THE CONCEPTION OF OUR GOSPELS AS

SALVATION-HISTORY
DAVID MICHAEL STANLEY, S.J.
Jesuit Seminaryj Toronto

time now, it has been evident that in the domain of

Catholic biblical studies a new breeze has been blowing. "The
breeze blows wherever it pleases," St. John informs us; and the breeze,
which for well over a decade has begun to spring up to revivify Catholic
scholarly endeavor, has been felt in almost every branch of scriptural
research. Biblical inspiration and inerrancy,1 the Mosaic authorship of
the Pentateuch,2 the "prehistory" of the first eleven chapters of
Genesis,8 all these questions have been given quite new solutions.
Among the problems that have undergone a reorientation in NT
studies, that of the historical character of the Gospels4 has enjoyed
a certain pre-eminence. Catholic exegetes now appear to be permitted
to voice opinions upon this subject which fifty, even twenty-five,
years ago would have caused considerable concern, if not condemnation.
While the professional student of Scripture rejoices at the new
impetus thus given his work through the present-day liberal attitude

OR SOME

Among the recent studies on these subjects, the following are noteworthy: P. Synave
and P. Benoit, La prophitie (Somme th&ologique, ed. Revue des Jeunes; Paris, 1947); P.
Benoit, "L'inspiration," in Robert-Tricot, Initiation biblique (3rd ed.; Paris, 1954) pp.
6-45; idem, "Note compldmentaire sur 1'inspiration," Revue biblique 63 (1956) 416-22;
Karl Rahner, "tlber die Schriftinspiration," Zeitschrift fur katholische Theologie 78 (1956)
137-68; J. Coppens, "L'inspiration et Tinerrance biblique," Ephemerides theologicae
Lovanienses 33 (1957) 36-57; Johannes Schildenberger, Vom Geheimnis des Gotteswortes:
Einfuhrung in das Verstandnis der heiligen Schrift (Heidelberg, 1950).I have attempted
to review and evaluate the more significant contributions in a recent paper, "The Concept
of Biblical Inspiration," in Catholic Theological Society of America: Proceedings of the
Thirteenth Annual Convention {1958) (New York, 1959) pp. 65-89.
2
Bruce Vawter, A Path through Genesis (New York, 1956); R. de Vaux, La Genese (Bible
de Jerusalem; Paris, 1951).
8
Charles Hauret, Origines de Vunivers et de Vhomme d?aprfc la Bible (2nd ed.; Paris,
1950); R. A. F. MacKenzie, "Before Abraham Was . . . , " Catholic Biblical Quarterly 15
(1953) 131-40.
4
These developments have been recently reviewed in a most effective way by B.
Rigaux, "L'Historicite" de J&us devant l'exegese r&ente," Revue biblique 65 (1958) 481522.
561

562

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

of the magisterium,6 he is also conscious that, on the part of some

within the Church, there has already been a reaction to many of the
views he now feels free to express. He would be foolish indeed to ignore
the fact that a certain malaise has manifested itself on the part of
some theologians. They are not so sure as their biblical colleagues
that the effects of the twentieth-century scriptural renaissance can be
called progress. There are undoubtedly some who feel, even though
perhaps they do not express their fears too openly,6 that the old ghost
of Modernism, which Pius X was thought to have laid within the
household of the faith, has staged a reappearance, this time as a
poltergeist.
And nowhere, I believe, is this uneasiness so strongly felt as it is
with regard to the exegetes' new conception of what has always been
known as the "historicity" of the Gospels. Even some of those who
have come to recognize the validity of certain principles of FormCriticism, let us say, when they are applied to the OT books, can
scarcely repress a shudder when these same principles are allowed to
operate in the study of the Gospels. The truth is, of course, that if
these principles have real, universal validity, then it ought to be not
only possible but necessary to apply them (due regard being had for
the variety that obtains in biblical historical narrative) no less in the
New than in the Old Testament.
Let me say at once, on the other hand, that there is some reasonableness in this somewhat conservative reaction we are speaking of. It
is only too obvious, for instance, that between the antiquity and
folkloric character of many oral traditions incorporated in the OT and
the relatively short-lived and well-substantiated oral traditions forming the basis of the written Gospels, there is a vast and easily discernible difference. Anyone can surely see that there were no human eyewitnesses to the creation. By contrast, the Evangelists could have
found a not inconsiderable number of serious-minded, sincere men to
testify to the sayings and doings of Jesus of Nazareth.7
5

John L. McKenzie, "Problems of Hermeneutics in Roman Catholic Exegesis," Journal

of Biblical Literature 77 (1958) 197-204.
6
Ibid.j p. 198: "At the present writing,fifteenyears after the publication of the encyclical
[Divino afflante Sfriritu], opposition to creative biblical scholarship speaks only in whispers,
and it no longer inhibits original work which goes beyond commonly accepted theological
opinion."
7
That they actually did so has been convincingly demonstrated by C. H. Dodd, His-

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

563

We do not wish to minimize this attitude of reserve which, though

rarely vocal, is certainly present in some Catholic minds. It is based
really upon a fear that, because certain long-established props have
been pulled out from under the structure of Catholic apologetics by the
new methods, the whole edifice is in danger of collapse. I find no difficulty in granting that such a fear (undoubtedly unfounded, as I
believe) has been partly caused by a few of the Catholic exegetes
themselves. It is most regrettable that occasionally the Scripture
scholar has, in the exuberance of experiencing his new-found freedom,
displayed an entirely too negative attitude in approaching the question
of the Gospels' historical character. 8 1 do not mean merely that some
scholars have succumbed to the temptation to play the enfant terrible,
shocking the genuine, if ill-informed, piety of earnest Christians. I
refer rather to the iconoclastic tendency occasionally displayed by
biblical experts to devote themselves to the demolition of outmoded
solutions to scriptural difficulties without sufficiently calling attention
to the positive values found in the explanations which they seek to
substitute for them. Not all NT critics have shouldered their new
responsibility of developing a much-needed NT biblical theology.
FUNDAMENTALISM

Still, granting that the new Catholic approach to Gospel criticism

has not always been conducted with the delicacy and prudence it
requires,9 we must admit that the causes for the opposition to it cannot
tory and the Gospel (London, 1938), "The Historical Tradition in the New Testament,"
pp. 41-74.
8
The most balanced and penetrating criticism of such a regrettable outlook has been
made by a modern English Scripture scholar: Thomas Worden, "Is Scripture to Remain
the Cinderella of Catholic Theology?", Scripture 8 (1956) 2-12.
9
Prudence does not here mean a refuge in conservatism which borders upon obscurantism. The proper approach is well expressed by J. Cambier, "Historicity des eVangiles
synoptiques et Formgeschichte," La formation des evangiles (Bruges, 1957) p. 196: "L'importance, comme aussi la delicatesse du probleme litte"raire, obligent a une grande prudence. L'emploi judicieux et nuance* de cette me"thode litte*raire plus perfectionne'e dans
l'e*tude des eVangiles synoptiques oblige a constater certaines liberty que les e*vange"listes
ont prises avec l'histoire, au sens critique et moderne du mot. Nous pensons que, et pour
une intelligence plus nuances de Phistoire sacree, et pour pargner une crise inutile de
scepticisme a nos eleves de se*minaires et aux chre*tiens culture's, il faut s'essayer a leur faire
prendre une conscience plus nette du problfcme." More recently, this same Catholic attitude
has been expressed serenely by L. Alonso-Schokel, professor of the Pontifical Biblical Institute, in a trenchant review of an OT Introduction whose author, to say the least, has not

564

THEOLOGICAL STUDIED

be laid entirely at the exegetes' door. A factor which we cannot afford

to overlook is an attitude which, though characteristically Protestant,
has influenced the thinking of not a few Catholics: I mean, of course,
biblical fundamentalism. Fundamentalism's adherents have been
chiefly found amongst certain non-Catholic sects, for the very good
reason that Bible-reading has been more commonly practiced by them
than by Catholics. In addition, the fundamentalist viewpoint has
developed partly as a corollary of the Protestant dogma of "private
interpretation," partly as a repudiation by sincere (and too often
uneducated) Christians of that "historicism" to which nineteenthcentury Protestant rationalism lent its patronage. Historicism which,
applied to the Gospels, was known as the "quest of the historical
Jesus," never won any support in Catholic scholarship.10
Can we define fundamentalism?11 Essentially, it consists of a conscious and deliberate "literal-mindedness"12 in accepting the affirma"moved with the times"; cf. Biblica 39 (1958) 502: "Cogitare videtur Auctor progressum
solum vel praesertim in eo consistere debere, ut sententiae confirmentur, quae 'traditionales' ei vocare libet. Absque dubio persuasum habet, se sic fidelius Ecclesiae servire,
securiorem doctrinam docere. Sed sententiae rigidiores non semper sunt securiores. Discipuli secundum spiritum huius voluminis formati, ministerium sacerdotale aggredientur
muniti argumentis in illo exhibitis; ea fidelibus proponent, inter quos laici docti et intelligentes aderunt, qui cum audierint has sententias ob eiusmodi argumenta cum fide cohaerere, nonne et fides eorum in periculum adduci, vel saltern dubia in eis suscitari poterunt,
quae facile evitari potuissent?"I might point out here that the commentaries in the Bible
de Jerusalem series on St. Matthew and St. John,by P.Benoit and D.Mollat,are fine examples of modern Catholic work on the Gospels. To them apply most appositely the remarks
of my colleague, R. A. F. MacKenzie, in a review (THEOLOGICAL STUDIES 14 [1953] 465)
of several OT fascicules in this same collection: "These Catholic scholars, free of polemical
preoccupations, are going about their own proper work, in the calm assurance that they
are carrying on the centuries-old exegetical tradition of the Church, and that, in the
light of faith, they can safely and profitably use modern discoveries, to achieve that
fuller understanding of Sacred Scripture which the Holy See hopes and expects of them."
10
McKenzie, art. cit. (supra n. 5) p. 200: "The revolt against historicism and the demand for a biblical theology in the Protestant churches has had a parallel in the Catholic
Church. Here there was no revolt against historicism, because there never had been any
historicism against which to revolt. But there was a stout affirmation of the 'historical
character' of the Bible without any attention whatever to the study of literary forms.
The purely defensive and almost entirely controversial scholarship of the era of the siege
mentality had by 1943 proved its sterility beyond all question."
11
John L. McKenzie, The Two-Edged Sword (Milwaukee, 1956) p. 105, defines it as
"the crass literal interpretation of the Bible without regard for literary forms and literary
background."
12
1 say "conscious and deliberate," in order to exclude the simple faithful who, despite

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

565

tions of biblical writers without regard to the idiom, the context, or

the literary form through which they are expressed. Fundamentalism
is, in fact, a misguided determination to cling to a superficial meaning
of the Bible at all costseven the cost of real understanding. A form
of anti-intellectualism, it is quite out of harmony with that spirit of
religious inquiry (fides quaerens intellectum) which the Catholic Church
has always sought to encourage in the faithful, and which is the ideal
and the guiding principle of Catholic theology.
One pernicious effect of the fundamentalist mentality is to expose
the Scriptures to serious misunderstanding and even ridicule by
those who do not possess Christian faith. It can, moreover, create a
harmful dichotomy between faith and reason amongst Christians in
whom a well-developed literary or scientific education is combined
with religious instruction that is uncritical and intellectually deficient.13
Indeed, fundamentalism has been known to lead to a kind of "illuminism." I am thinking of the injudicious attack by an Italian priest,
Dolindo Ruotolo, made in 1941 upon Catholic biblical scholarship
through a pamphlet that had to be censured by the Biblical Commission.14 Ruotolo (or "Dain Cohenel," as he signed himself) advocated,
for a proper comprehension of the Bible, giving free rein to the Spirit,
"as though" (to cite the Church's condemnation of his ideas) "all
were in personal communion with the divine Wisdom and received
from the Holy Spirit special personal illumination... ."16
DIVINO AFFLANTE SPIRITU

In his Encyclical of 1943, Divino afflante Spiritu, Pope Pius XII

"unequivocally repudiated fundamentalism in Catholic exegesis."16
an unconsciously ingenuous attitude towards much in the Bible, do reach the real message
of the sacred text.
13
Worden, art. cit. (supra n. 8) p. 7.
14
The pamphlet, entitled "Un gravissimo pericolo per la Chiesa e per le anime. II sistema
critico-scientifico nello studio e nell'interpretazione della Sacra Scrittura, le sue deviazioni funeste e le sue aberrazioni," was roundly condemned in a letter to the Italian
hierarchy, August 20, 1941; A AS 33 (1941) 465-72. Its author was judged lacking in
"judgment, prudence, and reverence."
15
"... quasi che ognuno fosse in personale communione con la divina Sapienza, e
ricevesse dallo Spirito Santo speciali lumi individuali, come pretesero i primitivi protestanti."
16
McKenzie, art. cit. (supra n. 5) p. 198.

566

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

This statement of John L. McKenzie, S. J., requires some amplification,

since the fundamentalist attitude had, over a long period, become
fairly firmly entrenched in Catholic thinking, particularly as regards
the Gospels. It may, then, not be out of place here to recall briefly
those directives of Pius XII which can provide norms for the desirable,
indeed necessary, Catholic approach to Gospel studies.
Pius lays down two principles of paramount importance, which
run directly counter to the fundamentalist position: (1) "the supreme
law of interpretation is that by which we discover and determine what
the writer meant to say";17 (2) there are only very few texts of the
Bible "whose meaning has been declared by the Church's authority,
nor are those more numerous about which there is a unanimous opinion
of the holy Fathers."18 It may be helpful to examine the scope of these
two norms, which are applicable to the study of the Gospels, in greater
detail.
How does one, according to Pius XII, determine the sacred writer's
meaning? It is, in the first place, by discerning "the distinctive genius
of the sacred writer."19 The papal insistence upon the human character
of the Bible is noteworthy.20 The Encyclical makes it very clear that
17

A AS 35 (1943) 314: "Neque enim quemquam latet summam interpretandi normam

earn esse, qua perspiciatur et definiatur, quid scriptor dicere intenderit, ut egregie Sanctus
Athanasius monet: 'Hie, ut in omnibus aliis divinae Scripturae locis agere convenit,
observandum est, qua occasione locutus sit Apostolus, quae sit persona, quae res cuius
gratia scripsit, accurate et fideliter attendendum est, ne quis ilia ignorans, aut aliud
praeter ea intellegens, a vera aberret sentential "
18
Ibid., p. 319: "Mud enim imprimis ante oculoshabeant, innormis ac legibus ab Ecclesia
datis, defideimorumque doctrina agi; atque inter multa ilia, quae in Sacris Libris, legalibus, historicis, sapientialibus et propheticis proponuntur, pauca tantum esse quorum
sensus ab Ecclesiae auctoritate declaratus sit, neque plura ea esse, de quibus unanimis
Sanctorum Patrum sit sententia. Multa igitur remanent, eaque gravissima, in quibus
edisserendis et explanandis catholicorum interpretum acumen et ingenium libere exerceri
potest ac debet, ut ad omnium utilitatem, ad maiorem in dies doctrinae sacrae profectum,
et ad Ecclesiae defensionem et honorem ex suo quisque viritim conferat."
19
Ibid.yp, 314: "interpres igitur omni cum cura, ac nulla quam recentiores pervestigationes
attulerint luce neglecta, dispicere enitatur, quae propria fuerit sacri scriptoris indoles
ac vitae condicio, quaflorueritaetate, quos fontes adhibuerit sive scriptos sive ore traditos,
quibusque sit usus formis dicendi. Sic enim satius cognoscere poterit quis hagiographus
fuerit, quidque scribendo significare voluerit."
20
As the last citation makes clear. Also to be noted is Pius XII's repeated emphasis
upon the primacy of the sensus litteralis. The Encyclical Hutnani generis added a further important nuance (AAS 42 [1950] 569): "Immo perperam loquuntur de sensu humano
Sacrorum Librorum sub quo sensus eorum divinus lateat, quem solum infallibilem de-

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

567

belief in God's primary authorship of the sacred books must not be

misunderstood, so that, for example, we attempt implausible "harmonizations" of various Gospel accounts of the same episode, forcing
them to agree where they actually differ in detail.21 The proper method,
we are told, entails careful research into the inspired author's background and culture, as well as his manner of writing (sources used,
literary forms employed). We must not allow ourselves to overlook
the profound differences separating our modern, Occidental point of
view from that of the ancient Near East. "Frequently the literal
sense" of the biblical writer, the Pope warns, "is not so obvious" to us
today.22 Consequently, to grasp the author's meaning, the rules of
clarant." P. 570: "Ac praeterea sensus litteralis Sacrae Scripturae eiusque expositio a tot
tantisque exegetis, vigilante Ecclesia, elaborata, ex commenticiis eorum placitis, novae
cedere debent exegesi, quam symbolicam ac spiritualem appellant
" Gustave Lambert
remarked in his commentary on this Encyclical, "L'Encyclique 'Humani Generis' et Pcriture sainte," Nouvelle revue thiologique 73 (1951) 226: "L'Encyclique 'Divino afflante
Spiritu' avait cependant insiste* avec toute la clarte* desirable sur le seul sens qui se trouve
partout dans l'Ecriture et qui est le sens litteral. Ce sens litt&al, qui est aussi le sens thiologique des textes sacred, est celui qui a e*te* connu et voulu conjointement par l'auteur principal qui est Dieu et par la cause instrumentale (intelligente et libre) qui est l'hagiographe
humain
L'hagiographe, en ecrivant a la manierehumaine,aexprime* unepensee divine."
21
To quote but two examples: (1) While the Synoptics agree in placing Jesus' cleansing
of the Temple at the close of His public life, indeed in its last week (Mt 21:12-13; Mk 11:
15-17, where it occurs the day after Jesus' messianic entry; Lk 19:45-46), Jn 2:13-22
employs the episode as the inaugural act of Jesus' Jerusalem ministry. However one wishes
to explain these variations (e.g., the first time Jesus comes to Jerusalem in the Synoptic
Gospels, which depict His public life as a Galilean ministry chiefly, is in the last ten days
before His death; hence they must insert it where they do. Jn on the other hand, whose
Gospel might be considered as a commentary on Jesus' logion in Lk 13:34 par., may well be
following a chronological order), the postulating of two cleansings of the Temple is really
no explanation at all.(2) The two stories of Judas' end (Mt 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19) differ
on three important details: Did Judas commit suicide (Mt) or die of some mysterious
accident or disease (Acts)? Did the Sanhedrin purchase the "potter's field" (Mt) or did
Judas himself buy it as a farm (Acts)? Whose blood led to the naming of the
area Haceldama, Jesus' (Mt) or Judas' (Acts)? It seems clear that two somewhat independent traditions of the Judas-story have been preserved in the NT; nor does the Vulgate's
ingenious harmonizing translation of Acts 1:18, "suspensus crepuit medius," resolve the
problem.
22
AAS 35 (1943) 314: "Quisnam autem sit litteralis sensus, in veterum Orientalium
auctorum verbis et scriptis saepenumero non ita in aperto est, ut apud nostrae aetatis
scriptores"an admirable example of papal understatement. Mt 23:9 is a good illustration of what the Pope means: "And do not call anyone on earth your father. Only one is
your Father, and He is in heaven." This text, which makes many a non-Catholic scrupulous about calling a priest "Father," is probably a warning to the disciples not to imitate

568

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

grammar and philology are not always sufficient. We must invoke the
aid of history, archeology, ethnology,23 and even psychology.24 Most
important of all, we must study the types of literature which have
survived in Near Eastern literary remains of all kinds, in order to
master the modes of expression through which the sacred writers set
down "what they had in mind."26
As regards the variety of historical writing to be found in the Bible,
the interpreter must constantly bear in mind "the special purpose, the
religious purpose, of biblical history."26 We shall return to a consideration of this remark when we discuss the special character of the Gospels
as salvation-history.
Speaking more generally of the great richness of biblical literary
forms, Pius XII states that "the sacred books need not exclude any of
the ancient Near Eastern forms of expression in human language, provided they are compatible with the divine sanctity and veracity."27
the scribes and Pharisees, who delighted in assuming high-sounding titles, assimilating
themselves to "the Fathers," i.e., the patriarchs and other famous Jewish forbears.
23
A AS 35 (1943) 314: "Nam quid illi verbis significare voluerint, non solis grammaticae,
vel philologiae legibus, nee solo sermonis contextu determinatur; omnino oportet mente
quasi redeat interpres ad remota ilia Orientis saecula, ut subsidiis historiae, archaeologiae,
ethnologiae aliarumque disciplinarum rite adiutus, discernat atque perspiciat, quaenam
litteraria, ut aiunt, genera vetustae illius aetatis scriptores adhibere voluerint, ac reapse
adhibuerint."
24
A fine example of attention to the psychological differences between the Western and
the Semitic mentality may be found in Celestin Charlier, "M&hode historique et lecture
spirituelle des tortures," Bible et vie chrStienne 18 (1957) 7-26.
25
A AS 35 (1943) 315: "Veteres enim Orientales, ut quod in mente haberent exprimerent, non semper iisdem formis iisdemque dicendi modis utebantur, quibus nos hodie, sed
illis potius, qui apud suorum temporum et locorum homines usu erant recepti. Hi quinam
fuerint, exegeta non quasi in antecessum statuere potest, sed accurata tantummodo antiquarum Orientis litterarum pervestigatione. Haec porro, postremis hisce decenniis maiore,
quam antea, cura et diligentia peracta, clarius manifestavit, quaenam dicendi formae
antiquis illis temporibus adhibitae sint, sive in rebus poetice describendis, sive in vitae
normis et legibus proponendis, sive denique in enarrandis historiae factis atque eventibus."
26
Ibid., p. 315: "Haec eadem pervestigatio id quoque iam lucide comprobavit, israeliticum populum inter ceteras Orientis veteres nationes in historia rite scribenda, tarn ob
antiquitatem, quam ob fidelem rerum gestarum relationem singulariter praestitisse;
quod quidem ex divinae inspirationis charismate atque ex peculiari historiae biblicae fine,
qui ad religionem pertinet, profecto eruitur."
27
Ibid., p. 315: "A Libris enim Sacris nulla aliena est illarum loquendi rationum,
quibus apud veteres gentes, praesertim apud Orientales, humanus sermo ad sententiam
exprimendam uti solebat, ea tamen condicione, ut adhibitum dicendi genus Dei sanctitati
et veritati haudquaquam repugnet
"

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

569

Thus that ingenuous apriorism habitually found in the fundamentalist

interpretation of the Bible is effectively ruled out. The exegete "must
ask himself how far this form of expression or literary genre employed
by the sacred writer may contribute to the true and genuine interpretation."28
The second basic principle of Catholic hermeneutics, viz., that only
a tiny sector of the many affirmations in the Bible has received any
authoritative interpretation, has been called "perhaps the most important statement of the encyclical."29 The Pope asserts that the Catholic
exegete must be given full liberty in his search for solutions to "many
important questions"30 which admit free discussion within the limits of
orthodoxy. Not infrequently we meet the tendency on the part of
some Catholics to cling doggedly to what they consider to be the
"traditional" explanation of a scriptural passage.31 They sincerely
feel that in this way they are being most orthodox, when in point of
fact there is no such tradition, I mean, theologically significant
tradition, existing.32
28
Ibid., p. 316: "Quapropter catholicus exegeta, ut hodiernis rei biblicae necessitatibus
rite satisfaciat, in exponenda Scriptura Sacra, in eademque ab omni errore immuni ostendenda et comprobanda, eo quoque prudenter subsidio utatur, ut perquirat quid dicendi
forma seu litterarum genus, ab hagiographo adhibitum, ad veram et genuinam conferat
interpretationem; ac sibi persuadeat hanc officii sui partem sine magno catholicae exegeseos
detrimento neglegi non posse."
29
McKenzie, art. cit. (supra n. 5) p. 198.
30
AAS 35 (1943) 319: "Hac tamen in rerum condicione catholicus interpres . . . neutiquam retineri debet, quominus difficiles quaestiones, hucusque nondum enodatas, iterum
atque iterum aggrediatur, non modo ut, quae ab adversariis opponantur, propulset, sed ut
solidam etiam explicationem reperire enitatur, quae et cum Ecclesiae doctrina, cum iisque
nominatim, quae de Sacra Scriptura ab omni errore immuni tradita sunt, fideliter concordet, et certis quoque profanarum disciplinarum conclusionibus debito modo satisfaciat."
31
If I may be forgiven a reference to a personal experience, I should like to cite the
official summary of a discussion following a paper in the introduction to which I attempted
to show that the disciples had no clear realization of Christ's divinity until after they received the revelation through the gift of the Holy Spirit. "To many, even of those present,
the possibility that the apostles did not realize the divinity of Christ during His public
life came as a novelty and a surprise. Concern was voiced that students might be led to
conclude from this that Christ did not reveal His divinity at all. One group asked about the
theological certitude of Father's position and wondered what theological note would be
assigned to it. Some felt that more unanimous concurrence and greater certitude on the
theological level would be necessary before such a position could be taught in class"; Society of Catholic College Teachers of Sacred Doctrine: Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Convention {1958) (Notre Dame, Ind.) p. 36.
32
To cite one example, Stanislas Lyonnet has pointed out in his interpretation of the

570

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

Another point clarified by this papal directive is the concept of

"private interpretation." Provided it does not conflict with Catholic
doctrine, any explanation of the great bulk of scriptural texts is as
good or bad as the reasons given for it, and this holds good equally for
the majority of the patristic opinions or those given by theologians,
however ancient, as for the suggestions of modern exegetes. Indeed,
today's biblical scholar may quite conceivably provide a far more
satisfactory explanation of a scriptural difficulty than his predecessors.33 Moreover, he is, through this Encyclical, invited to attempt to
do so; nor is the term "new" to be used by those who differ as though
it were a stigma.34
With the insight provided by these hermeneutical norms, we must
now examine what is meant by the historical character of our Gospels.
HISTORICAL CHARACTER OF THE GOSPEL NARRATIVES

The modern concept of history goes back ultimately to the Greeks,36

who classed it among the arts under the patronage of the muse Clio. In
our day, inasmuch as it is the product of the historical method, history
is classed as a social science. However, the writing of history remains
an art, involving, as it inevitably does, the selection and interpretation
and expression in some literary form of the "remembered past."36

Pentecostal glossolalia as ecstatic prayer, "De glossolalia Pentecostes eiusque significatione," Verbum domini 24 (1944) 65-75, that the rather common patristic opinion (viz.,
that the gift bestowed the power to speak foreign languages in a miraculous way) was
based upon the demonstrably erroneous view that the charism was given for preaching.
83
One recent and striking instance is the interpretation of Mt 1:18-22 by Xavier L&raDufour, "L'Annonce a Joseph," Melanges bibliques rSdigis en Vhonneur de Andre" Robe
(Paris, 1957) pp. 390-97. Another is Alberto Vaccari's brilliantly simple solution of the
Matthean divorce logia, "La clausola sul divorzio in Matteo 5,32; 19,9," Rivista biblica
3(1955)97-119.
84
A AS 35 (1943) 319: "Horum autem strenuorum in vinea Domini operariorum conatus
non solummodo aequo iustoque animo, sed summa etiam cum caritate iudicandos esse
ceteri omnes Ecclesiae filii meminerint; qui quidem ab illo haud satis prudenti studio
abhorrere debent, quo quidquid novum est, ob hoc ipsum censetur esse impugnandum,
aut in suspicionem adducendum."
85
Erich Dinkier, "Earliest Christianity," The Idea of History in the Ancient Near East
(New Haven-London, 1955) p. 172: "The concept of history has been given to us by Greek
science and to this very day is employed by us in a Greek sense. From Thucydides to
Toynbee the common and connecting assumption has been that history is a rational, intelligible continuity, an integrated nexus or concatenation, operating in a unified world,
capable of investigation and illumination by historical method."
88
McKenzie, op. cit. (supra n. 11) p. 60.

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

571

More basically, history in the modern sense is to be identified with the

ancient Greeks' view of it because the intelligibility sought by the
contemporary as by the classical historian is a human intelligibility.
Both share the conviction that there is a pattern discernible in the
events of the past which sprang ultimately from the mind of man, a
pattern, consequently, which is recoverable by the application of the
historical method (a process invented by the mind of man) and which
can be represented by the art of historical writing.
"Historical writing,,, says C. H. Dodd, "is not merely a record of
occurrences as such. It is, at least implicitly, a record of the interest
and meaning they bore for those who took part in them, or were
affected by them... ."37 And he concludes: "Thus the events which
make up history are relative to the human mind which is active in
those events."88 Dodd then defines history "as consisting of events
which are of the nature of occurrences plus meaning."89
If we accept Dodd's definition, it becomes clear that the task of
selecting and interpreting the facts to be chronicled is an essential
part of the historian's function. While the exercise of these two will
vary according as he writes cultural, political, or economic history, the
historian must choose and he must interpret. Assuming, for instance,
it were possible to film a battle completely, such a newsreel record
would not be history but only a source for history.
Selection and interpretation, of course, presuppose some criterion of
judgment. The very choice of sources will be governed by the type of
history to be written. The political historian will find much of his
data in government archives; the cultural historian discovers valuable
material in folklore, local customs, family traditions, even legends.40
87

Dodd, op. cit. (supra n. 7) pp. 26-27. M Ibid., p. 27. Ibid., p. 36.
Hippolyte Delehaye, Les iSgendes hagiographiques (3rd ed.; Brussels, 1927) p. 10:
"La le*gende est, primitivement, Phistoire qu'il faut lire le jour de la fete du saint, legenda."
It is the fashion, at least in clerical circles, to smile superiorly at the stories occasionally
found in the second nocturns of the Roman Breviary (e.g., the heroic fasts of the infant St.
Nicholas, or the marvelous prayer-feats of St. Patrick), and, indeed, in the future revision
of the divine office we can expect that many of these legenda will be excised. However, it
must be remembered that these stories constitute (and this not despite, but because of,
their incredible character) the essential proof of the people's belief in the sanctity of these
saints, and as such represent historical reality. Vox populi, vox Dei, in the age before official
canonization, was the principle which justified the cultus paid to the saints. These legendary tales are the popular expression of the people's belief in the heroic sanctity of these
heroes of God.
40

572

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

The historian's work will ultimately be judged by the correctness of

his interpretation of the evidence he has unearthed. In some instances
he will be led to highlight an event which in itself, or at the time of its
occurrence, may have been almost insignificant. Thus the historian
of the Counter Reformation will direct attention to the battle of
Pampeluna, a tiny incident in a series of border skirmishes, because
an impoverished Basque nobleman, Inigode Loyola, there received the
wound which led to his "conversion" and eventually to the founding
of the Society of Jesus.
But before he selects and interprets the events about which he
intends to write, the historian must satisfy himself as to their situation
in space and time. "When" and "where" are two of the historian's
most elementary queries. John L. McKenzie has called chronology
and geography "the eyes of history." "If," he adds, "the modern
historian cannot tell you when and where something happened, he
will not call it a historical event, although he does not thereby deny
that it happened."41 To anticipate our discussion of the historical
nature of the Gospels, we wish to state at once that the Evangelists
show a strongly marked tendency to dissociate most of the episodes
constituting Jesus' public life which they record, from both time and
place. While the significance of this phenomenon will appear later in
this essay, it must be noted here as one indication of the distance
which separates the Gospels from modern historical writing. The
Evangelists' lack of interest in the specific geographical or chronological settings of many of their narratives unquestionably sets a
limitation upon our attempts to prove these events "historical" in the
modern sense.42 Jesus' earthly life, to be sure, is located in Palestine;
His birth occurred "in diebus regis Herodis," his death "sub Pontio
Pilato"; the dates of both events are known only approximately. As
41

McKenzie, op. cit. (supra n. 11) p. 62.

Thus the "historicity" of the Gospel narratives is not as simple as some apologetics
manuals would lead us to think. The Evangelists' purpose was quite different from that of
the historian: their aim primarily was to testify to the divine-human fact of God's intervention in human history which brought man salvation in Jesus Christ. The means they
chose to express this vary from parables to eyewitness accounts; hence the supreme importance of careful attention to the subsidiary literary forms found in the Gospels. If our
apologetics is to be valid, we must make it clear that the Magi-story, for instance, is not
"historical" in the sense in which the narrative of the crucifixion may be called "historical."
42

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

573

for His public ministry, the impression given by the Synoptic Gospels
is that it lasted about six months.
What, then, is the biblical conception of history, and how do our
Gospels differ from "history" in the modern acceptation of the word?
The biblical notion of history rests upon the belief that God has, in the
past, revealed Himself in a special way within the cadre of human
affairs.43 Through specific events, personalities, and human utterances,
God has intervened in the world of man. From this point of view, it is
clear that the intelligibility to be seen in the biblical narratives is
essentially that of a divine, not a human, pattern.44 It is best described
as "a Mystery/' in the Pauline45 (and Johannine46) sense, viz., as
God's revelation, in time, to men of His eternal plan for the world's
salvation. This Mystery was disclosed to mankind in two stages: one
incomplete and rudimentary to God's chosen people in the OT; the second, complete and definitive through His only Son, Jesus Christ, to
the Church of the NT. This genre of history, which we call salvationhistory or Heilsgeschichte, is the story of God's self-revelation to us;
and its aim is obviously very different from that modern scientific
history which is written without reference to the divine point of
view.
Here, in fact, we have touched upon one of the profound differences
between the Weltanschauung of modern man, the product of a dis43

Dodd, op. cit. (supra n. 7) p. 30: "This is in fact the assertion which Christianity
makes. It takes the series of events recorded or reflected in the Bible, from the call of
Abraham to the emergence of the Church, and declares that in this series the ultimate
reality of all history, which is the purpose of God, isfinallyrevealed, because the series is
itself controlled by the supreme event of allthe life, death and resurrection of Jesus
Christ."Cf. also Jean Danielou's recension of Herbert Butterfield's Christianity and History in Downside Review 68 (1950) 182-90.
44
It is this viewpoint which distinguishes all biblical history from the profane, or socalled scientific, history and indeed constitutes its superiority vis-a-vis "history" as we
understand it today. This is what Pius XII has pointed out so masterfully in the passage
of Divino afflante Spiritu cited in n. 26.
46
That is, the divine plan of salvation as revealed in the historical process which Paul
and other sacred writers call "the last times": cf. Rom 16:25; Col 1:26-27; Eph 3:8-13,
etc.
46
L. Bouyer, Le quatrieme ivangile (2nd ed.; Tournai-Paris, 1955) p. 19: "Pour lui
[Jean], Vhistoire est un mystdre et la raconter c*est nicessairement exposer en mime temps ce
mystire . . . le dfroulement de Phistoire humaine nous reVele le geste de la main divine qui
Paccompagne et le produit."

574

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

tinctively Greek culture, and the ancient Semitic mentality. Where we

moderns habitually discuss the meaning of happenings in terms of
secondary or finite causality, the Semitic genius interested itself
principally in God, the First Cause of all things. The attitude may
strike us as somewhat naive. How many priests, for instance, after
smiling indulgently at the explanation, offered by Ps 28, of the thunderstorm as the "Voice of Yahweh," turn to the newspaper or television
broadcast for an analysis of the weather? They find, we must admit,
that the meteorologists' pronunciamentos, couched in mythological
terms of "high- and low-pressure areas," are eminently more satisfying
than the insight of the Psalmist. Yet if, as the priest surely believes,
God causes the weather as He causes everything else, which explanation
touches the reality more profoundly? The example illustrates, at any
rate, the radical difference between the two viewpoints.47
The Evangelists propose, in their written accounts of Jesus' life upon
earth, to give their readers not merely an exposition based upon ocular
testimony. They aim at writing salvation-history. They offer an insight
into the meaning of the Mystery of Jesus Christ, i.e., they disclose to
the reader (in whom they presuppose Christian faith) something
which cannot be seen with the eye or perceived by the ear: the propter
nos et propter nostram salutem. And this, we should not forget, is
their primary intention. They claim to be not only eyewitnesses, but
witnesses to the Good News of salvation, since their message, like the
rest of the Bible, is addressed not simply to man's intellect for his
information, but to the whole man for his salvation.
The twofold nature of this apostolic testimony to Jesus Christ is
already consciously present in Peter's sermon to Cornelius' household
at Caesarea (Acts 10:34-43) .49 The apostolic preachers are, in the
47
Here one may well ask upon what grounds the validity of this suprahuman interpretation rests, if, as we have asserted, salvation-history is simply God's revelation of
Himself. Obviously it cannot be proven (or disproven) solely by the use of modern historical method. For while it is quite possible to demonstrate scientifically the "historical"
(in our modern sense) character of the Gospels, still the fact that God has spoken to men
through books written by men is an object of faith. Faith's guarantee that these writers
have infallibly expressed the revelation of Jesus Christ as incarnate Son and universal Redeemer is founded upon the supernatural fact of scriptural inspiration. Thus for an adequate comprehension of the Evangelists' testimony we must realize that it possesses not
merely the authority of reliable eyewitnesses, but the authority of God Himself.
48
A careful reading of 1 Jn 1:1-2 will reveal this viewpoint of the sacred writers.
49
Another striking example is to be found in Acts 2:22 ff.

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

575

first place, "witnesses of all He [Jesus] did in the country of the Jews
and Jerusalem" (v. 38), or "witnesses appointed beforehand by God,
who ate and drank with Him after His resurrection from death''
(v. 41). But they have the office of witnessing in a deeper, more important sense, because they have received a mandate from the risen
Lord "to preach to the people and to bear witness that He is the
Judge of living and dead, constituted by God and Father" (v. 42).
This same double purpose is manifest in our written Gospels. Mark,
whose account reflects, perhaps more strikingly than any other Gospel,
the influence of an observant eyewitness,50 has entitled his book "the
Good News of Jesus Christ, Son of God" (Mk 1:1).61 This intention
of providing us with a profounder realization of Christ's divinity, with
a grasp, that is, of a supernatural truth which does not fall under the
observation of the senses, implies something more than ocular testimony. Even Luke, whose prologue reveals a spirit not unacquainted
with "historical method," manifests to his aristocratic convert,
Theophilus, his aim of writing salvation-history. True, he has "investigated it all carefully from the beginning"; he has "decided to write
a connected account of it." But both the thorough examination of his
sources and the ordering of his narrative have been carried out "in
order that you may more clearly grasp the authentic character of the
oral instructions you have received" (Lk 1:4). The term we have
translated as "the authentic character" {asphaleia) meant "security"
in the contemporary commercial and military usage.52 Since he is
writing for a man who is already a believer, Luke aims at more than
establishing the historical character of the events and sayings
he records. He means to interpret their Christological significance, as
60

A study of this Gospel reveals that its author, while providing us with some of the
most vivid and detailed scenes of Jesus' public life, was innocent of anything like literary
art or a creative imagination. This strange combination of two apparently contradictory
qualities happily vouches for the authenticity of the early testimony of Papias that while
Mark was not a disciple of Jesus himself, he "wrote down accurately all that he remembered" of Peter's preaching. Thus the liveliness of the Marcan narratives, so rich in minute
detail, goes back to Peter's all-seeing eye.
61
We accept these words as authentically Marcan; cf. Vincent Taylor, The Gospel according to St. Mark (London, 1952) p. 152.
62
Cf., s.v., Moulton-Milligan, The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament Illustrated
from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources (London, 1949).

576

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

indeed the whole of his two-volume work reveals.53 The author of the
fourth Gospel declares, as he reaches the conclusion of his book, that
"these things have been written in order that you may persevere in
your belief54 that Jesus is the Messias, the son of God, and that persevering in this belief you may possess life in His Name" (Jn 20:31). John
has, in the scene he has just described between the doubter Thomas and
the risen Lord, brought out clearly the relative value of eyewitness
experience and the intelligibility apprehended by Christian faith. It is
obvious, from Christ's insistence that Thomas touch Him and so
have the reality of his Lord's risen Body impinge upon his senses, that
there can be no doubt of the necessity for eyewitness testimony. But
Jesus also points out to His disciple that belief implies much more
than mere seeing with bodily eyes: "is it because you have seen me
that you have believed?" Faith belongs to a higher order, providing the
superior perceptiveness expressed in Thomas' "My Lord and my God."
Accordingly, Jesus pronounces a new beatitude upon all future generations of Christians: "Happy those who, though they did not see,
yet become believers" (Jn 20:28-29). In the eyes of the Evangelist,
we of a later age are at no disadvantage in comparison with the disciples
who saw and heard Jesus: we possess the unum necessariutn, that perception of the salvific character of Jesus' earthly life through Christian
faith which, if it reposes upon the Apostles' eyewitness testimony,
grasps, quite as accurately as they, the supernatural meaning of that
life, which is beyond the reach of mere historical investigation.
How do the Evangelists convey this "fourth-dimensional" quality
of the salvation-history they write? We can only find the answer to
this question (1) by appreciating the very personal manner in which
each of the Evangelists has conceived the Good News of salvation in
Jesus Christ, (2) by investigating how he employs the various kinds of
materials that have gone into the making of his book, and finally (3)
by determining the manifold literary genera55 through which he has
expressed what he wishes to tell us.
68

Etienne Trocme*, Le "Livre des Actes" et Vhistoire (Paris, 1957) pp. 38-75.
Note the use here of the present subjunctive, which denotes not the beginning but the
continuance of an action.
55
To those who still need to be convinced that certain literary forms are actually to be
found in the Bible, we recommend Jean Levie, La Bible: Parole humaine et message de Dieu
(Paris-Louvain, 1958) pp. 241-75.
54

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

577

Before attempting to illustrate our answers to these three aspects

of the problem by concrete examples, we wish to make several observations of a general nature. First, it must be evident that to treat these
questions thoroughly demands exact and detailed literary and historical
analysis, which would be out of place here. Secondly, we must not allow
ourselves to forget that there is no rule-of-thumb solution to the
question of the Gospels' historicity: each narrative must be examined
for itself and for the problem it presents. Thirdly, if we are to avoid
the fundamentalist mentality, we must be on our guard against the
superficial conclusion that, because one is forced to admit that certain
details in an Evangelist's narrative (or even its general framework)
are due to the literary form used or to his specific purpose, the whole
story has been invented. Such a "black-or-white" attitude is simply
due to the failure of a modern, Occidental mind to comprehend the
Semitic view evinced by the Evangelist. Finally, it will not infrequently happen that, after the most patient literary analysis, we
cannot decide with any certainty "what actually happened,"66 and
we must content ourselves with such imprecision.67
"THE DISTINCTIVE GENIUS" OF OUR FOUR EVANGELISTS

The ancient titles which tradition has given the Gospels show that
from a very early period the Christian Church was conscious that,
while there is only one Gospel (to euaggelion), still each of the four
Evangelists has presented it according to his personal understanding
(kata Matthaion, etc.) of it by means of those aspects of the person
and mission of Jesus which struck him particularly. In fact, we may
86
That is, "what actually happened" from our modern point of view. For the early
Christians, "what actually happened" was what was recorded upon the sacred page. Dabar
in Hebrew means both "word" and "event." It is true that frequently we can, by an investigation of the original Sitz im Leben of a scriptural passage, satisfy our curiosity or
refute certain tendentious arguments proposed by those who content themselves with a
merely natural view of the Gospels. However useful such investigation may be, it must not
be forgotten that it is the meaning intended by the inspired author that has the primacy.
57
J. Cambier, art. cit. (supra n. 9) p. 211: "Mais il est important de ne pas oublier que
Tanalyse litteraire d'une narration ne permet pas de conclure sans plus a l'affirmation ou a
la negation de sa valeur historique. Celle-ci depend d'autres facteurs, et en tout premier
lieu, pour ce qui est de nos evangiles, de la qualite des temoins et de la nature de la tradition qui rapporte les dits et les faits du Christ. Le probleme de Phistoricite* de nos eVargiles
est plus intimement lid a celui de la tradition qu'a la me*thode des formes littdraires."

578

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

say that our four Evangelists present us with four different Christologies, if, as Oscar Cullmann has recently reminded us, we do not forget
that this Christology is inseparable from the Christian Heilsgeschichte.
Dr. Cullmann insists that "the question of Jesus in primitive Christianity was answered, not on the basis of a ready-made myth, but of a
series of real facts, which occurred during the first century of our era,
facts which went unnoticed by the 'history-makers' of the time... but
which, for all that, are no less historical: the life, mission, and death
of Jesus of Nazareth... ,"68
Such a Christological interpretation of the history of Jesus is seen
already operative in the Marcan Gospel, in many respects the least
artistically conceived of the fouradhering as it does so closely to the
Petrine version of the primitive preaching.69 Mark's principal theme
is that the incarnate Son of God, Jesus Christ, has, in His public life,
His death and resurrection, realized His vocation as the Servant of
God. It is in terms of the Deutero-Isaian Suffering and Glorified
Ebed Yahweh that Mark has couched the Gospel message. At Jesus'
first appearance in his book, on the occasion of His baptism by John,
the heavenly Voice proclaims Him Son of God who is also the Suffering
Servant: "You are my beloved Son. In you I take delight" (Mk 1:11).
The words contain an allusion to the first Servant Song (Is 42:1).
Rightly called the Gospel of the Passion, Mark's book announces
Jesus' death as early as the third chapter (Mk 3:6); and the passionaccount occupies a proportionally large place in this shortest of the
Gospels. The characteristically Marcan statement by Jesus of His
life's work is expressed in terms of the Servant theme: "Why, even the
68

Oscar Cullmann, Die Christologie des Neuen Testaments (Tubingen, 1957) pp. 326-27:
"Die mit der Vielheit der christologischen Wurdetitel und Losungen gegebene Mannigfaltigkeit, die Feststellung, dass jede der zeitlich verschiedenen christologischen Funktionen
zunachst Gegenstand eines besonderen Titels sein kann, dass erst allmahlich die Verbindung zu den andern ins Blickfeld tritt und damit dann eine heilsgeschichtliche Perspektive
entsteht, beweist, dass die Jesusfrage im Urchristentum nicht von einem fertigen Mythus,
sondern von einer Reihe realer Tatsachen aus beantwortet wurde, die sich im ersten Jahrhundert unserer Zeitrechnung ereignet haben, Tatsachen, welche von denen, die damals
'Geschichte machten', unbeachtet blieben und noch heute verschieden interpretiert werden
konnen, aber deswegen nicht weniger geschichtlich sind: das Leben, Wirken und Sterben
Jesu von Nazareth; das Erleben seiner Gegenwart und seines Weiterwirkens tiber den
Tod hinaus innerhalb der Gemeinschaft seiner Jtinger."
59
Taylor, op. tit. (supra n. 51) p. 148.

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

579

Son of Man has come to act as a servant, not to be served, and to lay
down His life as a ransom for all the rest of men" (Mk 10:45; cf. Is
53:5-8). Another echo of this theme is perceptible in the Transfiguration episode, which forms the literary center of Mark's Gospel:60
"This is my beloved Son. Pay heed to Him" (Mk 9:7). Jesus' triple
prophecy of His future passion is stated in terms of the Servant's
mission.61
Since it is as incarnate Son that Jesus acts as the Servant on Mark's
view, his narrative underscores the reality of Jesus' human nature to
the point where the reader is almost disconcerted.62 Jesus can become
impatient, angry, sharp in His rebukes, sensitive to His hearers'
reactions, surprised at the turn of events. Yet Mark presents undeniable evidence of Jesus' divinity, while admitting implicitly that the
reality of Jesus' adoption of the Servant's role hid this profound truth
during His public life from all, even His chosen followers, until, at His
death, even a pagan centurion could be moved to confess, "This man
was really God's Son!" (Mk 15:39).63 The Christian reader, however,
is provided with incontrovertible testimony that Jesus is Son of God:
in His forgiving of sins (Mk 2:1-11), His assertion of authority over
the Sabbath (Mk 2:28), His control of even inanimate nature (Mk
4:35-41). Thus the second Gospel gives us an unmistakable picture of
the Son of God who "despoiled Himself by taking on the Servant's
character" and "carried self-abasement, through obedience, right up
to death" (Phil 2:7-8).
The conception of Jesus and His redemptive work which dominates
the Matthean Gospel is connected with the mystery of the Church, in
which the Evangelist sees realized God's dominion in this world as the
divine or "heavenly Kingdom." Emmanuel is Matthew's characteristic
* Mk 8:279:32, connected as it is by a chronological reference (a rare phenomenon in
the Synoptic Gospels), probably pre-existed this Gospel in a written form. Dom Willibald
Michaux in his analysis of the plan of this Gospel, "Carrier de Bible: L'Evangile selon
Marc," Bible et vie chritienne 1 (1953) 78-97, has made use of this fact to show that this
complex forms the literary center of Mark.
81
Mk 8:31; 9:31 = Is 53:10-11; Mk 10:33 - Is 50:6.
62
The re-editing of many Marcan episodes by Greek-Matthew in the interests of edification suggests that that author was also disconcerted: compare Mk 4:38 with Mt 8:25; Mk
6:5-6 with Mt 13:58; Mk 5:30-31 omitted by Mt 9:22.
83
On the meaning of this confession, cf. "Balaam's Ass, or a Problem in New Testament
Hermeneutics," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 20 (1958) 55-56.

580

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

title for Jesusa name foretold by Isaiah in his prediction of the virginal
conception (Is 7:14) and explained at the outset of this Gospel as
meaning "with us is God" (Mt 1:24). At the very close of his book,
Matthew records the promise of the glorified Christ upon His departure
from this world: "And remember, / am with you all the time until the
end of the world" (Mt 28:20).64 Matthew's version of Jesus' public
life is so constructed as to bring home to us the truth that, in His
Galilean ministryparticularly by His preaching66Jesus has begun
to found that Church through which He will remain with us until the
end of time. Behind the immediate reality of five long instructions,
into which Matthew has grouped Jesus' sayings, we are given a glimpse
of the future Church. The sermon on the mount (Mt 5-7) is an expression of the Church's spirit and her function; the missionary discourse (Mt 10), particularly its second half, is a prophecy of the
evangelizing activities of the Church in the apostolic age (cf. Mt
10:1742);66a the instruction in parables (Mt 13) discloses the mystery
of the Church, the added explanations of the sower66b (Mt 13:19-23)
64

Thus we have an inclusio, which gives the spirit of the whole work.
Matthew's chief interest is in the logia of Jesus. For the first Evangelist, the incident
is of importance only for the doctrinal message it containsan illustration of dabar as
word-event.
65a
The wider perspective of this second part can be seen in the heightened opposition to
the Gospel (16-17) both in Palestine itself (17) and in the Diaspora (18). The disciples
now possess the Pentecostal Spirit (20). Mention is made of the coming of "the Son of
Man" in the destruction of the Temple, 70 A.D. (23): the apostolic kerygma is preached
universally (27), for the apostles have now, in the primitive Christian Church, assumed
the office of the prophets (41).
65b
The point of the sower centres upon the harvest, i.e., the eschatological judgment:
the future judgment will reveal what is decided in the present (represented by the varying
fortunes of the seed). In the explanation, the original point of the sower is overshadowed by
a psychological allegorization, which dwells upon the reception of the logos (the apostolic
kerygma) by various classes of men. One type is proskairos, a term found elsewhere only
in the Pauline writings (21), which implies an organized community against which persecution is directed (thlipsis, diogmos) such as Acts 8:1 describes. Another type is led to abandon the Christian faith by the merimna tou aidnos or the apate tou ploutou (22): such will
be Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11). Thus it seems probable we are dealing here with an
application to her own experiences by the apostolic Church of the Lord's teaching.Only
Mt records the explanation of the cockle. Here again, while the point of the parable (the
eschatological judgment, as is indicated by the unnatural command to collect the cockle
first (30), which contradicts the normal Palestinian practice) has been kept in the explanation, still it appears we are again dealing with an allegorical application to the Church
of the apostolic age. The universal nature of the preaching here is opposed to Jesus' habit65

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

581

and of the cockle (Mt 13:36-43) reflecting the experience of the

apostolic Church; the community discourse (Mt 18) prescribes the
mutual relations of the Church's members; and the prophetic description of the ruin of the Temple (Mt 24-25) gives a preview of the
Church's ultimate liberation from Judaism as the necessary consequence of Jesus' exaltation through His passion and resurrection.66*5
This Emmanuel-Christology is the fundamental significance, for
Matthew, of the earthly life of Jesus Christ.
For Luke, Jesus is primarily the Saviour,66 whose message of mercy
and salvation provides the God-given answer to the religious aspirations of that Hellenistic world for which Luke writes. Luke sees all
the events of Jesus' life as orientated towards Jerusalem, the scene of
man's salvation.67 The Lucan Infancy narratives revolve about
Jerusalem and its Temple; and almost ten chapters of this book are
devoted to Jesus' last journey to the Holy City (Lk 9:5119:27).
Arrived there, Luke insinuates, the disciples "tarry in the city" (Lk
24:49) until the coming of the Holy Spirit. There are no Galilean
appearances of the risen Christ in Luke's story.
John's Gospel is markedly different in spirit and style, as in the
episodes narrated, from the first three. John is absorbed in the contemplation of God's Son, the divine Word, or perfect expression of the
Father, who becomes man to "interpret" to us the God whom "no
man has ever seen" (Jn 1:18). It is most of all the sacramental quality
of Jesus' actions during His public life which has impressed John:
ual practice of addressing Himself only to Jews in His lifetime (38: ho de agros estin ho
kosmos: cf. Mt 15:24). Also the good seed is taken as a symbol of the members of the
Christian Church (38b: hoi huioi tes basileias), which is distinguished (43) from heaven
(basileia ton patros auton), a distinction characteristic of the Pauline letters.Thus in
these explanations recorded by Mt we have a most valuable piece of scriptural evidence
that the Church of the apostolic age was already doing what the Church has ever claimed
the right to do, viz., render explicit the doctrinal implications of her Master's teaching.
65c
That this discourse applies directly and in toto to the events of the year 70 A.D.,
and only typically to the end of the world, has been shown by A. Feuillet, "La synthese
eschatologique de saint Matthieu (XXIV-XXV)," Revue biblique 56 (1949) 340-64; 57
(1950) 62-91, 180-211.
66
Luke alone of the Synoptics gives Jesus the title soter (Lk 2:11; cf. also 1:69, 71, 77;
19:9; 2:30; 3:6).
67
E. Osty, Les ivangiles synoptiques (Paris, 1947) p. liv: "II a repre"sente* tous les eVe*nements de la vie du Seigneur comme emportes par une force mystique vers Jerusalem, le theatre de sa passion et de son triomphe."

582

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

Christ speaks to us of God, not only by what He says, but even more
forcibly by the symbolic character of His actions. His miracles are
"signs" which have a supernatural meaning for the eyes and ears of
faith. They are so many symbols of the Christian sacraments: of
baptism, in the cure of the blind man, for instance (Jn 9:1-41), who
washes in a pool bearing Christ's name, "the One sent" (Jn 9:7); of
the Eucharist, in the multiplication of loaves (Jn 6:1-13).w John's
message, in brief, directed as we have seen to those Christians who
have believed without having seen Jesus upon earth, is that the
glorified Christ, who lives on in the Church and in her sacraments, is
the same Jesus of Nazareth whose "signs" to men revealed His unseen
Father.
THE EVANGELISTS' USE OF THEIR SOURCES

An examination of how the Evangelists used the data about Jesus

furnished them by tradition will reveal their utter fidelity to the
reality of the sacred history, while employing considerable freedom in
their expression of it. Thus, while Matthew and Luke present Jesus'
temptations in the desert as a rejection of the false messianic ideal,
Mark, who devotes but a single verse to the episode, portrays Jesus in
the episode as the New Adam in the New Paradise.69 The Lucan
account of Jesus' visit to Nazareth, which is probably a synthesis of
three visits, or of three distinct scenes connected with one visit, forms
the solemn introduction to Jesus' public life in the third Gospel.70
Again, Luke has assembled, in his well-developed travel-story of the
last journey to Jerusalem (Lk 9:5119:27), the bulk of the materials
which his own independent research had unearthed.71
68
Jn gives a popular etymology for the place-name Siloe (which really means a conduit) in order to indicate the pool as a type of the baptismal font.The Johannine modifications of the incident of the multiplication of loaves have been dictated by the Eucharistic
significance he has perceived in it: cf. "The Bread of Life," Worship 32 (1957-58) 477-88.
89
This interpretation appears to me to be at least as probable as that which interprets
the allusion to "wild beasts" as an indication of evil. Cf. Taylor, op. cit. (supra n. 51) p.
164.
70
Mt in fact mentions two visits, one at the beginning of the public life (4:12-13),
another later (13:54-58). Lk 4:16-30 is probably a composite picture, of which 16-22a
corresponds to Mt 4:12-13; 22b-24 corresponds to Mt 13:54r-58, Mk 6:1-6; and 25-30
is from a source not used by Mt-Mk. Cf. E. Osty, op. cit. (supra n. 67) p. lvi; in a different
sense, Ronald Knox, A New Testament Commentary 1: The Four Gospels (London, 1953)
pp. 131-32.
71
L. Vaganay, Le probUme synoptique (Paris-Tournai-New York-Rome, 1954) p. 253

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

583

Characteristic of Matthew is his compressing of his narratives. He

interests himself principally in highlighting their religious meaning
without too much regard for details he considers insignificant.72 Thus,
the centurion seeking a cure for his sick "boy" comes in person to make
his request (Mt 8:5-13), while Luke's version shows that the petition
was actually made through two groups of intermediaries without the
centurion's appearing at all (Lk 7:1-10). This same Matthean
tendency to abbreviation is seen operative in the story of the raising
of Jairus' daughter,73 as in the incident of the cursing of the fig tree.74
Not infrequently, we see an Evangelist assemble materials preserved
in several distinct traditions and create a new literary unity out of
them. John, for instance, presents in his first chapter a series of
testimonies by the disciples, where we can discern a Christological
rather than a simple historical purpose. By means of seven different
titles given to Jesus (the Prophet, the Lamb of God, the Son of God,
Rabbi, the Anointed, King of Israel, Son of Man), John sums up for
us the disciples' conception of their master. At the same time, an
examination of this passage shows that John here records much valuable data, viz., that Peter, Andrew, John, Nathanael, and Philip, even
Jesus Himself, had originally been followers of the Baptist.75 The
synthetic character of this series of vignettes is, however, obvious from
what the Synoptics, notably Mark, tell us of the disciples' slowness
and difficulty in recognizing Jesus as the Messias.
THE EVANGELISTS' USE OF LITERARY FORMS

Considered as a whole, each of our Gospels belongs to a special

literary form which arose from the oral form of the apostolic preaching.
72
This tendency to abbreviate narrative is probably to be explained by Mt's inclusion
of so many logia of Jesus, on the one hand, and by the material limitations of the ordinary
scroll on which he wrote. At times, Matthean brevity leads to obscurity: to understand
Mt 9:2b ("Jesus seeing their faith") one must read Mk 2:4; similarly, the incomprehensible
"I repeat" of Mt 19:24 is clarified by Mk 10:23-24.
73
Compare Mt 9:18-24 with Mk 5:21-43, where, by having Jairus come to say his
daughter "has just died," Mt eliminates the Marcan messengers who give Jairus (who has
in Mk told Jesus his daughter "was dying") news of his daughter's death.
74
In Mt 21:19 the fig tree withers up "instantaneously"; for quite a different version,
cf.Mk 11:12-14,20-25.
75
Another important detail: Jn 1:42 agrees with Mk 3:10 and Lk 6:14 in assigning
the change of Simon's name to Peter to a quite early stage of the public ministry. Hence
it becomes probable that the scene at Caesarea Philippi, as recorded by Mt 16:13-20,
is a synthesis of several diverse elements.

584

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

This kerygma was a proclamation to nonbelievers of Jesus' work of

universal redemption through His passion and resurrection, to which
certain episodes and sayings from His public life were added. The
written Gospel, as we have seen, was, on the contrary, meant for
Christian readers to provide a more profound understanding of the
mysteries of the faith.76 Like the preaching, however, it attempts to
express that reality which surpasses the limits of our time-space world
and its experiences. Indeed, it may be said that the external historical
events it records are subordinate to the infinitely more important, less
easily perceptible fact that God has, in Jesus Christ, personally entered
our human history. The historical happenings recorded by the Gospels
are not set down solely (nor primarily) for the sake of the history they
contain, but for their Christological signification. To assess fully the
evangelical genus litterarium, we must attend above all to the dialogue
between the inspired author and his Christian reader, that witnessing
to Christ which, as Paul characterizes it, is "from faith to faith" (Rom
1:17), which makes the Gospel "God's power unto salvation for every
believer" (Rom 1:16). Only when this is borne in mind can the historical character of the Gospels be rightly evaluated.
Incorporated under this specific form, the Gospel-form, which we
have called salvation-history, we can discern many other literary
forms which aid us in grasping the meaning of the Gospels' historical
character. At this point it may not be inopportune to recall Pius XII's
insistence upon the very wide variety of historical literary forms found
in the Bible, all perfectly consonant with the divine veracity and
dignity. To decide just how God should (or should not) have transmitted His revelation to us, without first putting ourselves to school to
His inspired writers, is scarcely a reverent approach to the scriptural
Word. No sincere Christian should attempt an apology for the divine
choice of certain means of God's self-revelation.
Let me put this another way. The problem posed by the presence
of certain literary forms in our Gospels is in no sense to be regarded
as one of reconciling the "history" with the Christology. Once we
grant the supreme truth of the Incarnation with all its consequences,
the Christology is the history.77
76
Thus it is a particular genre of that religious history of which Pius XII speaks in
Divino afflante Spiritu: cf. n. 26.
77
Cullmann, op. cit. (supra n. 58) p. 328: "Auf doppelte Weise bildet vielmehr schon

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

585

Among the subordinate literary forms found in the Gospel narratives,

we might enumerate the genealogy,78 the eyewitness account,79 popular
traditions,80 family reminiscences,81 externalized representations of
interior experiences,82 and finally the midrash.83 With regard to sayings
and sermons of Jesus, there are some logia which undoubtedly retain
the form and idiom of the speaker.84 But there are also discourses
das Leben Jesu den Ausgangspunkt alien christologischen Denkens: in Jesu eigenem
Selbstbewusstsein und in der konkreten Ahnung, die seine Person und sein Werk in den
Jungern und im Volke wachriefen."Here we must also mention another question frequently put to the Catholic critic when he is discussing the literary form of certain Gospel
narratives: "Where do you stop?" If we accept the incarnational view of Sacred Scripture
proposed by Dlvino afflante Spiritu, viz., "Dei verba, humanis linguis expressa, quoad
omnia humano sermoni assimilia facta sunt, excepto errore" (AAS 35 [1943] 316), then the
answer is clear enough. We "stop" when we have been satisfied that we understand completely the words of the inspired writer, since then we know we have grasped the divine
message intended for us in this biblical passage.
78
Mt 1:1-17; Lk 3:23-38.Note that the biblical genealogy (of such doctrinal importance in the OT because of the messianic idea held by Israel) is an art-form; hence it is
not to be confused with those family-trees found in modern histories or biographies, which
profess to trace all the ancestors of a given individual back through many generations. The
biblical genealogy has a religious purpose which must be discovered, in each instance, by
careful analysis.
79
Amongst the Evangelists, Mark, the faithful recorder of what the observant eye of
Peter noted, has perhaps preserved the greatest number of eyewitness descriptions of
scenes. Matthew is rightly regarded as having, the most frequently, transcribed the logia
of Jesus so as to keep their original Semitic flavor and idiom.
80
By popular traditions here is meant the type of story told, especially in the ancient
Near East, among the people. By the nature of things, there is much more of this genre
in the OT than in the NT; but they do exist in the NT, e.g., the story of the Magi (Mt
2:1-12), the two stories of Judas' death referred to above, possibly also the story of the
strange happenings in Jerusalem after Jesus' death (Mt 27:51-53). For those who boggle
at the suggestion that God has condescended to use "the story" as a vehicle of His revelation, we recommend John L. McKenzie's masterly discussion of "The Hebrew Story,"
op. cit. (supra n. 11) pp. 60 ft.
81
To this class, I believe, belong certain elements in the Matthean and Lucan Infancy
narratives; also, perhaps, the strange story preserved in Mk 3:21-22.
82
E.g., the heavenly Voice at Jesus' baptism, apparently heard by no one else (Mt
3:16 ff. par.); Jesus' triple temptation (Mt 4:1-11), which in Lk 4:1-13 is more "spiritual";
possibly also the Lucan annunciations to Zachary (1:11-22), to our Lady (1:26-38)the
case of Joseph's dream is clearer (Mt 1:20-21). Related to this genre are attempts to describe supernatural phenomena which defy human expression: e.g., Acts 2:3: the Pentecostal "tongues as if of fire"; Lk 22:44b: "His sweat became as it were clots of blood . . . ."
83
Cf. the interesting discussion by Rend Laurentin, Structure et thiologie de Luc I-Il
(Paris, 1957) pp. 93 ff., of the midrashic examples in the Lucan Infancy narrative.
84
These can be determined by comparing the various forms in which the saying may be
represented in the evangelical tradition: the simplest and most obvious example, perhaps,
is Mt 5:40; cf.Lk 6:29b.

586

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

which the Evangelist himself has constructed from Jesus' sayings and
sermons; and these can even be expressed (as in the fourth Gospel) in
the author's own style and terminology. There are parables which in
the course of oral tradition have undergone a certain historicization86
or allegorization.86 At times we find liturgical texts which enshrine
pronouncements of Jesus dealing with the ritual or sacramental life of
His future Church.87
While this list is by no means exhaustive, it exemplifies sufficiently
the great variety of literary forms which our Gospels contain. In an
essay that is already lengthy, there is room to discuss only one or two
of these genres. However, a brief consideration of the genealogy and
of the eyewitness account may serve to illustrate the statement of
Pius XII, already referred to, that, prescinding from divine inspiration,
the pre-eminence of the Israelites in historical writing lies in the
religious character of the history they wrote.88
The age-old attempt to "reconcile" the genealogies of Jesus given
by Matthew (Mt 1:1-17) and by Luke (Lk 3:23-38), a celebrated
crux interpretum since the patristic age, is largely the result of a failure
to understand the nature of this important biblical genus UtterariumP
86
For instance, the Matthean parable of the wedding feast (Mt 22:1-14): the detail in
v. 7 is probably a reference to the destruction of Jerusalem under Titus in 70 A.D., while
the addition by Mt of the guest without a wedding garment (v. 11 ff.), intended as a warning to the Gentile Christians, probably reflects the constitution of the Church which Mt
knew at the time of writing (ca. 80 A.D.).
86
It is a delicate question to determine how much or how little allegory was present in
many of the parables as Jesus Himself gave them. However, it is probable that the three
Matthean parables, the steward (Mt 24:45-51), the virgins (Mt 25:1-13), the talents
(Mt 24:14r-30), reflect the organization of the Church at the time this Gospel was written,
and represent the hierarchical authorities, groups of consecrated women, and the body of
the faithful.
87
E.g., Mt 28:18-19, Mk 14:22-24, Jn 9:35-38, like Acts 8:34 ff., appear to reflect the
pre-baptismal interrogation. Cf. "Liturgical Influences on the Formation of the Four
Gospels," Catholic Biblical Quarterly 21 (1959) 24-38.
88
Cf. n. 26 above.This quality distinguishes the literature of Israel from that of her
neighbors and explains the remarkable way in which the sacred writers were able to take
over literary forms and even myths from their pagan contemporaries and transform them
into apt vehicles which express the divine revelation.
89
No solution that is entirely satisfactory has ever been discovered, even though some
are highly ingenious: e.g., (1) Mt gives Joseph's, Lk Mary's Davidic ancestry; (2) both
give Joseph's descent: Matthan (Mt) and Melchi (Lk) married the same woman in turn;
then Jacob, Heli's half-brother, married Jacob's childless widow, Joseph being the issue
of this union; (3) Mt gives legal Davidic descent, Lk Joseph's real ancestry; eventually, of

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

587

Once it is recognized that these genealogical tables are deliberately

incomplete90 and that, moreover, it is impossible to corroborate or
explain the variations in the names of Jesus' immediate ancestry, we
are in a position to ask the real question: What religious message is
expressed through this obviously artificial literary construction?
Luke, who uses the ascending order, tells us at the start that people
thought Jesus was Joseph's son. In reality, howeverand this is what
Luke is attempting to conveyJesus was the Son of God. Luke's use
of the Greek genealogical phrase, "X who was of Y," permits him to
employ the same expression for Adam's relationship to God as for
Seth's relationship to Adam. Accordingly the theological significance
of the whole structure becomes clear. Jesus, who is "of God" in a way
infinitely superior to Adam, is the New Adam whose redemptive act
far surpasses in its universality Adam's sinful act and its effect upon
the entire human race.
The chief purpose of the Matthean genealogy is to show the link
between Jesus and the salvation-history of His people. It descends
from Abraham, and employs the biblical term "generated." Matthew
can thus state that Jesus is that "seed of Abraham" (cf. Gal 3:16)
who inherits the divine promise made to that patriarch. He is, moreover, that member of the Davidic dynasty in whom the promise made
to David (2 Sam 7:12 ff.) is realized. The extraordinary inclusion of
four women in this family tree (Thamar, Rahab, Ruth, and Bethsabee,
all probably of non-Jewish origin) reveals Matthew's interest in the
salvation of the Gentiles.
Mark's Gospel abounds in narratives that clearly repose upon eyewitness testimony. Characteristic of such passages is their explicit
reference to time and place, together with the vivid quality of their
descriptive details. The story of twenty-four hours in Jesus' public life
(Mk 1:21-39), that of the storm on the lake (Mk 4:35^1), or the
feeding of the five thousand (Mk 6:34-44) are striking examples of
eyewitness accounts. A brief but very graphic instance, which we quote
here, depicts the reactions of the crowds who seek cures.
Matthat's two sons, Jacob was father of our Lady, Heli of Joseph, who thus inherited the
title, since his uncle had no male offspring, etc., etc.
90
The Matthean genealogy is schematized to obtain three series of fourteen each: in
the second group, three kings, Ochozias, Joas, Amasias, are omitted (practice of erasio
nominis?); and it is conceivable that similar omissions occur in the third list.

588

THEOLOGICAL STUDIES

Because there was such a crowd, He told His disciples to have a rowboat ready
for Him, to prevent their pushing up against Him. He had cured many, so all who
had ailments kept thrusting themselves towards Him in order to touch Him.
And the impure spirits, when they caught sight of Him, would fling themselves
down at His feet and scream, "You are the Son of God!", while He kept ordering
them vehemently not to reveal who He was (Mk 3:9-12).

As we read the passage, we receive the unmistakable impression of

a report obtained at first hand. At the same time, this eyewitness is
testifying to a supernatural reality which he knows by something more
than the testimony of his senses: the divine mystery of Jesus' person.
Thus we see that the Evangelists in their use of this type of material,
no less than by those literary genres like the genealogy which are more
artificially contrived, are engaged upon their predominating purpose,
the record of the Good News about Jesus Christ, which is salvationhistory.
By way of conclusion, I should like to refer to an episode in the
fourth Gospel which, I believe, illustrates in a striking way this conception of NT salvation-history. I have in mind the scene in which
a baffled Sanhedrin is resolving to put Jesus effectively out of the way.
"If we permit Him to go on this way, everybody will find faith in
Him. Besides the Romans will intervene and do away with both the
Temple and the Nation" Qn 11:48). To them in their quandary,
Caiaphas, "as high priest of that year" (of the accomplishment of
man's redemption), addresses an inspired pronouncement: "You have
completely misunderstood the case. You do not realize that it is better
that one man die for the people, and that the whole nation should not
perish" (Jn 11:50). This remark is designated as "prophecy" by the
sacred writer, not in the sense of a mere prediction of Jesus' approaching death, but in the sense of an utterance which voices the
divine verdict about the nature of that death. On John's view, Caiaphas
here becomes God's official spokesman. Accordingly the high priest
gives expression (whether unwittingly or not, John does not tell us) to
the propter nos et propter nostram salutem. The Evangelist's reflections
upon the true significance of Caiaphas' words are of interest to our
study, since they imply not only his own awareness as an inspired

OUR GOSPELS AS SALVATION-HISTORY

589

writer of the nature of salvation-history, but also a conviction that, to

deliver such a statement, a special divine charism is at work: "He did
not say this on his own. But, as high priest of that year, he prophesied
that Jesus was destined to die for the nationindeed, not only for the
nation, but that He might reunite God's dispersed children" (Jn
11:51-52).