 |
 |
| Back | Home |
Source Material:
New Schaff-Herzog
Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol. V
The Apostolic Fathers with
Justin Martyr and Irenaeus
(abridged and edited for clarity) |
|
IGNATIUS
of ANTIOCH (died c. 110)
Bishop of
Antioch in Syria
Little is known of the
life of Ignatius of Antioch except what may be gathered from the letters
bearing his name. Irenæus quotes him as a martyr who was condemned to be
thrown to the beasts; Origen quotes him once, and in the sixth homily on Luke
mentions him as the successor of Peter in the bishopric of Antioch, giving the
same account of his death as Irenæus. Eusebius knows no independent
facts, and the chronology of the lists of the bishops of Antioch which he gives
is doubtful. He too calls him the second bishop; though the Apostolic
Constitutions combine two traditions by making Peter appoint first Euodius, the
immediate predecessor of Ignatius, and then Ignatius. Purely legendary are the
assertions that Ignatius was the child mentioned in Matt. 28:4, and that he was
a disciple of John or of Peter. The Acta Martyrii relating to him must
also be abandoned as historical sources. Two independent accounts exist, the
Martyrium Colberlinum (first published by Ussher in a Latin version,
1647, then by Ruinart in Greek, 1689), which is identical with the Syriac
version given in part by Cureton and in full by Mosinger (1872); and the
Martyrium Valicanum, published by Dressel from a Vatican manuscript,
after Umber had given a slightly different text from one at Oxford. Besides
these there are three others formed by a combination of the two; but the
authenticity of even the Colbertinum, which has the best claim, is now
seldom defended. This result has been reached on the basis of contradictions
between it and the letters, of its frequent unhistorical statements, and of the
fact that it was not known to any ancient writer. It cannot have been composed
earlier than the fifth century. The one source is therefore the epistles, which
purport to have been written during the journey of Ignatius from Antioch to
Rome to suffer martyrdom.
In all there
are fifteen letters bearing the name of Ignatius, evidently of varying age and
value. Seven of these (Ad Ephesios, Ad Magnesios, Ad
Trallianos, Ad Romanos, Ad Philadelphenos, Ad
Smyrnæos, Ad Polycarpum) are found in a shorter and a
longer Greek recension. The latter adds five more (Ad Mariam
Cassobolitam, with a letter from Mary to Ignatius, Ad Tarsenses,
Ad Antiochenos, Ad Heronem diaconum Antiochenum, and Ad
Philippenses); and finally there are three found only in a Latin text, two
to St. John and one to the Virgin Mary, with her reply to it. These last are
wholly worthless, and were probably composed originally in Latin. Of the
shorter Greek recension (known as G1) there is only a single
manuscript, the Codex Mediceo-Laurentinus, and two copies made from
it; but there is also a Latin version (first published by Ussher, 1644, from
two manuscripts, of which one has since been lost), quite accurate and of value
for the restoration of the text; a Syriac one, incomplete, and an Armenian one
based upon it; and a fragment of a Copto-Sahidic one. This shorter recension
was first published in Greek by Vossius, 1644. Of the numerous later editions,
those of Zahn and Lightfoot are the most scholarly. The longer or interpolated
Greek recension (G2) exists in several manuscripts, as does also a
Latin version of it; and the Armenian version mentioned above contains the
additional letters. It was first published by Pacæus in 1557 and
independently by Gessner two years later; of modern editions Zahn's is the most
reliable. Finally three letters (to the Ephesians, the. Romans, and Polycarp)
were discovered in a still shorter recension, though only in a Syriac version,
and first published by Cureton in 1845 from two manuscripts found in the
Nitrian desert in 1839 and 1843, and again in 1849 with the additional use of a
third, found in 1847.
In view of the
great importance of these letters for the early constitutional history of the
Church, the question of their authenticity has been much discussed. The first
period in the history of their criticism goes down to the discovery of
G1. In it at least the three Latin epistles were abandoned, even by
Baronius. As to the others, Roman Catholic theologians were usually inclined to
defend the authenticity of all those contained in G2, and the
Protestants to deny it. With the publication of G1 begins the second
period, in which G1 was generally recognized as a nearer approach to
the original text, G2 as having been altered. The latter was
defended by Meier as late as 1836, but this question may be regarded as finally
settled. Opinions varied greatly during the second period as to the
authenticity of G1. The third period began with the discovery of the
shortest or Syriac recen sion (S). The first editor, Cureton, strongly
expressed his belief that now at last the really genuine letters were found,
which had later been recast so as to support the developed doctrine of the
divinity of Christ and the developed constitution of the Church, while four
entirely new letters had been added. A large number of scholars declared
substantially for this view, though still more refused their assent. The
demonstration begun by Denzinger and Uhlhorn, carried further by Merx, and
completed by Zahn, that S represents merely an excerpt from G1, may
now be regarded as conclusive. Many of the original upholders of S have now
abandoned it, while no new defenders have appeared; and its part in the history
of Ignatian criticism may be regarded as a closed incident. The present
position of the controversy is this: either G1 gives what are
substantially unchanged, genuine letters of Ignatius, or none of his letters
are extant. It may be safely said that the upholders of the former view,
represented with learning and thoroughness by Zahn and Lightfoot, have
increased in number. Harnack has abandoned his former attempt to date the
letters in the last years of Hadrian or the first of Antoninus Pius, and
decided that they are genuine, and composed toward the end of the reign of
'I'rajan (110-117), or possibly, though not probably, a little later.
Four principal reasons are urged against the authenticity
of the letters as found in G1.
(1) It is asserted that the historical data afforded by them are
incorrect. The fact is, however, that the data of the letters themselves (not
of the Acta) correspond perfectly to the conditions of the time.
Christians suffered martyrdom under Trajan, and there is no reason to doubt the
account of Ignatius being brought to Rome to die there. The law forbidding
provincial governors to send condemned prisoners from one province to another
is not earlier than Severus and Antoninus, and that which regulated their
transportation to Rome probably later still. There is nothing improbable about
the route assigned, nor the fact that Ignatius was able to communicate with the
local churches and wrote letters on the way. Similar examples are found in
Lucian (De morte Peregrini), and in the Acta of Perpetua and
Felioitas. The anxiety of Ignatius that the Roman Christians might take steps
for his liberation is easily understood when it is known that appeals on behalf
of a condemned prisoner could be made by others, even against his will. In a
word, the whole line of argument represented by the first objection may now be
largely disregarded.
(2) The second deals with the personality of Ignatius, as set
forth in the epistles, which Baur considered much more suited to a deliberate
invention than to actual history, objecting especially to its "affected
humility" and its "false heroism." This point, made most strongly by Bunsen, is
now not so much pressed; it is an entirely subjective one, and is decided in an
opposite sense by equally good judges, Rothe and Hamack seeing throughout the
stamp of an actual personality.
(3) Somewhat more impressive is the contention that heresies are
combated which belong to a later period than the opening years of the second
century. It is still a question whether one heresy or two (a Gnostic-Docetic
and a Judaising) may be discerned. In favor of the view once held by Baur, that
the epistles presuppoee the existence of the great Gnostic system, that of
Valentinus and Marcion, Hilgenfeld is almost alone. Lipsius places the Docetism
attacked by Ignatius later than Saturninus, though still before Valentinus, and
thus dates the letters between 130 and 140. But a careful study of the question
makes it fairly certain that they must have been written before Gnosticism grew
to threatening dimensions, which occurred precisely in those years. In any
case, too little is known of its earlier stages to assert that no such heretics
as are described in the letters existed in the opening years of the second
century; and it is safe to say that if their genuineness in accepted on other
grounds, this offers no reason to doubt it.
(4) It is also contended that the organization of the Church,
especially the episcopate, belongs to a later period. It is perfectly true that
the epistles know three orders - bishops, presbyters, and deacons, of which the
second is already subordinate to the first--and Ignatius lays great stress upon
the function of the episcopate in the interests of unity. But if there is here
a step in advance of Clement of Rome and the "Shepherd of Hermas" the stage
which appears in Irenæus is still more advanced. There are abundant
traces of a recent and as yet incomplete elevation of the episcopate over the
presbyterate; it is a local, not a universal, office, and does not carry with
it the guardianship of the teaching tradition; it is valued largely as a center
of unity for the local church, a safeguard against centrifugal tendencies, and
a guaranty for the future permanence and purity of Christianity. While it
would, then, be too much to say that all difficulties have been removed, the
discussion has reached a stage when such as remain are not to be set against a
single piece of strong external evidence; and such evidence exists in the
epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, which is itself definitely attested by
Irenæus. This can only be met by declaring it forged or largely modified.
The former view offers great difficulty in the face of the evidence; the
latter, more often put forward (most acutely by Ritachl), falls before the
unity of the whole letter and the fact that such very extensive additions would
have to be supposed in order to remove all traces of the Ignatian epistles.
(G. UHLHORN) It seems highly
probable that even the shorter Greek form has suffered extensive modification,
bow extensive no one is in a position to determine. The cautious student of the
history of polity and doctrine will decline to base important conclusions on
the unsupported testimony of these writings. Even if the reference to Ignatian
epistles in the epistle of Polycarp is genuine, this would not prove the
authenticity of the epistles in their present form.
A.H.N. .
The learned dissertation of Pearson, on the difficulties of
reconciling the supposed year of the martyrdom with the history of Trajan,
etc., is given entirely in Jacobson (vol. ii. p. 524), against the decision of
Usher for A.D. 107. Pearson accepts A.D. 116. Consult also the preface of Dr.
Thomas Smith, in the same work (p. 518), on the text of the original and of the
Latin versions, and on the credibility of the narrative. Our learned
translators seem to think the text they have used hasn't been modified. If the
simple-minded faithful of those days, so near the age of miracles, appear to
us, in some degree, enthusiasts, let us remember the vision of Col. Gardiner,
accredited by Doddridge, Lord Lyttleton's vision, accepted by Johnson and his
contemporaries, and the interesting narrative of the pious Mr. Tennent of New
Jersey, attested by so many excellent and intelligent persons, almost of our
own times.
The following is the INTRODUCTORY NOTICE of the translators:-
The following account of the martyrdom of Ignatius professes, in several
passages, to have been written by those who accompanied him on his voyage to
Rome, and were present on the occasion of his death (chaps. v. vi. vii.). And
if the genuineness of this narrative, as well as of the Ignatian Epistles, be
admitted, there can be little doubt that the persons in question were Philo and
Agathopus, with Crocus perhaps, all of whom are mentioned by Ignatius (Epist.
to Smyr., chap. x.; to Philad., chap. xi.; to Rom., chap. x.) as having
attended him on that journey to Rome which resulted in his martyrdom. But
doubts have been started, by Daillé and others, as to the date and
authorship of this account. Some of these rest upon internal considerations,
but the weightiest objection is found in the fact that no reference to this
narrative is to be traced during the first six centuries of our era. This is
certainly a very suspicious circumstance, and may well give rise to some
hesitation in ascribing the authorship to the immediate companions and friends
of Ignatius. On the other hand, however, this account of the death of Ignatius
is in perfect harmony with the particulars recounted by Eusebius and Chrysostom
regarding him. Its comparative simplicity, too, is greatly in its favour. It
makes no reference to the legends which by and by connected themselves with the
name of Ignatius. As is well known, he came in course of time to be identified
with the child whom Christ (Matt. 28:2) set before His disciples as a pattern
of humility. It was said that the Saviour took him up in His arms, and that
hence Ignatius derived his name of Theophorus; that is, according to the
explanation which this legend gives of the word, one carried by God. But in
chap. ii. of the following narrative we find the term explained to mean, "one
who has Christ in his breast;" and this simple explanation, with the entire
silence preserved as to the marvels afterwards connected with the name of
Ignatius, is certainly a strong argument in favour of the early date and
probable genuineness of the account. Some critics, such as Usher and Grabe,
have reckoned the latter part of the narrative spurious, while accepting the
former; but there appears to be a unity about it which requires us either to
accept it in toto, or to reject it altogether.
When Trajan, not long since, succeeded to the empire of the
Romans, Ignatius, the disciple of John the apostle, a man in all respects of an
apostolic character, governed the Church of the Antiochians with great care,
having with difficulty escaped the former storms of the many persecutions under
Domitian, inasmuch as, like a good pilot, by the helm of prayer and fasting, by
the earnestness of his teaching, and by his [constant] spiritual labour, he
resisted the flood that rolled against him, fearing [only] lest he should lose
any of those who were deficient in courage, or apt to suffer from their
simplicity. Wherefore he rejoiced over the tranquil state of the Church, when
the persecution ceased for a little time, but was grieved as to himself, that
he had not yet attained to a true love to Christ, nor reached the perfect rank
of a disciple. For he inwardly reflected, that the confession which is made by
martyrdom, would bring him into a yet more intimate relation to the Lord.
Wherefore, continuing a few years longer with the Church, and, like a divine
lamp, enlightening every one's understanding by his expositions of the [Holy ]
Scriptures, he [at length] attained the object of his desire.
For Trajan, in the ninth year of his reign, being lifted
up [with pride], after the victory he had gained over the Scythians and
Dacians, and many other nations, and thinking that the religious body of the
Christians were yet wanting to complete the subjugation of all things to
himself, and [thereupon] threatening them with persecution unless they should
agree to worship demons, as did all other nations, thus compelled all who were
living godly lives either to sacrifice [to idols] or die. Wherefore the noble
soldier of Christ [Ignatius], being in fear for the Church of the Antiochians,
was, in accordance with his own desire, brought before Trajan, who was at that
time staying at Antioch, but was in haste [to set forth] against Armenia and
the Parthians. And when he was set before the emperor Trajan, [that prince]
said unto him, "Who art thou, wicked wretch, who settest thyself to transgress
our commands, and persuadest others to do the same, so that they should
miserably perish?" Ignatius replied, "No one ought to call Theophorus wicked;
for all evil spirits have departed from the servants of God. But if, because I
am an enemy to these [spirits], you call me wicked in respect to them, I quite
agree with you; for inasmuch as I have Christ the King of heaven [within me], I
destroy all the devices of these [evil spirits]." Trajan answered, "And who is
Theophorus?" Ignatius replied, "He who has Christ within his breast." Trajan
said, "Do we not then seem to you to have the gods in our mind, whose
assistance we enjoy in fighting against our enemies?" Ignatius answered, "Thou
art in error when thou callest the demons of the nations gods. For there is but
one God, who made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that are in them; and
one Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, whose kingdom may I enjoy."
Trajan said, "Do you mean Him who was crucified under Pontius Pilate?" Ignatius
replied, "I mean Him who crucified my sin, with him who was the inventor of it,
and who has condemned [and cast down] all the deceit and malice of the devil
under the feet of those who carry Him in their heart." Trajan said, "Dost thou
then carry within thee Him that was crucified?" Ignatius replied, "Truly so;
for it is written, 'I will dwell in them, and walk in them.' " Then Trajan
pronounced sentence as follows: "We command that Ignatius, who affirms that he
carries about within him Him that was crucified, be bound by soldiers, and
carried to the great [city] Rome, there to be devoured by the beasts, for the
gratification of the people." When the holy martyr heard this sentence, he
cried out with joy, "I thank thee, O Lord, that Thou hast vouchsafed to honour
me with a perfect love towards Thee, and hast made me to be bound with iron
chains, like Thy Apostle Paul." Having spoken thus, he then, with delight,
clasped the chains about him; and when he had first prayed for the Church, and
commended it with tears to the Lord, he was hurried away by the savage cruelty
of the soldiers, like a distinguished ram the leader of a goodly flock, that he
might be carried to Rome, there to furnish food to the bloodthirsty beasts.
Wherefore, with great alacrity and joy, through his desire
to suffer, he came down from Antioch to Seleucia, from which place he set sail.
And after a great deal of suffering he came to Smyrna, where he disembarked
with great joy, and hastened to see the holy Polycarp, [formerly] his
fellow-disciple, and [now] bishop of Smyrna. For they had both, in old times,
been disciples of St. John the Apostle. Being then brought to him, and having
communicated to him some spiritual gifts, and glorying in his bonds, he
entreated of him to labour along with him for the fulfilment of his desire;
earnestly indeed asking this of the whole Church (for the cities and Churches
of Asia had welcomed the holy man through their bishops, and presbyters, and
deacons, all hastening to meet him, if by any means they might receive from him
some spiritual gift), but above all, the holy Polycarp, that, by means of the
wild beasts, he soon disappearing from this world, might be manifested before
the face of Christ.
And these things he thus spake, and thus testified,
extending his love to Christ so far as one who was about to secure heaven
through his good confession, and the earnestness of those who joined their
prayers to his in regard to his [approaching] conflict; and to give a
recompense to the Churches, who came to meet him through their rulers, sending
letters of thanksgiving to them, which dropped spiritual grace, along with
prayer and exhortation, Wherefore, seeing all men so kindly affected towards
him, and fearing lest the love of the brotherhood should hinder his zeal
towards the Lord, while a fair door of suffering martyrdom was opened to him,
he wrote to the Church of the Romans the Epistle which is here subjoined.
Having therefore, by means of this Epistle, settled, as he
wished, those of the brethren at Rome who were unwilling [for his martyrdom];
and setting sail from Smyrna (for Christophorus was pressed by the soldiers to
hasten to the public spectacles in the mighty [city] Rome, that, being given up
to the wild beasts in the sight of the Roman people, he might attain to the
crown for which he strove), he [next] landed at Troas. Then, going on from that
place to Neapolis, he went [on foot] by Philippi through Macedonia, and on to
that part of Epirus which is near Epidamnus; and finding a ship in one of the
seaports, he sailed over the Adriatic Sea, and entering from it on the
Tyrrhene, he passed by the various islands and cities, until, when Puteoli came
in sight, he was eager there to disembark, having a desire to tread in the
footsteps of the Apostle Paul. But a violent wind arising did not suffer him to
do so, the ship being driven rapidly forwards; and, simply expressing his
delight over the love of the brethren in that place, he sailed by. Wherefore,
continuing to enjoy fair winds, we were reluctantly hurried on in one day and a
night, mourning [as we did] over the coming departure from us of this -ighteous
man. But to him this happened just as he wished, since he was in haste as soon
as possible to leave this world, that he might attain to the Lord whom he
loved. Sailing then into the Roman harbour, and the unhallowed sports being
just about to close, the soldiers began to be annoyed at our slowness, but the
bishop rejoicingly yielded to their urgency.
They pushed forth therefore from the place which is called
Portus; and (the fame of all relating to the holy martyr being already spread
abroad) we met the brethren full of fear and joy; rejoicing indeed because they
were thought worthy to meet with Theophorus, but struck with fear because so
eminent a man was being led to death. Now he enjoined some to keep silence who,
in their fervent zeal, were saying that they would appease the people, so that
they should not demand the destruction of this just one. He being immediately
aware of this through the Spirit, and having saluted them all, and begged of
them to show a true affection towards him, and having dwelt [on this point] at
greater length than in his Epistle, and having persuaded them not to envy him
hastening to the Lord, he then, after he had, with all the brethren kneeling
[beside him], entreated the Son of God in behalf of the Churches, that a stop
might be put to the persecution, and that mutual love might continue among the
brethren, was led with all haste into the amphitheatre. Then, being immediately
thrown in, according to the command of Caesar given some time ago, the public
spectacles being just about to close (for it was then a solemn day, as they
deemed it, being that which is called the thirteenth in the Roman tongue, on
which the people were wont to assemble in more than ordinary numbers ), he was
thus cast to the wild beasts close beside the temple, that so by them the
desire of the holy martyr Ignatius should be fulfilled, according to that which
is written, "The desire of the righteous is acceptable [to God]," to the effect
that he might not be troublesome to any of the brethren by the gathering of his
remains, even as he had in his Epistle expressed a wish beforehand that so his
end might be. For only the harder portions of his holy remains were left, which
were conveyed to Antioch and wrapped in linen, as an inestimable treasure left
to the holy Church by the grace which was in the martyr.
Now these things took place on the thirteenth day before
the Kalends of January, that is, on the twentieth of December, Sura and Senecio
being then the consuls of the Romans for the second time, Having ourselves been
eye-witnesses of these things, and having spent the whole night in tears within
the house, and having entreated the Lord, with bended knees and much prayer,
that He would give us weak men full assurance respecting the things which were
done, it came to pass, on our falling into a brief slumber, that some of us saw
the blessed Ignatius suddenly standing by us and embracing us, while others
beheld him again praying for us, and others still saw him dropping with sweat,
as if he had just come from his great labour, and standing by the Lord. When,
therefore, we had with great joy witnessed these things, and had compared our
several visions together, we sang praise to God, the giver of all good things,
and expressed our sense of the happiness of the holy [martyr]; and now we have
made known to you both the day and the time [when these things happenedl, that,
assembling ourselves together according to the time of his martyrdom, we may
have fellowship with the champion and noble martyr of Christ, who trod under
foot the devil, and perfected the course which, out of love to Christ, he had
desired, in Christ Jesus our Lord; by whom, and with whom, be glory and power
to the Father, with the Holy Spirit, for evermore! Amen. |
|
