The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1912-08-03
BIBLICAL COMMISSIun
Answers Scripturat Questions Re-
garding the Authorship, Date of
Composition, Historical Truth and
Mutual Relations of the First Three
Gospels.

The latest issue of the Acta Apostle
licae Sedis, among many other i'm
portant documents, contains number
of answers by the Biblical Commits
sion to many interesting scriptural
questions on the Synoptic Gospels.
The previous pronouncement OF the
Commission, says the London Tab
let," dealt with the Gospel of St.
Matthew, to which it assigned the
priority of composition universally
attributed to it by tradition, but COM
bated or called in question by mod
ern criticism. Matthew wrote the
first Gospel in his native language;
it was afterwards translated into
Greek, and the Greek version may
be posterior to the Gospels of Mark
and Luke, but it is substantially
identical with the original text. The
first of the present decisions proclaims
that Mark, disciple and interpreter
of Peter, and Luke, doctor, help
er and companion of Paul, are really the
them, for this conclusion is forced
upon us by earliest tradition, by the
testimony of the Fathers, by the
quotations occurring in their works,
by the evidence of the early heretics,
by the versions of the New Testa-
ment, by the most ancient codices,
and by internal evidence.
Turning next to the twelve con-
Guiding versicles of Mark mark xvi,
9-2O), the authenticity of which has
been so widely questioned by critics,
the Commission declares that the ar
guments advanced against this pass
age are not of a nature to justify
their rejection as nOn-insp1red ana
non-canonical, and do not even prove
that Mark is not the author of them
Again, it is not lawful to doubt the
inspiration and canonicity of Lukes
accounts of the infancy of Christ
Nuke i-iD, and of the apparition OF
the angel comforting Him, or OF the
sweat of blood (xxii, 43-4q, nor can
it be shown by solid arguments that
these passages do not belong to the
genuine Gospel of Luke. The fourth
question refers to the Magniticat;
some very rare documents put the
Canticle into the mouth of st. Eliza
beth. The Commission decides that
such isolated testimonies cannot pre-
vail against the overwhelming eVl-
dence of nearly all the codices, which
attribute the Canticle to our Lady,
all the more as the context, the mind
e
dition of the Church require the lat
ter Interpretation. Next the Commits
sion declares that it is not lawful to
abandon the most ancient and the
traditional view that the chronology
cal order of the Synoptic Gospels is
Matthew first, Mark second, and Luke
third, adding that this traditional
order is not violated by the opinion
of those who hold that the Greek YER
sion of Matthew'S Gospel may have
been made after the composition OF
Mark and Luke. The sixth answer
declares that it is not lawful to set
the date of the composition of the
Gospels of Luke and Mark as late as
the destruction of Jerusalem, or even
to assert that the Gospel or Luke
was written after the beginning OF
the siege of Jerusalem. In answer to
the seventh question the Commission
pronounces that Lukes Gospel pre-
ceded the Acts of the Apostles, and
was therefore composed not subse-
auently to the Roman captivity of
ST. Paul. The eighth answer affirms
that, in view of tradition and the in
ternal evidence, it cannot be prudent
ly doubted that in composing their
Gospels, Mark wrote according to
the preaching of Peter, and Luke ac-
cording to the preaching of Paul, and
that both evangelists had at their dis
posal other trustworthy sources, both
oral and written.