Historical method is the disciplined evaluation of sources, context, chronology, testimony, and material evidence in order to make truthful claims about the past.
Evidence and judgment
Historical claims are assessed through the provenance, date, genre, independence, competence, and possible bias of sources together with archaeological, textual, and institutional evidence. Nearness to an event is important but does not dispense with critical comparison.[1]
A Catholic historian neither falsifies evidence to protect a pious story nor assumes philosophical naturalism that rules out divine action before examining the claim. Faith and intellectual honesty require accurate distinctions among established fact, reasonable inference, disputed reconstruction, and legend.
History and ecclesiastical judgment
Canonizations, approved cult, doctrinal definitions, and official investigations are historical facts with precise ecclesiastical consequences. Their existence can be documented historically even when their theological meaning also depends on faith and Church authority.[2]
A label such as 'Historical account' identifies the evidence governing dates, institutions, biographies, and events. It does not imply religious neutrality, skepticism about miracles recognized by the Church, or a reduction of Catholic truth to sociology.
References
- 1.Divino afflante Spiritu — Pius XII on rigorous textual, linguistic, literary, and historical study in Catholic scholarship
- 2.Pontifical Biblical Commission documents — Official resources on historical and literary study within the faith of the Church