Back   A review of the book: Trustworthy and True- The Gospels beyond 2000 by Adrian Graffy (2001). published in 2001. In this book the author sets out with the worthy intention of reassuring an audience that has a serious problem. Duffy writes: “If modern methods of study have shown the gospels to be unreliable, how can the believer discover Jesus?” [Page 7]. My first comment is that modern methods of study have not led to this problem. The problem has arisen because supporters of the Markan Priority theory  (i.e. Mark wrote first and others borrowed from him) have been dominating the classrooms. Most Protestants and many Catholics have been taught this theory, and it is this that has led to a loss of trust in the Gospels. Other scholars, using the modern methods encouraged by the Church since 1943, have rejected the theory. The author of the book accepts Markan Priority but is concerned with the problem the theory has caused. He well illustrates what Markan Priority teaches: [highlighting added]. “Clearly Matthew’s gospel used Mark as a source. …Luke too uses Mark. [Page 249].  …‘according to John’, is not the equivalent of ‘written by John’. We are dealing with the gospel traditions preserved and promoted within the community with which John was associated. Maybe John founded the community, maybe he just preached there. And the same is true of each of the gospels. Mark’s gospel is linked to a certain Mark who may have been Peter’s assistant. Matthew’s gospel arose in the church which had Matthew as its founder or patron.Luke’s gospel was somehow associated with Luke, a companion of Paul, who seems to also have written the Acts of the Apostles”. [Page 12]. It is not surprising there is widespread doubt and disbelief. This is how the author attempts to solve the problem: “What then can we mean by saying the gospels are ‘trustworthy and true’? On the basis of historical memories of Jesus, new and developing understandings of Jesus, his life and death, and his abiding legacy, are recognised by the church and offered to believers as the good news”. [Page12]. “These gospels were recognised by the whole church as accurate, as guided by the Spirit and as faithfully reflecting the faith of the first believers. These gospels were thus set apart. They became ‘canonical’, officially recognised, treasured and preserved for future generations. They were recognised as trustworthy and true”. [Page 248]. To me the argument is not consistent. Markan Priorists deny what the church says: The Church accepts the unanimous witness of the early historians when they record that Matthew wrote the first Gospel. She knows that Clement, who succeeded to Mark’s diocese at Alexandria, recorded that Matthew and Luke wrote before Mark. The Church, like the early historians, has no knowledge of a Q document, yet this imagined document is vitally important to the Markan Priority theory. The Church says that Apostles handed on in writing what they had received from the lips of Christ, from living with Him, and from what he did. She maintains that Apostles and other men handed on in writing the fourfold Gospel. Some of the authors of the four Gospels wrote from their own memory. (Dei Verbum Sections 7, 18 and 19). Markan Priorists not only ignore what the Church has said but usually do not mention it to students. The ‘Suggested Further Reading’ page in the book under review, doesn’t suggest one official Catholic publication. Yet the author claims this same Church has the authority and ability to decide which documents are true Gospels, and that they are Trustworthy and True. I do not find this at all convincing. The first step in re-establishing the Gospels as ‘Trustworth and True’ is to abandon the unproved Markan Priority theory. DB Version: 26th June 2008 Back