Catholicism For Dummies. Rev. Kenneth Brighenti

      © John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

      FIGURE 4-1: The writers of the four Gospels are often depicted like this from Revelation (Apocalypse) 4:7.

      How the Gospels came to be

      Were Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John standing on the sidelines taking notes as Jesus preached or performed miracles? No. In fact, only two of the four, Matthew and John, were actual Apostles and eyewitnesses, so you can’t think of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John as, say, reporters covering a story for the media.

Before the Gospels were written, the words and deeds of Jesus were told by word of mouth. In other words, the Gospels were preached before they were written. The spoken word preceded the written word. And after it was written, because the papyrus on which the scrolls were written was so fragile, expensive, and rare, most people didn’t read the Word but heard it as it was spoken in church during Mass. The Church calls it the three-level development of the Gospel: first, the actual sayings and teachings of Christ; second, the oral tradition where the Apostles preached to the people what they saw and heard; and third, the writing by the sacred authors to ensure that the message wouldn’t be altered.

      Comparing Gospels

      The Catholic Church regards the entire Bible as the inspired and inerrant (error-free) Word of God, so the Gospels in particular are crucial because they accurately relate what Jesus said and did while on earth. As we discuss in Chapter 2, the Catholic Church believes that the Bible is sacred literature, but as literature, some parts of it should be interpreted literally, and other parts are intended to be read figuratively. The Gospels are among the books that are primarily interpreted literally insofar as what Jesus said and did.

      Matthew and Luke

      Matthew opens his Gospel with a long genealogy of Jesus, beginning with Abraham and tracing it all the way down to Joseph, the husband of Mary, “of whom Jesus was born, who is called the Messiah.”

      Matthew was addressing potential converts from Judaism. A Jewish audience was probably interested in hearing this family tree because the Hebrew people are often called the Children of Abraham. That’s why Matthew began with Abraham and connected him to Jesus to open his Gospel.

      THE GOSPEL TRUTH, LITERALLY

      The Catholic Church firmly believes that every word of the Bible has a literal meaning in both the original language of the sacred author and in the language of the translator. However, the Church does not believe that every word is meant to have a literal interpretation. What’s the difference?

      Consider an example: Jesus says in John 15:5, “I am the vine, you are the branches.” The literal meanings of the words vine and branches (ampelos and klemata in Greek) are essential to understanding the passage. You know what a vine is and the difference between a vine and a branch — you know the literal meaning of each word. But the intention of the original author (John) as well as the speaker (Jesus) in this passage requires you to go a step further. You are not a plant, so this passage must be a figure of speech.

      Sometimes, Bible passages require a literal interpretation. For instance, in John 1:63, “his name is John” literally means that the son of Elizabeth and Zecchariah is called John (who would later be known as John the Baptist). But the Bible is also rich with metaphors and other figures of speech, such as Jesus calling Himself the Lamb of God (see John 1:29). Obviously, Jesus is not literally a four-legged sheep, but you still need to know what a lamb is in order to appreciate the analogy.

      How do you know which biblical passages to interpret literally and which to approach as figures of speech? Well, we know of an ancient axiom regarding Scripture: “If you take a text out of context, you get a pretext.” In other words, the meaning of the word, phrase, or passage can be properly interpreted by the context. This means considering the previous and following words and phrases, verses, and chapters.

Luke offers a similar genealogy to Matthew’s, but he works backward from Jesus to Adam, 20 generations before Abraham. Luke was a Gentile physician, and his audience was Gentile, not Jewish. Neither Matthew nor Luke used editorial fiction, but each carefully selected what to say to his respective audience through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. A Gentile audience wasn’t as concerned with a connection to Abraham as a Jewish audience. Gentiles were interested in a connection between Jesus and the first man, Adam, because Gentiles were big into Greek philosophy. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle — just to mention a few famous Greek thinkers who lived before Christ — philosophized about the origins of humanity, and thus, making a link between Jesus and the first man would have greatly appealed to them. In the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew mentions that prior to giving the sermon, Jesus “went up on the mountain” (Matthew 5:1), but Luke describes Jesus giving a Sermon on the Plain, “a level place” (Luke 6:17). Both men quote the teachings from these sermons, called the Beatitudes. See the following version from Matthew 5:

      Now contrast the Sermon on the Mount in the Gospel of Matthew with Luke 6:17–26, which follows: