Why four Gospels?, part 1: the Early Church Fathers
Study:
Why there should be four Gospels, no more and no less, captured the imagination of the church leadership early on. Iranaeus, AD 120-202, is recorded as being the first Church Father to have attempted to explain the number and variety of Gospels as stemming from that of the cherubim of Ezekiel. His explanation was not unique though. A long line of churchmen have attempted the same comparison even down to modern times. What follows is a collection of their observations.
Irenaeus, AD 120-202:
8. It is not possible that the Gospels can be either more or fewer in number than they are. For, since there are four zones of the world in which we live, and four principal winds, while the Church is scattered throughout all the world, and the “pillar and ground” of the Church is the Gospel and the spirit of life; it is fitting that she should have four pillars, breathing out immortality on every side, and vivifying men afresh. From which fact, it is evident that the Word, the Artificer of all, He that sitteth upon the cherubim, and contains all things, He who was manifested to men, has given us the Gospel under four aspects, but bound together by one Spirit. As also David says, when entreating His manifestation, “Thou that sittest between the cherubim, shine forth.” For the cherubim, too, were four-faced, and their faces were images of the dispensation of the Son of God. For, [as the Scripture] says, “The first living creature was like a lion,” symbolizing His effectual working, His leadership, and royal power; the second [living creature] was like a calf, signifying [His] sacrificial and sacerdotal order; but “the third had, as it were, the face as of a man,”—an evident description of His advent as a human being; “the fourth was like a flying eagle,” pointing out the gift of the Spirit hovering with His wings over the Church. And therefore the Gospels are in accord with these things, among which Christ Jesus is seated. For that according to John relates His original, effectual, and glorious generation from the Father, thus declaring, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” Also, “all things were made by Him, and without Him was nothing made.” For this reason, too, is that Gospel full of all confidence, for such is His person. But that according to Luke, taking up [His] priestly character, commenced with Zacharias the priest offering sacrifice to God. For now was made ready the fatted calf, about to be immolated for the finding again of the younger son. Matthew, again, relates His generation as a man, saying, “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham;” and also, “The birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise.” This, then, is the Gospel of His humanity; for which reason it is, too, that [the character of] a humble and meek man is kept up through the whole Gospel. Mark, on the other hand, commences with [a reference to] the prophetical spirit coming down from on high to men, saying, “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as it is written in Esaias the prophet,”—pointing to the winged aspect of the Gospel; and on this account he made a compendious and cursory narrative, for such is the prophetical character. And the Word of God Himself used to converse with the ante-Mosaic patriarchs, in accordance with His divinity and glory; but for those under the law he instituted a sacerdotal and liturgical service. Afterwards, being made man for us, He sent the gift of the celestial Spirit over all the earth, protecting us with His wings. Such, then, as was the course followed by the Son of God, so was also the form of the living creatures; and such as was the form of the living creatures, so was also the character of the Gospel. For the living creatures are quadriform, and the Gospel is quadriform, as is also the course followed by the Lord. For this reason were four principal (καθολικαί) covenants given to the human race: one, prior to the deluge, under Adam; the second, that after the deluge, under Noah; the third, the giving of the law, under Moses; the fourth, that which renovates man, and sums up all things in itself by means of the Gospel, raising and bearing men upon its wings into the heavenly kingdom.
Irenaeus, Against Heresies, bk. 3, ch. 11, § 8.
Roberts, Alexander; Donaldson, James, The Ante-Nicene fathers; translations of the writings of the fathers down to A.D. 325, Buffalo: The Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1887, vol. 1 - The Apostolic Fathers. - Justin Martyr. - Irenaeus, p. 428.
Hippolytus of Rome, c. AD 170–235:
[...] note that in expounding the four living creatures of Ezekiel (Lagarde, Anal. Syr. p. 90), while he [Hippolytus Romanus] follows Irenaeus in assigning one to each of the Evangelists, he does not, like him, assign the lion, the eagle, and the man to John, Mark, Matthew respectively, but, as has been done in later times, to Matthew, John, Mark.
"Hippolytus (2) Romanus," Smith, William, (Sir); Wace, Henry, eds., A Dictionary of Christian biography, literature, sects and doctrines; during the first eight centuries, being a continuation of 'The dictionary of the Bible,' London: John Murray, 1882, vol. 3 - Hermogenes—Myensis, p. 104.
Victorinus, d. AD 304:
7–10. “The first living creature was like to a lion, and the second was like to a calf, and the third had a face like to a man, and the fourth was like to a flying eagle; and they had six wings, and round about and within they were full of eyes; and they had no rest, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord Omnipotent. And the four and twenty elders, falling down before the throne, adored God.”] [...]
[...] And in that the living creatures are different in appearance, this is the reason: the living creature like to a lion designates Mark, in whom is heard the voice of the lion roaring in the desert. And in the figure of a man, Matthew strives to declare to us the genealogy of Mary, from whom Christ took flesh. Therefore, in enumerating from Abraham to David, and thence to Joseph, he spoke of Him as if of a man: therefore his announcement sets forth the image of a man. Luke, in narrating the priesthood of Zacharias as he offers a sacrifice for the people, and the angel that appears to him with respect of the priesthood, and the victim in the same description bore the likeness of a calf. John the evangelist, like to an eagle hastening on uplifted wings to greater heights, argues about the Word of God. Mark, therefore, as an evangelist thus beginning, “The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as it is written in Isaiah the prophet;” “The voice of one crying in the wilderness,”—has the effigy of a lion. And Matthew, “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham:” this is the form of a man. But Luke said, “There was a priest, by name Zachariah, of the course of Abia, and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron:” this is the likeness of a calf. But John, when he begins, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” sets forth the likeness of a flying eagle. [...]
Victorinus, Commentary on the Apocalypse of the blessed John, ch. 4, vss. 7-10.
Roberts, Alexander; Donaldson, James, The Ante-Nicene fathers; translations of the writings of the fathers down to A.D. 325, Buffalo: The Christian Literature Company, 1886, vol. 7 - Lactantius, Venantius, Asterius, Victorinus, Dionysius, Apostolic Teaching and Constitutions, Homily, and Liturgies, p. 348.
Ambrose, AD 340-397:
[...] Ambrose; And it has happened well that we set out with delivering the opinion that the Gospel according to Matthew is of a moral kind, for morals are the peculiar province of man. The figure of a Lion is ascribed to Mark, because he begins with an assertion of His Divine power, saying, The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ the Son of God. The figure of the Eagle is given to John, because he has described the miracles of the Divine Resurrection. [...]
Thomas, Aquinas, Saint, Catena aurea: commentary on the four Gospels, collected out of the works of the fathers, Oxford: John Henry Parker; London: J. G. F and J. Rivington, 1841, vol. 1 - St. Matthew, pt. 1, p. 3.
Jerome, AD 345-420:
Jerome then applies the four symbolical figures of Ezekiel to the Gospels: the Man is Matthew, the Lion, Mark, the Calf, Luke, “because he began with Zacharias the priest,” and the Eagle, John. [...]
Jerome, Commentary on Matthew, preface.
Schaff, Philip; Wace, Henry, A Select library of Nicene and post-Nicene fathers of the Christian church, 2nd ser., New York: The Christian Literature Company; Oxford and London: Parker & Company, 1893, vol. 6 - St. Jerome: Letters and Select Works, p. 495.
[...] The following, however, which is that of Jerome, prevailed:—'The first form, that of the man, denotes Matthew, because he at once began to write of the man. The form of the lion denotes Mark, the voice of the roaring lion of the wilderness being heard in his Gospel. The third, that of the ox, signifies Luke, who begins with the priest Zacharias. The fourth form, the eagle, represents John, who soars above, as on eagles' wings, and speaks of the divine Word.' [...]
Lange, Johann Peter; Dods, Marcus, ed., The life of the Lord Jesus Christ: a complete critical examination of the origin, contents, and connection of the Gospels, 6 vols., Edinburgh: T. &. T. Clark; London: Hamilton and Co.; Dublin: John Robertson and Co., 1864, vol. 1, p. 172.
Augustine, AD 354-430:
9. For these reasons, it also appears to me, that of the various parties who have interpreted the living creatures in the Apocalypse as significant of the four evangelists, those who have taken the lion to point to Matthew, the man to Mark, the calf to Luke, and the eagle to John, have made a more reasonable application of the figures than those who have assigned the man to Matthew, the eagle to Mark, and the lion to John. For, in forming their particular idea of the matter, these latter have chosen to keep in view simply the beginnings of the books, and not the full design of the several evangelists in its completeness, which was the matter that should, above all, have been thoroughly examined. For surely it is with much greater propriety that the one who has brought under our notice most largely the kingly character of Christ, should be taken to be represented by the lion. Thus is it also that we find the lion mentioned in conjunction with the royal tribe itself, in that passage of the Apocalypse where it is said, “The lion of the tribe of Judah hath prevailed.” For in Matthew’s narrative the magi are recorded to have come from the east to inquire after the King, and to worship Him whose birth was notified to them by the star. Thus, too, Herod, who himself also was a king, is [said there to be] afraid of the royal child, and to put so many little children to death in order to make sure that the one might be slain. Again, that Luke is intended under the figure of the calf, in reference to the pre-eminent sacrifice made by the priest, has been doubted by neither of the two [sets of interpreters]. For in that Gospel the narrator’s account commences with Zacharias the priest. In it mention is also made of the relationship between Mary and Elisabeth. In it, too, it is recorded that the ceremonies proper to the earliest priestly service were attended to in the case of the infant Christ; and a careful examination brings a variety of other matters under our notice in this Gospel, by which it is made apparent that Luke’s object was to deal with the part of the priest. In this way it follows further, that Mark, who has set himself neither to give an account of the kingly lineage, nor to expound anything distinctive of the priesthood, whether on the subject of the relationship or on that of the consecration, and who at the same time comes before us as one who handles the things which the man Christ did, appears to be indicated simply under the figure of the man among those four living creatures. But again, those three living creatures, whether lion, man, or calf, have their course upon this earth; and in like manner, those three evangelists occupy themselves chiefly with the things which Christ did in the flesh, and with the precepts which He delivered to men, who also bear the burden of the flesh, for their instruction in the rightful exercise of this mortal life. Whereas John, on the other hand, soars like an eagle above the clouds of human infirmity, and gazes upon the light of the unchangeable truth with those keenest and steadiest eyes of the heart.
St. Augustin, The Harmony of the Gospels, bk. 1, ch. 6 [§ 9].
Schaff, Philip, A Select library of Nicene and post-Nicene fathers of the Christian church, 1st ser., New York: The Christian Literature Company, 1888, vol. 6 - Saint Augustin: Sermon on the Mount, Harmony of the Gospels, Homilies on the Gospels, pp. 80-81.
Gregory the Great, AD 540-604:
[...] Greg. These things the commencement of each of the Gospel books testifies. Because he opens with Christ's human generation, Matthew is rightly designated by a Man; Mark by a Lion, because he begins with the crying in the desert; Luke by a Calf, because he begins with a sacrifice; because he takes his beginning from the divinity of the Word, John is worthily signified by an Eagle. [...]
Thomas, Aquinas, Saint, Catena aurea: commentary on the four Gospels, collected out of the works of the fathers, Oxford: John Henry Parker; London: J. G. F and J. Rivington, 1841, vol. 1 - St. Matthew, pt. 1, p. 3.
Aelfric, archbishop of York, died c. A.D. 1051:
The prophet Ezekiel wrote of the four beasts which appeared to him, that they had eyes on every side. One of those beasts appeared to him with the face of a man, the second with a lion's face, the third with a calf's, the fourth with an eagle's. These four beasts betokened the four evangelists, Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and also all God's messengers who preached the evangelical lore. [...]
Aelfric, Abbot of Eynsham; Thorpe, Benjamin, The homilies of the Anglo-Saxon church: the first part, containing the Sermones catholici, or Homilies of AElfric, in the original Anglo-Saxon, with an English version, London: Printed for the AElfric Society, 1846, vol. 2, p. 431.
Adam of St. Victor, d. 1172/1192:
Adam, de Saint-Victor; Gautier, Léon; Wrangham, Digby Strangeways, tr., The liturgical poetry of Adam of St. Victor: from the text of Gautier, with translations into English in the original metres and short explanatory notes, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, & Co., 1881, vol. 3, p. 165.
Stier, Rudolf, 1800-1862:
[...] For—though it can be only indicated—the four Evangelists, in their fourfold cherubic figures, correspond finally and prophetically to a historical process of development of the Church throughout its entire history. The idea has before this been thrown out, that the cow, the lion, the man, and the eagle, symbolize the apostolic, the Roman, the Reformed, and the last Church; if we reflect upon it we shall find that the four-formed Gospels admit of being applied in the same way;—on this subject, however, we prefer not entering at large.
Stier, Rudolf; Pope, William Burt, tr., The words of the Lord Jesus, new ed., tr. fr. 2nd rev. & enlrgd. Ger. ed., Philadelphia: Smith, English, and Co; New York: Sheldon & Co.; Boston: Gould & Lincoln, 1859, vol. 3, pp. 353-354.
Lange, Johann Peter, 1802-1884:
[...] The lion, especially the Asiatic lion, which is here intended, is a striking representation of the vigorous, bold, and graphic peculiarity of Mark. The eagle well denotes the sublime spiritual flight of John, and his bold gaze at the sun of the spiritual world. But how inappropriate is the application of the man to Matthew, and of the ox to Luke, if we look away from the mere incidents on which Jerome founds his comparison! It is Luke who preeminently exhibits the absolutely pure and divinely powerful humanity of Christ, and the human countenance might well characterize his Gospel; while that of Matthew, who more especially proclaimed to the Hebrew people the promised Messiah, in whose blood they were to find the real atonement, would be more appropriately symbolized by the ox.
Lange, Johann Peter; Dods, Marcus, ed., The life of the Lord Jesus Christ: a complete critical examination of the origin, contents, and connection of the Gospels, 6 vols., Edinburgh: T. &. T. Clark; London: Hamilton and Co.; Dublin: John Robertson and Co., 1864, vol. 1, p. 173.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, 1871:
[...] 8. [...] Almighty — [...] The four living creatures answer by contrast to the four world-powers represented by four beasts. The fathers identified them with the four gospels, Matthew the lion, Mark the ox, Luke the man, John the eagle: these symbols, thus viewed, express not the personal character of the evangelists, but the manifold aspect of Christ in relation to the world (four being the number significant of world-wide extension, e. g., the four quarters of the world) presented by them severally: the lion expressing royalty, as Matthew gives prominence to this feature of Christ; the ox, laborious endurance, Christ's prominent characteristic in Mark; man, brotherly sympathy with the whole race of man, Christ's prominent feature in Luke; the eagle soaring majesty, prominent in John's description of Christ as the Divine Word. [...]
Jamieson, Robert; Fausset, Andrew Robert; Brown, David, A commentary: critical, practical and explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments, with a Bible dictionary, compiled from Dr. Wm. Smith's standard work, a copious index, chronological tables, maps and illustrations, Chicago; New York: Fleming H. Revell, 1880, New Testament - vol. 2, p. 545.
Summary:
The early adoption of the cherubim of Ezekiel and of Revelation as an explanation for the four Gospels, and its continuance as an explanation for 2000 years, would seem to indicate the working of the Holy Spirit... But if that is so... With so many different opinions, how can we know which is the correct assignment and explanation, if any?
Comments
Post a Comment