CHAPTER V.

THE FORGERY OF THE IGNATIAN EPISTLES.

If, as there is every reason to believe, the Ignatian Epistles are

forgeries from beginning to end, various questions arise as to the

time of their appearance, and the circumstances which prompted their

fabrication. Their origin, like that of many other writings of the same

description, cannot be satisfactorily explored; and we must in vain

attempt a solution of all the objections which may be urged against

almost any hypothesis framed to elucidate their history. It is, however,

pretty clear that, in their original form, they first saw the light in

the early part of the third century. About that time there was evidently

something like a mania for the composition of such works,--as various

spurious writings, attributed to Clemens Romanus and others, abundantly

testify. Their authors do not seem to have been aware of the impropriety

of committing these pious frauds, and may even have imagined that they

were thus doing God service. [67:1] Several circumstances suggest that

Callistus--who became Bishop of Rome about A.D. 219--may, before his

advancement to the episcopal chair, have had a hand in the preparation

of these Ignatian Epistles. His history is remarkable. He was originally

a slave, and in early life he is reported to have been the child of

misfortune. He had at one time the care of a bank, in the management

of which he did not prosper. He was at length banished to Sardinia, to

labour there as a convict in the mines; and when released from servitude

in that unhealthy island, he was brought under the notice of Victor, the

Roman bishop. To his bounty he was, about this time, indebted for

his support. [68:1] On the death of Victor, Callistus became a prime

favourite with Zephyrinus, the succeeding bishop. By him he was put in

charge of the cemetery of the Christians connected with the Catacombs;

and he soon attained the most influential position among the Roman

clergy. So great was his popularity, that, on the demise of his patron,

he was himself unanimously chosen to the episcopal office in the chief

city of the empire. Callistus was no ordinary man. He was a kind of

original in his way. He possessed a considerable amount of literary

culture. He took a prominent part in the current theological

controversies,--and yet, if we are to believe Hippolytus, he could

accommodate himself to the views of different schools of doctrine. He

had great versatility of talent, restless activity, deep cunning, and

much force of character. Hippolytus tells us that he was sadly given to

intrigue, and so slippery in his movements that it was no easy matter

to entangle him in a dilemma. It may have occurred to him that, in the

peculiar position of the Church, the concoction of a series of letters,

written in the name of an apostolic Father, and vigorously asserting the

claims of the bishops, would help much to strengthen the hands of the

hierarchy. He might thus manage at the same time quietly to commend

certain favourite views of doctrine, and aid the pretensions of the

Roman chief pastor. But the business must be kept a profound secret;

and the letters must, if possible, be so framed as not at once to awaken

suspicion. If we carefully examine them, we shall find that they were

well fitted to escape detection at the time when they were written.

The internal evidence warrants the conclusion that the Epistle to the

Romans was the first produced. It came forth alone; and, if it crept

into circulation originally in the Imperial city, it was not likely to

provoke there any hostile criticism. It is occupied chiefly with giving

expression to the personal feelings of the supposed writer in

the prospect of martyrdom. It scarcely touches on the question of

ecclesiastical regimen; and it closes by soliciting the prayers of the

Roman brethren for "the Church which is in Syria." [69:1] "If," says

Dr. Lightfoot, "Ignatius had not incidentally mentioned himself as

the Bishop 'of' or 'from Syria,' the letter to the Romans would have

contained no indication of the existence of the episcopal office" [70:1]

Whilst observing this studied silence on the subject which above all

others occupied his thoughts, the writer was craftily preparing the way

for the more ready reception of the letters which were to follow. The

Epistle to the Romans tacitly embodies their credentials. It slyly takes

advantage of the connection of the name of Ignatius with Syria in the

letter of Polycarp to the Philippians; assumes that Syria is the eastern

province; and represents Ignatius as a bishop from that part of the

empire on his way to die at Rome. It does not venture to say that

the Western capital had then a bishop of its own,--for the Epistle

of Clemens, which was probably in many hands, and which ignored the

episcopal office there--might thus have suggested doubts as to its

genuineness; but it tells the sensational story of the journey of

Ignatius in chains, from east to west, in the custody of what are called

"ten leopards." This tale at the time was likely to be exceedingly

popular. Ever since the rise of Montanism--which made its appearance

about the time of the death of Polycarp--there had been an increasing

tendency all over the Church to exaggerate the merits of martyrdom. This

tendency reached its fullest development in the early part of the third

century. The letter of Ignatius to the Romans exhibits it in the height

of its folly. Ignatius proclaims his most earnest desire to be torn

to pieces by the lions, and entreats the Romans not to interfere and

deprive him of a privilege which he coveted so ardently. The words

reported by Irenaeus as uttered by one of the martyrs of Lyons are

adroitly appropriated by the pseudo-Ignatius as if spoken by himself;

and, in an uncritical age, when the subject-matter of the communication

was otherwise so much to the taste of the reader, the quotation helped

to establish the credit of the Ignatian correspondence. Another portion

of the letter was sure to be extremely acceptable to the Church

of Rome--for here the writer is most lavish in his complimentary

acknowledgements. That Church is described as "having the presidency in

the country of the region of the Romans, being worthy of God, worthy

of honour, worthy of felicitation, worthy of praise, worthy of success,

worthy in purity, and having the presidency of love, filled with the

grace of God, without wavering, and filtered clear from every foreign

stain."

"The Epistle to the Romans," says Dr. Lightfoot, "had a wider popularity

than the other letters of Ignatius, both early and late. It appears to

have been circulated apart from them, sometimes alone." [71:1] It was

put forth as a feeler, to discover how the public would be disposed

to entertain such a correspondence; and, in case of its favourable

reception, it was intended to open the way for additional Epistles.

It was cleverly contrived. It employed the Epistle of Polycarp to the

Philippians as a kind of voucher for its authenticity, inasmuch as it

is there stated that Ignatius had written a number of letters; and it

contained little or nothing which any one in that age would have been

disposed to controvert. The Christians of Rome had long enjoyed the

reputation of a community ennobled by the blood of martyrs, and they

would be quite willing to believe that Ignatius had contributed to

their celebrity by dying for the faith within their borders. It is

very doubtful whether he really finished his career there: some ancient

authorities attest that he suffered at Antioch; [72:1] and the fact

that, in the fourth century, his grave was pointed out in that locality,

apparently supports their testimony. [72:2] The account of his hurried

removal as a prisoner from Antioch to Rome, in the custody of ten fierce

soldiers--whilst he was permitted, as he passed along, to hold something

like a levee of his co-religionists at every stage of his journey--wears

very much the appearance of an ill-constructed fiction. But the

disciples at Rome about this period were willing to be credulous in such

matters; and thus it was that this tale of martyrdom was permitted

to pass unchallenged. In due time the author of the letters, as

they appeared one after another, accomplished the design of their

composition. The question of the constitution of the Church had recently

awakened much attention; and the threat of Victor to excommunicate the

Christians of Asia Minor, because they ventured to differ from him as

to the mode of celebrating the Paschal festival, had, no doubt, led to

discussions relative to the claims of episcopal authority which, at Rome

especially, were felt to be very inconvenient and uncomfortable. No one

could well maintain that it had a scriptural warrant. The few who

were acquainted with its history were aware that it was only a human

arrangement of comparatively recent introduction; and yet a bishop

who threatened with excommunication such as refused to submit to his

mandates, could scarcely be expected to make such a confession.

Irenaeus had sanctioned its establishment; but, when Victor became so

overbearing, he took the alarm, and told him plainly that those who

presided over the Church of Rome before him were nothing but presbyters.

[73:1] This was rather an awkward disclosure; and it was felt by the

friends of the new order that some voucher was required to help it in

its hour of need, and to fortify its pretensions. The letters of an

apostolic Father strongly asserting its claims could not fail to give it

encouragement. We can thus understand how at this crisis these Epistles

were forthcoming. They were admirably calculated to quiet the public

mind. They were comparatively short, so that they could be easily read;

and they were quite to the point, for they taught that we are to

"regard the bishop as the Lord Himself," and that "he presides after the

likeness of God." [74:1] Who after all this could doubt the claims of

Episcopacy? Should not the words of an apostolic Father put an end to

all farther questionings?

Hippolytus, who was his contemporary, has given us much information in

relation to Callistus. He writes, indeed, in an unfriendly spirit; but

he speaks, notwithstanding, as an honest man; and we cannot well reject

his statements as destitute of foundation. His account of the general

facts in the career of this Roman bishop obviously rest on a substratum

of truth. As we read these Ignatian letters, it may occur to us that

the real author sometimes betrays his identity. Callistus had been

originally a slave, and he here represents Ignatius as saying of

himself, "I am a slave." [74:2] Callistus had been a convict, and more

than once this Ignatius declares, "I am a convict." [74:3] May he not

thus intend to remind his co-religionists at Rome that an illustrious

bishop and martyr had once been a slave and a convict like himself?

Callistus, when labouring in the mines of Sardinia, must have been

well acquainted with ropes and hoists; and here Ignatius describes the

Ephesians as "hoisted up to the heights through the engine of Jesus

Christ," having faith as their "windlass," and as "using for a rope the

Holy Spirit." [74:4] Callistus had at one time been in charge of a bank;

and Ignatius, in one of these Epistles, is made to say, "Let your works

be your _deposits_, that you may receive your _assets_ due to you."

[75:1] Callistus also had charge of the Christian cemetery in the Roman

Catacombs; and Ignatius here expresses himself as one familiar with

graves and funerals. He speaks of a heretic as "being himself a bearer

of a corpse," and of those inclined to Judaism "as tombstones and graves

of the dead." [75:2] It is rather singular that, in these few short

letters, we find so many expressions which point to Callistus as the

writer. There are, however, other matters which warrant equally strong

suspicions. Hippolytus tells us that Callistus was a Patripassian. "The

Father," said he, "having taken human nature, deified it by uniting it

to Himself, ... and so he said that the Father had suffered with the

Son." [75:3] Hence Ignatius, in these Epistles, startles us by such

expressions as "the blood of God," [75:4] and "the passion of my God."

[75:5] Callistus is accused by Hippolytus as a trimmer prepared, as

occasion served, to conciliate different parties in the Church by

appearing to adopt their views. Sometimes he sided with Hippolytus,

and sometimes with those opposed to him; hence it is that the theology

taught in these letters is of a very equivocal character. Dr. Lightfoot

has seized upon this fact as a reason that they are never quoted by

Irenaeus. "The language approaching dangerously near to heresy

might," says he, "have led him to avoid directly quoting the doctrinal

teaching." [76:1] A much better reason was that he had never heard

of these letters; and yet their theology is exactly such a piebald

production as might have been expected from Callistus.

It is not easy to understand how Dr. Lightfoot has brought himself to

believe that these Ignatian Epistles were written in the beginning

of the second century. "_Throughout the whole range of Christian

literature_," says he, "no more uncompromising advocacy of the

episcopate can be found than appears in these writings ... It is when

asserting the claims of the episcopal office to obedience and respect

that the language is _strained to the utmost_. The bishops established

_in the farthest part of the world_ are in the counsels of Jesus

Christ." [76:2] It is simply incredible that such a state of things

could have existed six or seven years after the death of the Apostle

John. All the extant writings for sixty years after the alleged date

of the martyrdom of Ignatius demonstrate the utter falsehood of these

letters. It is certain that they employ a terminology, and develop

Church principles unknown before the beginning of the third century, and

which were not current even then. The forger, whoever he may have been,

has displayed no little art and address in their fabrication. From all

that we know of Callistus, he was quite equal to the task. Like the

false Decretals, these letters exerted much influence on the subsequent

history of the Church. Cyprian, though he never mentions them, [77:1]

speedily caught their spirit. His assertion of episcopal authority

is quite in the same style. Origen visited Rome shortly after they

appeared; he is the first writer who recognises them; and it is worthy

of note that, of the three quotations from them found in his works,

two are from the Epistle to the Romans. It is quite within the range

of possibility that evidence may yet be forthcoming to prove that they

emanated from one of the early popes. They are worthy of such an origin.

They recommend that blind and slavish submission to ecclesiastical

dictation which the so-called successors of Peter have ever since

inculcated. "It need hardly be remarked," says Dr. Lightfoot, "how

subversive of the true spirit of Christianity, in the negation

of individual freedom and the consequent suppression of direct

responsibility to God in Christ, is the _crushing despotism_ with which"

the language of these letters, "if taken literally, would invest the

episcopal office." [77:2] And yet, having devoted nearly thirty

years off and on to the study of these Epistles, the Bishop of Durham

maintains that we have here the genuine writings of an apostolic Father

who was instructed by the inspired founders of the Christian Church!!

In this Review no notice is taken of the various forms of these

Epistles. If they are all forgeries, it is not worth while to spend time

in discussing the merits of the several editions.

APPENDICES.

I.

LETTER OF THE LATE DR. CURETON.

Immediately after the appearance of the second edition of _The Ancient

Church_, a copy of it was sent to the late Rev. W. Cureton, D.D., Canon

of Westminster--the well-known author of various publications

relating to the Ignatian Epistles. It was considered only due to that

distinguished scholar to call his attention to a work in which he was

so prominently noticed, and in which various arguments were adduced

to prove that all the letters he had edited are utterly spurious. In a

short time that gentleman acknowledged the presentation of the volume in

a most kind and courteous communication, which will be read with special

interest by all who have studied the Ignatian controversy. I give the

letter entire--just as it reached me. It was published several years

ago, appended to my _Old Catholic Church_.

DEANS YARD, WESTMINSTER, _Sept._ 24, 1861.

DEAR SIR,--I beg to thank you very much for your kindness in sending

me a valuable contribution to Ecclesiastical History in your book, _The

Ancient Church_, which I found here upon my return to London two or

three days ago. How much would it contribute to the promotion of charity

and the advancement of the truth were all who combated the opinions and

views of another to give him the means of seeing what was written fairly

and openly, and not to endeavour to overthrow his arguments without his

knowledge. This will indeed ever be the case when truth is sought for

itself, and no personal feelings enter into the matter.

I have read your chapters on Ignatius, and you will perhaps hardly

expect that I should subscribe to your views. It is now about twenty

years since I first undertook this inquiry, and constantly have I

been endeavouring to add some new light ever since. I once answered an

opponent in my present brother canon, Dr. Wordsworth, but since that

time I have never replied to any adverse views--but have only looked

to see if I could find anything either to show that I was wrong or to

strengthen my convictions that I was right. And I have found the

wisdom of this, and have had the satisfaction of knowing that my ablest

opponents, after having had more time to inquire and to make greater

research, have of their own accord conformed to my views and written in

their support.

I attach no very great importance to the Epistles of Ignatius. I shall

not draw from them any dogma. I only look upon them as evidence of the

time to certain facts, which indeed were amply established even without

such evidence. I think that in such cases, we must look chiefly to the

historical testimony of facts; and you will forgive me for saying that

I think your arguments are based upon presumptive evidence, negative

evidence, and the evidence of appropriateness--all of which, however

valuable, must tumble to the ground before one single fact. You notice

that Archbishop Ussher doubted the Epistle to Polycarp. But why? simply

because its style (not having been altered by the forger) was different

from the rest. But you know he says there was more _historical_ evidence

in its favour than for any of the rest. It thus becomes an argument in

support of the Syriac text instead of against it. Can you explain how

it happens that the Syriac text, found in the very language of Ignatius

himself, and transcribed many hundreds of years before the Ignatian

controversy was thought of, now it is discovered, should contain only

the _three Epistles_ of the existence of which there is any historical

evidence before the time of Eusebius, and that, although it may contain

some things which you do not approve, still has rejected all the

passages which the critics of the Ignatian controversy protested

against? You go too far to say that Bentley rejected the Ignatian

Epistles--he only rejected them in the form in which they were put forth

by Ussher and Vossius, and not in the form of the Syriac. So did Porson,

as Bishop Kaye informed me--but he never denied that Ignatius had

written letters--indeed, the very forgeries were a proof of true

patterns which were falsified.

A great many of the ablest scholars in Europe, who had refused to accept

the Greek letters, are convinced of the genuineness of the Syriac. But

time will open. Believe me, yours faithfully,

WILLIAM CURETON.

THE REV. DR. KILLEN.

Some time after this letter was written, ecclesiastical literature

sustained a severe loss in the death of its amiable and accomplished

author. Though Dr. Cureton here expressed himself with due caution, his

language is certainly not calculated to reassure the advocates of the

Ignatian Epistles. One of their most learned editors in recent times--so

far from speaking in a tone of confidence respecting them--here admits

that he attached to them "no very great importance." Though he had spent

twenty years chiefly in their illustration, he acknowledges that he was

constantly endeavouring "to add some new light" for his guidance.

To him, therefore, the subject must have been still involved in much

mystery.

It is noteworthy that, in the preceding letter, he has not been able

to point out a solitary error in the statement of the claims of these

Epistles as presented in _The Ancient Church_. He alleges, indeed, that

the arguments employed are "based upon presumptive evidence, negative

evidence, and the evidence of appropriateness;" he confesses that

these proofs are "valuable;" but, though he contends that they must all

"tumble to the around before one single fact," he has failed to produce

the one single fact required for their overthrow.

Dr. Cureton had obviously not been previously aware that Dr. Bentley,

the highest authority among British critics, had rejected the Ignatian

Epistles. Had he been cognisant of that fact when he wrote the _Corpus

Ignatianum_, he would have candidly announced it to his readers. The

manner in which he here attempts to dispose of it is certainly not very

satisfactory. He pleads that, though Bentley condemned as spurious the

letters edited by Ussher and Vossius, he would not have pronounced the

same decision on the Syriac version recently discovered. Why not? This

Syriac version is an edition of _the same Epistles_ in an abbreviated

form. If Bentley denounced _the whole_ as a forgery, it seems to follow,

by logical inference, that he would have pronounced the same verdict on

the half or the third part. Dr. Cureton is mistaken when he affirms in

the preceding communication that his Syriac version has rejected "all

the passages" against which "the critics of the Ignatian controversy"

had protested. The very contrary has been demonstrated in _The Ancient

Church_. A large number of the sentences which had provoked the most

unsparing criticism are retained in the Curetonian edition. It is

right to add that Archbishop Ussher more than "doubted" the Epistle to

Polycarp. He discarded it altogether. Without hesitation he set it aside

as spurious. Whilst he disliked its style, he felt that it wanted other

marks of genuineness. When writing _The Ancient Church_--now nearly

thirty years ago--I was disposed to think that the Ignatian Epistles had

been manufactured at Antioch; but more mature consideration has led me

to adopt the conclusion that they were concocted at Rome. They bear a

strong resemblance to several other spurious works which appeared

there; and the servile submission to episcopal authority which they so

strenuously inculcate was first most offensively challenged by the chief

pastor of the great Western bishopric. These Epistles tended much to

promote the progress of ecclesiastical despotism.

Any one who studies the two chapters on the Ignatian Epistles in _The

Ancient Church_, must see that what is there urged against them is

something more than "presumptive evidence, negative evidence, and the

evidence of appropriateness." It is shown that their anachronisms,

historical blundering, and false doctrine clearly convict them of

forgery.

II.

It has been deemed right to subjoin here a copy of the Ignatian Epistle

to the Romans, as some readers may not have it at hand for consultation.

Various translations of this Epistle have been published. The following

adheres pretty closely to that given by the Bishop of Durham:--

"Ignatius, who is also Theophorus, to her that has obtained mercy

through the might of the Most High Father, and of Jesus Christ His only

Son, to the Church which is beloved and enlightened through the will

of Him who willeth all things that are according to the love of Jesus

Christ our God, to her that has the presidency in the country of the

region of the Romans; being worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of

felicitation, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy in purity, and

having the presidency of love, walking in the law of Christ, and bearing

the Father's name, which I also salute in the name of Jesus Christ, the

Son of the Father, to those that are united both according to the flesh

and spirit to every one of His commandments, being filled inseparably

with the grace of God, and filtered clear from every foreign stain;

abundance of happiness unblameably in Jesus Christ our God.

"1. Through prayer to God I have obtained the privilege of seeing your

most worthy faces, and have even been granted more than I requested, for

I hope as a prisoner in Jesus Christ to salute you, if indeed it be the

will of God that I be thought worthy of attaining unto the end. For the

beginning has been well ordered, if so be I shall attain unto the goal,

that I may receive my inheritance without hindrance. For I am afraid of

your love, lest it should be to me an injury; for it is easy for you to

accomplish what you please, but it is difficult for me to attain to God,

if ye spare me.

"2. For I would not have you to be men-pleasers, but to please God, as

ye do please Him. For neither shall I ever have such an opportunity of

attaining to God, nor can ye, if ye be silent, ever be entitled to the

honour of a better work. For if ye are silent concerning me, I shall

become God's; but if ye love my body, I shall have my course again to

run. Pray, then, do not seek to confer any greater favour upon me than

that I be poured out a libation to God, while there is still an altar

ready; that being gathered together in love ye may sing praise to the

Father through Jesus Christ, that God has deemed me, the bishop of

Syria, worthy to be sent for from the east to the west. It is good to

set from the world to God, that I may rise again to Him.

"3. Ye have never envied any one. Ye have taught others, and my desire

is that those lessons shall hold good, which as teachers ye enjoin. Only

request in my behalf both inward and outward strength, so that I may

not only say it, but also desire it; that I may not only be called a

Christian, but really be found one. For if I shall be found so, then

can I also be called one, and be faithful then, when I shall no longer

appear to the world. Nothing visible is good: for our God, Jesus Christ,

now that He is with the Father, is all the more revealed. The work is

not of persuasiveness, but of greatness, whensoever it is hated by the

world.

"4. I write to all the Churches, and I bid all men know that of my own

free will I die for God, unless ye should hinder me. I exhort you not to

show an unseasonable good-will towards me. Suffer me to become food for

the wild beasts, that through them I shall attain to God. I am the wheat

of God, and I am ground by the teeth of wild beasts that I may be found

the pure bread of Christ. Rather entice the wild beasts that they may

become my sepulchre, and may leave no part of my body behind, so that I

may not, when I am fallen asleep, be burdensome to any one. Then shall I

be truly a disciple of Jesus Christ, when the world shall not so much as

see my body. Supplicate the Lord for me, that through these instruments

I may be found a sacrifice to God. I do not enjoin you as Peter and Paul

did. They were apostles, I am a convict; they were free, I am a slave

to this very hour. But, when I suffer, I shall be a freed-man of Jesus

Christ, and shall rise free in Him. Now I am learning in my bonds to put

away every desire.

"5. From Syria even to Rome I fight with wild beasts; by land and sea,

by night and by day, being bound amidst ten leopards, even a company of

soldiers, who only become worse when they are kindly treated. Howbeit

through their wrong-doings I am become more completely a disciple, yet

am I not hereby justified. May I have joy of the beasts that have been

prepared for me; and I pray that I may find them prompt; nay, I will

entice them that they may devour me promptly, not as they have done to

some, refusing to touch them through fear. Yea, though of themselves

they should not be willing while I am ready, I myself will force them to

it. Bear with me, I know what is expedient for me. Now am I beginning

to be a disciple. May nought of things visible and things invisible

envy me, that I may attain unto Jesus Christ. Come fire and cross, and

grapplings with wild beasts, cuttings and manglings, wrenching of bones,

hacking of limbs, crushings of my whole body, come cruel tortures of the

devil to assail me, only be it mine to attain to Jesus Christ.

"6. The farthest bounds of the universe shall profit me nothing, neither

the kingdoms of this world. It is good for me to die for Jesus Christ,

rather than to reign over the farthest bounds of the earth. I seek Him

who died on our behalf, I desire Him who rose again for our sake. My

birth-pangs are at hand. Pardon me, brethren, do not hinder me from

living. Do not wish to keep me in a state of death, while I desire to

belong to God; do not give me over to the world, neither allure me

with material things. Suffer me to obtain pure light; when I have gone

thither, then shall I be a man. Permit me to be an imitator of the

passion of my God. If any man has Him within himself, let him consider

what I desire, and let him have sympathy with me, as knowing how I am

straitened.

"7. The prince of this world would fain seize me, and corrupt my

disposition towards God. Let not any of you, therefore, that are near

abet him. Rather be ye on my side, that is, on God's side. Do not speak

of Jesus Christ and set your desires on the world. Let not envy dwell

among you. Even though I myself, when I am with you, should beseech you,

obey me not, but rather give credit to those things which I now write.

My earthly passion has been crucified, and there is no fire of material

longing in me; but there is within me a water that lives and speaks,

saying to me inwardly, 'Come to the Father.' I have no delight in the

food of corruption, or in the delights of this life. I desire the bread

of God, which is the flesh of Christ, who was of the seed of David; and

for a draught I desire His blood, which is love incorruptible.

"8. I desire no longer to live after the manner of men; and this shall

be, if ye desire it. Be ye willing, then, that ye also may be desired.

In a brief letter I beseech you, do ye give credit to me. Jesus Christ

will reveal these things to you, so that ye shall know that I speak the

truth--Jesus Christ the unerring mouth by which the Father has spoken

truly. Pray for me that I may attain the object of my desire. I write

not unto you after the flesh, but after the mind of God. If I shall

suffer, it was your desire; but if I am rejected, ye have hated me.

"9. Remember in your prayers the Church which is in Syria, which has God

for its shepherd in my stead. Jesus Christ alone shall be its bishop,

He and your love; but for myself, I am ashamed to be called one of them;

for neither am I worthy, being the very last of them and an untimely

birth; but I have found mercy that I should be some one, if so I shall

attain unto God. My spirit salutes you, and the love of the Churches

which received me in the name of Jesus Christ, not as a mere wayfarer;

for even those Churches which did not lie on my route after the flesh,

went before me from city to city.

"10. Now I write these things to you from Smyrna, by the hand of the

Ephesians, who are worthy of all felicitation. And Crocus also, a name

very dear to me, is with me, with many others besides.

"11. As touching those who went before me from Syria to Rome, to the

glory of God, I believe that ye have received instructions; whom also

apprize that I am near, for they all are worthy of God and of you, and

it becomes you to refresh them in all things. These things I write to

you on the 9th before the Kalends of September. Fare-ye-well unto the

end in the patient waiting for Jesus Christ."

This letter is a strange mixture of silly babblement, mysticism,

and fanaticism; but throughout it wants the true ring of an honest

correspondence. Why does the writer describe himself as the _Bishop of

Syria_, and why does he never once mention _Antioch_ from beginning to

end? When an apostle was imprisoned, his brethren prayed for his release

(Acts xii. 5); but this Ignatius forbade the Christians at Rome to make

any attempt to save him from martyrdom. Paul taught that he might give

his body to be burned, and yet after all be a reprobate (1 Cor. xiii.

3); but this Ignatius indicates that all would be well with him, if he

had the good fortune to be eaten by the lions. His letter is pervaded,

not by the enlightened and cheerful piety of the New Testament, but by

the gloomy and repulsive spirit of Montanism. Bishop Lightfoot tells

us that it had "a wider popularity than the other letters of Ignatius"

(vol. ii, § i. p. 186). It was accommodated to the taste of an age of

deteriorated Christianity. Polycarp would have sternly condemned its

extravagance. But, in the early part of the third century, the tone of

public sentiment in the Christian Church was greatly changed, and the

writings of Tertullian contributed much to give encouragement to such

productions as the Ignatian Epistles. Tertullian, however, in his

numerous writings, never once names Ignatius. It would appear that he

had never heard of these letters.

[ENDNOTES]

[2:1] Carwithen, _Hist. Ch. of England_, i. 554, 2nd ed.

[2:2] _Instit._ I. c. xiii. § 29. "There is," says Calvin, "nothing more

abominable than that trash which is in circulation under the name of

Ignatius."

[3:1] _The Apostolic Fathers_, Part II., S. Ignatius, S. Polycarp.

Revised texts, with Introductions, Notes, Dissertations, and

Translations. By J. B. Lightfoot, D.D., D.C.L., LL.D., Bishop of Durham.

London 1885.

[4:1] _Expositor_ for Dec. 1885, p. 401. London, Hodder & Stoughton.

[6:1] Vol. i. p. 316.

[6:2] Pref. I. vii.

[6:3] Vol. i. p. 107.

[7:1] Monk's _Life of Bentley_, ii. p. 44, ed. 1833. Monk adds, that the

affair was "the talk of the Long Vacation"--a clear proof that the truth

of the statement was indisputable.

[7:2] See my _Old Catholic Church_, p. 398, Edinburgh 1871; and Appendix

No. 1 to this Reply.

[7:3] Vol. i. p. 321, note.

[8:1] Vol. i. p. 316.

[8:2] Vol. i. p. 321.

[8:3] Vol. i. p. 320.

[9:1] See _Expositor_ for Dec. 1885, p. 403.

[9:2] Vol. ii. sec. i. p. 436.

[10:1] Vol. i. p.345.

[11:1] Vol. i. p. 331.

[11:2] See Lightfoot, vol. i. p. 131.

[12:1] See _Expositor_ for Dec. 1885, p. 404.

[13:1] Page v.

[15:1] Preface, p. vi.

[16:1] _Contra Haer._ iii. 3. 4.

[16:2] Vol. ii. sec. i. p. 446.

[16:3] _Ibid._

[17:1] Vol. i. p. 380. He says elsewhere "almost simultaneously," vol.

i. p. 382.

[17:2] § 4, 5, 6. It is worthy of remark that Eusebius notices the

letter of Polycarp, not along with the Ignatian Epistles, but in

connection with the beginning of the reign of Marcus Aurelius. See

Eusebius, Book IV. chap. xiv.

[18:1] The words "for kings" of this part of the letter are extant only

in a Latin version. The passage in the Latin stands thus: "Orate etiam,

pro regibus et potestatibus et principibus."

[18:2] As the great monarch of Assyria surveyed the potentates under his

dominion, he was tempted to exclaim vaingloriously, "Are not my princes

all of them kings?" Isa. x. 8, Revised Version. The emperor of Rome

might have uttered the same proud boast.

[18:3] Vol. i. p. 576.

[18:4] _Ibid._ In support of this view Dr. Lightfoot appeals to 1

Tim ii. 2, where the apostle says that "supplications, prayers,

intercessions, and giving of thanks," as circumstances required, should

be made "for kings and all that are in authority." Paul is here giving

general directions suited to all time; but Polycarp is addressing

himself to the Philippians, and furnishing them with instructions

adapted to their existing condition.

[19:1] Vol. i. p. 407

[21:1] § 13. This part of the letter is only extant in the Latin

version. Its words are: "De ipso Ignatio, et _de his qui cum eo sunt_,

quod certius agnoveritis, significate." Dr. Lightfoot admits that "it

was made from an older form of the Greek" than any of the existing Greek

MSS., vol. ii. § ii. p. 201. He vainly tries to prove that the words

"qui cum eo sunt" must be a mistranslation. They do not suit his theory.

They imply that Ignatius and his party were still living when the letter

was written.

[21:3] See Dr. Lightfoot, vol. i. p. 23, and Zahn, _Ignatius von

Antiochien_, pp. 28 and 401.

[21:4] This road was several hundred miles in length.

[22:2] Vol. ii. sec. ii. p. 921, note.

[23:1] "Si quis vadit ad Syriam, deferat literas meas, quas fecero

ad vos." This is the reading of the old Latin version, which, as Dr.

Lightfoot tells us, "is sometimes useful for correcting the text of the

extant Greek MSS." Vol. ii. sec. ii. p. 901. Even some of the Greek MSS.

read, not [Greek: par humon] but [Greek: par haemon]. This reading is

found in some copies of Eusebius and in Nicephorus, and is followed by

Rufinus. See Jacobson, _Pat. Apost._ ii. 488, note.

[24:1] The apostles and elders assembled at Jerusalem directed their

letters to the brethren "in _Antioch_, and Syria, and Cilicia," Acts xv.

23; but, according to Dr. Lightfoot and his supporters, Ignatius ignores

his own city, though one of the greatest in the empire, and remembers

only the province to which it belonged!

[25:1] Epistle to Polycarp, § 7.

[26:1] The words may be literally translated, "If any one is going to

Syria, he might convey to you my letters which I shall have finished,"

that is, which I have ready. Friendly letters were then generally much

longer than in our day, as the opportunities of transmitting them were

few; and much longer time was occupied in their preparation.

[27:1] [Greek: Psuria]--see the _Iliad_ and _Odyssey_, by J. B.

Friedreich, p. 64. Erlangen 1856. It is mentioned by Homer in the

_Odyssey_, lib. iii. 171. See also Dunbar's _Greek Lexicon_, art.

[Greek: Psuria].

[27:2] Mr. Gladstone has remarked that "the [Greek: Suriae naesos], or

Syros, has the same bearing in respect to Delos as [Greek: Psuriae] in

respect to Chios."--_Studies on Homer_, vol. iii. 333, note.

[28:1] See Homer, _Odyssey_, xv. 402. See the note in the _Odyssey_, by

F. H. Rothe, pp. 233-34. Leipsic 1834. In the Latin version of Strabo

we have these words: "Videtur sub-Syriae nomine mentionem facere Homerus

his quidem verbis:--

'Ortygiam supra Syria est quaedam insula.'"

Strabo, _Rer. Geog._ lib. x. p. 711. Oxford 1807. The passage in Homer

is thus rendered by Chapman:--

"There is an isle above Ortygia,

If thou hast heard, they call it Syria."

The present inhabitants of this island call themselves [Greek: Surianoi]

or Syrians. See Smith's _Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography_, art.

"Syros."

[28:2] Bingham's _Origines Ecclesiasticae_, iii. 196. London 1840.

[28:3] Smith's _Assyrian Discoveries_, p. 22. London 1875.

[29:1] Smith, p. 21.

[29:2] Dr. Lightfoot imagines that he has discovered a wonderful

confirmation of his views in the word "likewise" which here occurs (vol.

i. p. 574). It is not easy to see the force of his argument; but, with

the explanations given in the text, the word has peculiar significance.

It implies that whilst the messenger was to carry the letters from

Smyrna to Syria, he was _also_, or likewise, to bring back Smyrna the

letters sent to Syria from Philippi.

[30:1] Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans, § 11.

[30:2] Zahn speaks of the mission to Antioch as "senseless, even

considering the time of the year."--_Ignatius von Antiochien_, p. 287.

[34:1] I was myself so much impressed at one time by Dr. Lightfoot's

reasoning in the _Contemporary Review_ (May 1875), that I actually

adopted his reckoning as to the date of Polycarp's death in a late

edition of my _Ancient Church_; but, on more mature consideration, I

have found it to be quite untenable.

[34:2] Vol. i. p. 629.

[34:3] Vol. i. pp. 629, 630.

[35:1] Vol. i. p. 630.

[37:1] Lightfoot, vol. i. p. 632.

[37:2] _Ibid._

[37:3] Vol. i. p. 148.

[37:4] _Vita Malchi_, Opera iv. pp. 90, 91. Paris 1706.

[38:1] Döllinger's _Hippolytus and Callistus_, by Plummer, pp. 79, 80.

Edinburgh 1876.

[38:2] Vol. i. p. 633.

[39:1] Dr. Lightfoot is not supported in his chronology by his favourite

Zahn, who places the date of the martyrdom of Polycarp after the death

of Peregrinus, in A.D. 165.--_Ignatius von Antiochien_, p. 517.

[40:1] Vol. i. p. 451.

[40:2] Vol. i. p. 635.

[41:1] Vol. i. p. 640.

[41:2] Vol. i. pp. 639, 640.

[42:1] Vol. i. 610.

[42:2] _Ibid._ Even the manuscript authorities of this postscript differ

as to the name. According to some, the prenomen was _Statius_; according

to others, _Stratius_; according to another, _Tatius_; whilst in another

the name is omitted altogether. See Lightfoot, vol. i. p. 656, note;

vol. ii. sec. ii. p. 984; see also Jacobson, ii. p. 593.

[43:1] It is probable that the postscript was written many years after

the event; and, under these circumstances, the writer may have mistaken

the name of the proconsul at the time. Eusebius seems to have known

nothing of this postscript, and it is now impossible to tell when it was

added.

[43:2] Ummidius Quadratus, in A.D. 167, was associated with the Emperor

Lucius Verus in the consulship; and it would appear that about A.D.

169--on the ground of exceptional ability and influence--he was

appointed to the proconsulship of Asia.

[43:3] Vol. i. pp. 460, 463. In another case we find the proconsul

_Sergius_ Paulus styled incorrectly _Servillius_ Paullus, vol. i. p.

494. See also i. p. 508.

[44:1] It is stated in this same postscript, that "Philip of Tralles was

high priest," or Asiarch, at the time of the martyrdom of Polycarp.

From this fact Dr. Lightfoot has endeavoured to derive support for his

chronology. His argument is, however, quite inconclusive. The dignity

of Asiarch could be enjoyed only by the very rich, as none others could

sustain the expense of it; and the same individual might hold it for

years together, as well as again and again. The Philip of whom Dr.

Lightfoot speaks, had a son of the same name, who may also have been

high priest or Asiarch. See Lightfoot, vol. i. pp. 612, 613, 615, 616.

[44:2] Euseb. iv.

[45:1] Vol. i. p. 443.

[45:2] Vol. i. p. 343.

[45:3] Vol. i. pp. 443-44.

[46:1] Vol. i. p. 510.

[46:2] § 2.

[46:3] See Neander, i. p. 147. Edinburgh 1847.

[46:4] Neander, i. p. 146.

[47:1] Antoninus Pius became emperor in A.D. 138.--Lightfoot, i. p. 703.

Hadrian died on the 10th of July of that year.--_Ibid._

[47:2] Book iv. 10.

[47:3] Book iv. 11. Dr. Lightfoot states that Eusebius had lists of

Roman and Alexandrian bishops, "giving the lengths of their respective

terms of office," vol. ii. sec. i. p. 451. It is said that Hippolytus

was the first who ever made a chronological list of the Bishops of

Rome.--Döllinger's _Hippolytus and Callistus_, p. 337.

[50:1] § 8, 9.

[50:2] Vol. i. p. 703.

[50:3] Vol. i. p. 650.

[51:1] Vol. i. p. 273.

[53:1] _Contra Haer._ lib. v. c. 28. §4.

[54:1] Dr. Lightfoot seems to have been in a condition of strange

forgetfulness when he asks, "Why does not Irenaeus quote Polycarp's

Epistle?"--vol. i. p. 328. The simple answer is that he mentions the

Epistle, and quotes Polycarp by name as a witness against the heretics.

_Contra Haer._ book iii. c. 3. § 4.

[55:1] Eusebius, v. c. i. The writer here mentions a number of

individuals by name, who were at this time "led into the amphitheatre to

the wild beasts."

[55:2] Professor Harnack says: "If we do not retain the Epistle of

Polycarp, then we must allow that _the external evidence on behalf

of the Ignatian Epistles is exceedingly weak, and hence is highly

favourable to the suspicion that they are spurious."--Expositor_ for

Jan. 1886, p. 11. We have seen, however, that the Epistle of Polycarp

furnishes no evidence in their favour. See Chap. II.

[56:1] Vol. i. p. 578.

[57:1] Vol. i. p. 579.

[57:2] Vol. i. p. 580.

[57:3] Vol. i. p. 39.

[57:4] Vol. i. p. 583.

[57:5] To the Trallians, § 10.

[58:1] To the Romans, § 5.

[58:2] To the Trallians, § 4.

[58:3] To the Smyrnaeans, § 4.

[58:4] To the Romans, § 4.

[58:5] Letter of the Smyrnaeans relating to the death of Polycarp, § 4.

[58:6] To the Smyrnaeans, § 9.

[58:7] Polycarp to the Philippians, Section § 1, 5, 10.

[58:8] § 4, 6.

[59:1] To the Philad. § 3. To the Smyrnaeans, § 9. To Polycarp, § 6.

[59:2] _The Ancient Church_, Period II. sec. ii. chap. ii., iii.

[59:3] _Epistle to the Philippians_, pp. 181-269.

[60:1] Vol. i. p. 377.

[60:2] 1 Tim. i. 3, iii. 5.

[61:1] Acts xx. 28, 31.

[61:2] 1 Tim. iv. 14.

[62:1] _Comment. in Titum_.

[62:2] Gal. ii. 9.

[63:1] _Philippians._ Essay, pp. 216, 218.

[63:2] Dr. Lightfoot, as we have seen, here completely mistakes the date

of the Epistle of Polycarp.

[63:3] _Philippians_, p. 226.

[63:4] _Ibid._ p. 227.

[63:5] _Ibid._ p. 226.

[64:1] See my _Ancient Church_, 4th edition, pp. 470-71. New York 1883.

[64:2] Vol. i. p. 377.

[64:3] It is quite clear that the bishops of whom Irenaeus speaks were

not a distinct order from presbyters. Thus he says, "It is incumbent

to obey the _presbyters_ who are in the Church, those who possess the

succession from the apostles, and who together with the _succession

of the episcopate_ have received the certain gift of truth." ... "It

behoves us ... to adhere to those who ... hold the doctrine of the

apostles, and who, together with _the order of the presbytery_, display

sound speech and blameless conduct."--_Contra Haer._ lib. iv. c. 26, §

2, 4.

[65:1] _Irenicum_, part ii. chap. 7.

[65:2] _Contra Haer._ iii. 3, 4.

[65:3] "It is," says he, "at all events _not likely_," vol. i. p. 425.

[66:1] 1 Tim. i. 18.

[66:2] If he was eighty-six years of age at the time of his martyrdom in

A.D. 169, he was born A.D. 83.

[67:1] Even Eusebius has given some countenance to this practice. See

his _Evangelical Preparation_, xii. c. 31.

[68:1] Döllinger's _Hippolytus and Callistus_, p. 113.

[69:1] § 9. See this letter in Appendix II.

[70:1] Vol. i. p. 383. It is worthy of note that, in this Epistle to the

Romans, Antioch is not named. Ignatius speaks of himself as "the bishop

from Syria," § 2. He thus seeks to identify himself with the Ignatius

mentioned in the Epistle of Polycarp, who speaks of sending letters to

Syria.

[71:1] Vol. ii. sec. i. p. 186.

[72:1] Lightfoot, vol. ii. sec. i. pp. 435, 445.

[72:2] Vol. i. p. 46.

[73:1] Euseb. v. c. 24.

[74:1] Eph. § 6; Magn. § 6.

[74:2] Rom. § 4.

[74:3] Eph. § 12; Rom. § 4; Trallians, § 3.

[74:4] Eph. § 9.

[75:1] Polycarp, § 6.

[75:2] Smyrnaeans, § 5; Philad. § 6.

[75:3] _Philosophumena_, Book IX.

[75:4] Eph. § 1.

[75:5] Rom. § 6.

[76:1] Vol. i. p. 329.

[76:2] Philippians, p. 236.

[77:1] Cyprian could not sympathize with this Ignatius in his passion

for martyrdom. The Bishop of Carthage incurred some odium by retiring to

a place of safety in a time of persecution.

[77:2] Philippians, Essay 237.

The Ignatian Epistles Entirely Spurious: A Reply to the Right Rev. Dr. Lightfoot · 第 5 / 5 章