predicts accurately a political event, are not prophecies because they are deductions made from natural causes which may be known to man.

Like miracles, prophecies properly so called, and duly fulfilled is evidence of Divine intervention. The possibility of prophecy depends upon two truths: (1) God knows future events; (2) God can reveal them. It is obvious that God knows the future events whose existence will be determined by necessary causes, since God is the author of these causes. It is also true that God knows future events which are dependent on the free-will of man. To deny this would be equivalent to the denial of the omniscience, providence and immutability of God. Since God alone knows all future events there is no conceivable reason why He should not be able to reveal certain of these events before they happen if He chooses to do Neither is there any reason forbidding Him to use human beings as instruments to make known the future in order to confirm the doctrine they may be teaching in His name. In fact, a prophecy fulfilled is a positive, irresistable proof of the divinity of the revelation in support of which it had been given and actually verified. It is a true miracle and, therefore, it possesses the same demonstrative force that is rightly attributed to a miracle. A true prophecy is possible only to God since He alone knows the future. It is, consequently, a kind of divine revelation and, as God cannot confirm error by any of His acts, it follows that a doctrine, of which prophecy forms an integral part, must come also from God.

so.

Chapter V

HISTORICAL VALUE OF THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENT

We have studied Revelation, its possibility, its necessity and the signs by which it can be recognized. Because Divine Revelation is necessary to man if he is to attain the supernatural destiny planned for him by Almighty God, we may say that a Revelation by God has been made and the only thing that remains for us to do is to find out where it is and what He has revealed. In other words, we are seeking the revealed religion. Of the many religions in the world today which claim to be able to lead men to God, there is only one which can stand a scientific scrutiny; viz., the Catholic Church. She claims to be in full possession of the revealed truth and offers as proof that her mission is from heaven the facts contained in Tradition and Holy Scripture. However, before studying these marvelous facts Apologetics first examines the value of the historical sources which contain them; that is, Tradition and Holy Scripture.

Tradition, as an historical source, is the transmission of a fact by word of mouth from person to person. Every event which interests a people passes from the first witnesses of it to the rest of the nation and is preserved among them for a long time especially if the tradition is put in writing or inscribed on monuments. Every society which exists or has existed, religious as well as civil, has had its own traditions. Of all these societies, none is comparable to the Catholic Church when we consider its duration, its universality, its unity, the powerful influence exercised by it and the difficulties it sustained in order to preserve its independence. Like all these societies, the Church has

her traditions and she is her own witness to them. If we want to know something of the history of the Greeks we study Greek literature, Greek monuments, histories of Greece written by Greeks or authorities on Greece because we expect them to be the best sources of their own traditions and history. We would act in a similar manner if we should desire to study the history of Rome, of Germany, of France, of Russia, of England, of our own country, and of any other nation. So too, if we really wish to know the facts which constitute her history we must examine the traditions that the Church has preserved. These facts, mixed with her doctrines, are contained in her books: books of religious instruction, of religious legislation, of liturgy, of piety, of history; in monuments, statues, paintings and inscriptions; in her institutions, such as the Papacy, the College of Cardinals, the ecclesiastical hierarchy, her universities, religious orders, etc.; in the cus toms of those who have practiced the faith of the Church. All these sources reveal to us the traditions of the Catholic Church for about twenty hundred years. A very great number of them are also contained in the annals of societies not Catholic.

The principal object of the testimony of the Church is to bear witness to the fact of Divine Revelations in addition to miracles and prophecies, which are the most certain indications of this Revelation. Although, in its present form, the Church dates only from the time of Jesus Christ she teaches and has always taught that the religion she professes is the completion of the primitive religion and of the Mosaic religion. Thus, she unites her own traditions to those of the Patriarchs and of Judaism.

Once one admits the divinity of the Church he should recognize that the traditional evidences of the Church have a divine value. Even if one considers the testimony only from a natural point of view, as we are doing now, it possesses the highest historical value one could possibly desire.

The

facts to which she bears witness are external, easily examined, and of capital importance since they concern the destiny of man. The witnesses of these facts are innumerable and well known for their knowl edge and virtue. If these facts were false, and the witnesses of them liars, the enemies of the Church would have long ago exposed the imposture. Also, it is impossible to conceive of men like Clement of Alexandria, Justin the philosopher, Cyprian and Augustine, Hilary and Athanasius, Gregory and Chrysostom, Anselm and Thomas Aquinas, Newman and Mercier, Leo XIII and Pius XI, and a multitude of other brilliant, saintly men being so simple, so indifferent, as not to study the motives for their belief; so unintelligent as not to recognize fiction, myths, etc. for what they are; and so foolish as to dedicate their lives to propagate a lie, suffer humiliation and insult, and even lose their lives in its defense.

Although at the present part of our course we shall spend most of our time studying Holy Scripture, it is necessary to stress the point that not all of Revelation is contained in the Bible. We shall prove later, contrary to Protestant teaching, that the Bible does not contain all revealed truth. The biblical writings are distinguished from traditional writings in this, which will also be proved later, that the Bible was written under the inspiration of God whereas the writings preserving Traditions were not. In other words, the Bible is the word of God written by men as instruments used by Almighty God.

We shall now consider the conditions that an historical document be authoritative. An historical account is authoritative when the facts it relates are true. They may be considered true when the historian possesses the required knowledge and sincerity. In other words, when the historian has not been deceived and does not wish to deceive. We can be reasonably certain he has not been deceived when

he is an eyewitness of the events he relates or when he has obtained his information from reliable sources. We can also be reasonably certain he does not wish to deceive his readers when it is not to his advantage to lie and especially when he suffers some disadvantage, as for example, persecution, humiliation, even loss of life and property in defense of his veracity.

To know that a certain author is an honest historian is not sufficient proof that a book atHence, it is very tributed to him is really his. important to assure ourselves of its authenticity and integrity. That is, whether the book attributed to him is really his and whether it is as he wrote

it.

The authenticity of a book may be established Exby extrinsic proofs and by intrinsic proofs. trinsic proofs are those drawn from sources outside A constant tradition which atthe book itself. tributes the book to a certain person, the testimony of contemporary writers and others who quote passages from the book and attribute them to him, are examples of extrinsic proofs. Intrinsic proofs are Could the drawn from the study of the work itself. facts related have been known to the reputed author? . These are some of the things one Is the style his? Intrinsic looks for when seeking intrinsic evidence. evidence is only a probable argument. Without extrinsic proof we could never be positive a certain book is being attributed to the proper author.

The integrity of a book consists in its havThere ing been preserved as the author wrote it. are two kinds of integrity; absolute, which admits of no change whatever no matter how insignificant; substantial integrity, which preserves the author's work without any essential change having been made. For example, in our literature classes we read the The plays of Shakespeare but not as he wrote them. spelling, for one thing, has been changed to suit modern usage. Evidently, as all critics agree,