Chrysostom on the Value of Diversity

John in Korovniki church – unknown – Public Domain

I’m currently reading the St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press edition of St. John Chrysostom’s On Wealth And Poverty, which is part of their amazing “Patristic Series”. Known in his own time as “the golden-mouthed”, Chrysostom’s simple and (deceptively?) straightforward sermons stand in quiet contrast with the complex poetic erudition of  Bonaventure that I just put down. The book is composed of seven sermons, of which I’ve only read a few so far. It’s moving reading, with Chrysostom’s love-sharpened voice cutting across the years that separate us, but one paragraph stood out to me in particular:

We might ask why the Master speaks in parables, and why He explained some parables but not others, and what in fact a parable is, and many other such questions – but we will save these for another time, so as not to delay this urgent discussion now. We will ask you only this one question, which of the evangelists it is who tells us that Christ told this parable. Who is it? Only Luke. you must also know this, that all four evangelists reported some of Christ’s savings, but each of them individually chose others to report. Why is this so? To make us read the other gospels, and to make us realize how remarkable their agreement is. For if all of them told everything, we would not pay careful attention to all of them, because one would be enough to teach us everything. But if everything they tell were different, we would not see their remarkable agreement. For this reason all of them wrote many things in common but each also chose some things to tell individually.

That might seem obvious to you, but it came as a profound logic to me. More contemplation, reading, and prayer is required from me, but I think Chrysostom’s argument for multiplicity in the gospels contains within it an argument that a diversity of perspectives is necessary for understanding more generally.