1 Cor. v, 9. Source of the Acts i, 21, 22. There is reason for believing that some scriptures, for instance, a letter of St. Paul to the Corinthians, have been lost. But this does not detract from the worth of those we do have. That these primitive memoirs of Jesus Christ, in addition to those by Matthew and Mark and Luke and John, have not come down to us may be occasion for regret; certainly it is not occasion for complaint. Eternity will not exhaust what Memoirs of the Divine Man we do have. From this Preface to St. Luke's Gospel, we learn, secondly, the Source of the Gospels: "Even as they delivered them unto us, who from the be- . ginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word." These early memoirs or primitive Gospels to which our Evangelist alludes were evidently written by those who had not been personally acquainted with the Prophet of Nazareth. Nevertheless, their source of information was accurate; for it was the apostolic tradition or oral testimony of those who had been eyewitnesses, and servants of the word, all the time that the Lord Jesus had gone in and gone out among them, from the days of John the Baptizer unto the day he was taken up from them. Two of the four Gospels which have come down to us-Matthew's and John'swere written by apostles. The two others-Mark's and Luke's-were written by evangelists, gathering their materials directly from apostles. Thus Luke, the writer of our Preface, like the many others who had undertaken to write a connected account of what Jesus Christ had said and done, distinctly bases his narrative on the apostolic testimony or tradition: "Even as those handed them down to us who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word." The source and basis, then, of these primitive Gospels was the contemporaneous oral Gospel or Tradition of the original apostles. Need I add that it is still the only kind of Tradition which the Church is at liberty to accept as the authorized Gospel and Doctrine of Jesus Christ? Compatible with Free From this Preface to St. Luke's Gospel, we Inspiration learn, thirdly, that inspiration is compatible with free-will.: "It seemed good to me also to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus." According to the judgment of the early Church, by which judgment the Church has ever since stood, the Gospel according to St. Luke was acknowledged to be a constituent part of the inspired canon. Yet there is no evidence to show that Luke felt laid on him a resistless necessity to write his Gospel, or that in writing it he was conscious of any special, overmastering inspiration. Others had undertaken to arrange a narrative of the Christian Facts; and it seemed good to Luke also to undertake the same. So far as his own consciousness was concerned, he seems to have set himself to his task spontaneously, and arranged his narrative as seemed to him best. Yet the judgment of the Christian sense from the beginning has been that in thus composing his recital he was Divinely inspired. These facts cast light on the doctrine of Inspiration. They show that one may be inspired, will. Qualifications of Luke. and yet act with entire freeness. The sacred writers have often been compared to Eolian harps, played on by the Holy Spirit or divine Breath of God. The comparison is beautiful and just, so far as it goes. But it does not cover the whole truth; it fails to recognize the human element in inspiration. But let the sacred writers be compared to different musical instruments, for example, a flute, a cornet, a trumpet, an organ, etc., played on, indeed, by one and the same divine Breath, but giving forth different melodies, according to the character of each distinct instrument; and the comparison becomes more complete and just. The source of the melody is Divine, and common to them all; the character of the melody is human, varying according to the temperament and peculiarity of the writer. In brief, the thoughts are Divine, the words are human. And this it is which gives to each Gospel of the canon its peculiarity. Each writer wrote according to his idiosyncrasy, as seemed to him good. And this it is which gives to us one and the same Gospel-the Gospel of Jesus Christ; and also different gospels-a gospel according to Matthew; a gospel according to Mark; a gospel according to Luke; a gospel according to John. Each of them doubtless said, "It seemed good to me also to write a life of Jesus Christ." But we shall recur to this point. From this preface to St. Luke's Gospel we learn, fourthly, that our evangelist was qualified to write a gospel: "Having traced the course of all things accurately from the first.” An educated, intelligent observer, an intimate of apostles, perhaps the brother whose praise in 2 Cor. viii, 18. the Gospel was spread through all the churches, St. Luke the Evangelist was in a condition to know the facts of the Christ's career. His habits of observation as a physician would naturally lead Col. iv, 14. him to scrutinize closely all alleged facts. He at least would know whether the church of his day was following cunningly devised myths. He had 2 Peter i, 16. a reputation for honesty, and he puts his own personal veracity into the issue. He himself assures us that his first step in preparing his narrative was to trace down from the beginning everything accurately. In short, he exercised the "critical faculty." He was a rationalist in the true sense 22. of that noble but prostituted word, proving all 1 Thess. v, 21, things, holding fast that which is good, throwing away that which is bad. Thus was he qualified to write an intelligent, credible narrative of the great Christian facts. Pur pose in Writing. From this preface to St. Luke's Gospel we Luke's learn, fifthly, our evangelist's purpose in writing: "That thou mightest know the certainty concerning the things wherein thou wast instructed." Doubtless a good deal of misapprehension touching the facts of Christ's carcer was already prevalent. These facts were so transcendent that they might be easily misunderstood, and, in passing from mouth to mouth in that age of tradition rather than of printed page, would naturally accumulate unauthorized additions. These alien additions would sooner or later be seen to be discrepant with the apostolic statements, and so a suspicion, especially under assaults by the enemies of 1 Peter iii, 15. Advantage of pels. Christianity, might spring up touching the original statements themselves. Our evangelist seems to have had this possibility in view, and therefore, having personally and minutely investigated all the facts in the case, would assure his noble friend Theophilus of the absolute truthfulness of the apostolic traditions: so that he might always be ready to give answer to every man who should ask him a reason concerning the hope that was in him. For knowledge of facts rather than theories was then, as it still is, the need of the times. And St. Luke undertook to meet the need: "Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to arrange a narrative of the things which are fully believed among us, even as those handed them down to us who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having accurately traced down everything from the very first, to write to thee a connected account, most noble Theophilus, in order that thou mayest thoroughly know the certainty of those statements in which thou hast been catechized." Such is the preface to the Gospel according to St. Luke. And as St. John's prologue may be taken as the prologue to the Gospel, so St. Luke's preface may be taken as the preface to the Gospels. And this suggests our first concluding thought: Several Gos- The advantage of having several Gospels. Of course, there might have been but one Gospel. But Providence has graciously preserved for us four Gospels. And herein is an immense advantage. First, the having several Gospels is a key |