) whereby the jective character of knowledge is established, so ‘Theology has ‘ts supernatural epistemology, Apolo- (fc, demontrating” the truth of Divine Reveliin, garding Hs atitude fo other sciences, Apologetics pre- supposes the traths of Metaphysics, Natural Theology, Psychology, and Cosmology; the truth also of the history and exegeas of Holy Scripture—not of course as a Work divinely inspired, Inspiration of the Bible can be proved only by the dion of an niall autborign he foregoing division of the subject is suggested by the consitation de fide catholin of the: Vatiatt Counc In quoting the decisions of Councils we wish the student to understand that such quotations are given because they are authoritative declarations of Catholic detcine. Need fess to say that in a tretise, which appeals to. reason alone, eoneilise definitions (Hhough infailfbie from another >" guggests the division of the subject matter: 1. Possibility of Revelation and its con- groity (bs* 1607). 2. The: Council asserts the conos- Eibilty ofthe faci of Revelation, is cxedibility ofthe tories of Fath and the validity ofthe motives of erodibility "eters et Denner’ thetag. PRINCIPLES OF CATHOLIC APOLOGETICS SP Se Th ph ands revenue om of the sured (De 28i4, 2815), thus declaring the hen nee ae yelation to be proved {rom miracles ig sareecertain, Here isan instance of what is meant by torical eon ub dretione fide. ‘The onder of hs ibe that suggested by the Vatican Council is, Ibe hecabitgy and existence of Revelation