so to recap: the more modern definition
1) $X$ is a Baire space iff every countable union of closed nowhere dense sets has empty interior.
Equivalent by taking complements (note that a set $A$ is nowhere dense iff its complement $X \setminus A$ contains an open dense subset) to my favourite formulation, which seems to be more commonly used among topologists:
1') $X$ is a Baire space iff every countable intersection of open and dense subsets is dense.
(note that in any space a finite intersection of open and dense subsets is open and dense, so the countable intersection is the first "interesting" question, in a way.)
And what they call the historical definition:
2) Every non-empty open subset of $X$ is of second category.
The article call it historical because it uses a notion "category" of a subset (a subset is either first category or second category, and not both, by definition), which has fallen in some disuse. Nowhere dense sets and meagre sets (the countable unions of nowhere dense subsets) are still normal usage. Note that a first category subset is now called meagre, and the notion of "second category" is not used as much (but still occurs), so it's good to know it. But definition 1) and 2) are easily proved to be equivalent, so they give rise to the same spaces being called Baire. So we have a trivial reformulation of the "classical" definition 2 as:
2') Every non-empty open subset of $X$ is non-meagre.
Or, stated more "positively"
2'') Every meagre set has empty interior.
(otherwise the non-empty interior is a subset of a meagre set, and thus meagre etc.)
which brings us back to definition 1) again.
It's just that the Wikipedians do not like the category terminology (because it might confuse people with category theory as a branch of maths) and so choose to reformulate everything using meagre and non-meagre instead.
Let me give you some extra tools to use, here. Some details are left to you to verify.
Definitions: A subset $A$ of a topological space $X$ is said to be nowhere-dense (in $X$) if for every non-empty open subset $U$ of $X$ there is a non-empty open subset $V$ of $X$ such that $V\subseteq U$ and $V\cap A=\emptyset$. (You should be able to prove that this is equivalent to your definition of nowhere-dense.) A topological space $X$ is said to be a Baire space if every countable union of nowhere-dense subsets of $X$ has empty interior.
Lemma 1: $X$ is a Baire space if and only if every countable intersection of open dense subsets of $X$ is dense in $X$.
Proof: Suppose $X$ is a Baire space and $\{G_n\}_{n=1}^\infty$ is a countable collection of open dense sets, so each $X\setminus G_n$ is nowhere dense. (Why?) Thus, for any non-empty open set $U$, we have that $$U\nsubseteq\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty (X\setminus G_n)=X\setminus\left(\bigcap_{n=1}^\infty G_n\right),$$ so there must be some point of $\bigcap_{n=1}^\infty G_n$ in $U$. Thus, $\bigcap_{n=1}^\infty G_n$ is dense.
Suppose countable unions of open dense sets are dense, and let $A_n$ be nowhere dense for each $n$, so each $X\setminus\overline{A_n}$ is open and dense. (Why?) Take any non-empty open $U$, so that $U$ intersects $$\bigcap_{n=1}^\infty\left(X\setminus\overline{A_n}\right)=X\setminus\left(\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty\overline{A_n}\right)\subseteq X\setminus\left(\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty A_n\right),$$ so cannot be a subset of $\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty A_n$. Thus, $X$ is a Baire space. $\Box$
Lemma 2: $X$ is a Baire space if and only if every countable union of closed nowhere-dense subsets of $X$ has empty interior. (I leave the proof to you. Lemma 1 and DeMorgan's Laws should help.)
Lemma 3: If $X$ is a non-empty complete metric space with metric $d:X\times X\to\Bbb R$, and $F$ is a non-empty closed subset of $X$, then $F$ is a complete metric space with metric $d_F$ defined by $d_F(x,y)=d(x,y)$ for all $x,y\in F$. (I leave the proof of this to you.)
Proposition: Assuming BCT holds, every non-empty complete metric space is a Baire space.
Proof: Suppose by way of contradiction that $X$ is a non-empty complete metric space, but isn't a Baire space. Then by Lemma 2, there is some countable collection $\{A_n\}_{n=1}^\infty$ of closed nowhere-dense subsets of $X$ whose union doesn't have empty interior--meaning there is some non-empty open $U$ such that $$U\subseteq\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty A_n.$$ Now, in particular, we can take a non-empty open set $V$ such that $\overline V\subseteq U.$ (Why?) Then $$\overline V\subseteq\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty A_n,$$ so $$\overline V=\overline V\cap\left(\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty A_n\right)=\bigcup_{n=1}^\infty(\overline V\cap A_n).\tag{#}$$ But $\overline V$ is a non-empty complete metric space by Lemma 3, so by BCT, $\overline V$ is not a countable union of closed nowhere-dense subsets of $\overline V$. But each $\overline V\cap A_n$ is closed and nowhere-dense in $\overline V$ (why?), so $(\#)$ gives us the desired contradiction. $\Box$
Best Answer
Perhaps, an easier proof is consider the family $\{A_n\cap B\}_{n\in\omega}$. The sets $A_n\cap B$ are closed, (without lost of generality we can assume that each $A_n$ is closed) with empty interior (in the subespace topology) and $B=\bigcup_{n\in\omega}B\cap A_n$.