3. In what do the Evangelists agree and differ? A reason for the difference is rendered out of Chrysostom.
All the Evangelists have it in common, that, having been taught by the Holy Spirit, in a very skillfully composed compendium they unfolded and tied together the history of Christ. Indeed, they differ to this extent, that on a particular occasion some wrote at greater length, others more sparingly: that each also enriched the common argument with certain special narrations, either of things done, or of speeches given: that each with his own talent for speech and writing took up the same matters, with Matthew employing a middling character, Mark a lowly, Luke a flowery, John a grand: that each chose their own order, as the rationale of the occasion and plan of each appeared to require. Nevertheless, that appearance of disagreement also furnishes an indication of an altogether genuine agreement. For rightly did Chrysostom already of old argue, Commentario in principium Matthæi, that the Evangelists were by no means going to escape suspicion concerning their honesty before their enemies, if the order, connection, and individual words of the things to said agreed exactly. By that diversity, of whatsoever sort it is ultimately, sinister suspicion of this sort is altogether taken away. Also, either, as the same Holy Father argued, some one of those had said all, and the number of the others would have been superfluous: or, each of them had written all things so diversely, novelly, and differently, there would have been no evidence of agreement. Hence, all spoke many things in common, and at the same time each wrote something singular, yet by no means in conflict with the common things.
Dr. Dilday's Lecture: "Gospels: Narrative and Teaching (Part 1)"