During the Renaissance and Reformation, both the long and middle recensions became known in both Greek and Latin, although it was not until 1646 that the Greek text of the middle recension was published. This multiplicity of forms, together with the admixture of varying numbers of later spurious letters, created a great deal of confusion and debate about the authenticity of the letters. Progress in resolving the question was not helped by the fact that the discussion came to be heavily influenced by extraneous dogmatic concerns: Catholic scholars generally defended the authenticity of the letters because of the obvious polemical value of Ignatius’s early emphasis on the monepiscopal form of church structure, while Protestants generally denied their authenticity for similar reasons.
A consensus of sorts in favor of the middle recension came to prevail following the publication of Pearson’s Vindiciae Ignatianae (1672), but the question was reopened in 1845 when William Cureton published the Syriac abridgment of three of the letters (the short recension). Not until the independent work of Theodor Zahn (1873), Adolf von Harnack (1878), and J. B. Lightfoot (1885) was the authenticity of the seven letters of the middle recension generally recognized.[7] So thorough and persuasive was the work especially of Zahn and Lightfoot that the great majority of scholars since their day have considered the matter of authenticity as settled once and for all.
Three major challenges in the space of a decade in the late 1960s and 1970s— by Weijenborg and Joly, who questioned the authenticity of the entire corpus, and by Rius-Camps, who contended that three of the seven letters were forged and the rest interpolated and revised—did little to alter the consensus.[8] The admitted difficulties that were noted and raised as a reason for reevaluating the documents were not new, and the proposed solutions seemed to raise more problems than they solved.[9]
In the late 90s the question of authenticity was again raised.[10] This time an attempt was made to place the discussion on a new footing by bringing to bear on the problem a revised understanding of Gnosticism, especially as propounded by Valentinus, and by noting that foundational working assumptions on which the nineteenth-century scholars based their case are widely questioned or rejected in current scholarship. Consequently, scholars such as R. Hübner and T. Lechner claim that the letters betray a dependence upon the writings of Noetus of Smyrna and therefore must be forgeries composed no earlier than about AD 165–175, a time when the proto-orthodox church was responding to the challenges posed by the teachings of Valentinus and other Gnostic teachers.
Hübner and Lechner succeed in raising fresh doubts about the traditional early date of the Ignatian letters, but their case for seeing them as later forgeries is unpersuasive: for example, they give insufficient weight to evidence in the letters that does not fit the proposed time frame, and they pay inadequate attention to probable first- or early-second-century antecedents of Ignatian ideas and concepts (such as 1 Corinthians, John, and 1 Timothy).[11] In short, the proposed solutions raise more problems and questions than they solve or answer. The traditional view, that the seven letters attributed to Ignatius are authentic, remains the most probable (and least problematic) solution to the question regarding authenticity.
Form and Style
Ignatius utilizes both Pauline and secular communication models in distinctive ways (e.g., thanksgiving statements are notably absent), especially with respect to the greetings at the beginning and end of his letters and internal transitional devices.[12] His dense, colorful (perhaps even florid) style reflects a popular style of rhetoric known as Asianism.
Sources and Cultural Context
Whereas Ignatius makes very little use of the Old Testament,[13] he is deeply indebted to early Christian tradition, which has pervasively shaped his vocabulary and thought. His heavy use of Pauline tradition (the way Paul responded to rejection likely offered a model for Ignatius) was shaped both by a more “mystical” tradition (represented also in the Gospel of John) and by a concern for order and discipline (cf. Matthew).
Ignatius likely knew a wide range of early Christian literature, but whatever that range was, we can demonstrate with certainty his use of only a few writings.[14] He probably worked with the Gospel of Matthew (e.g., Smyrn. 1.1); there is no evidence of Mark, and only minimal (and not conclusive) evidence of Luke (Smyrn. 3.2). Use of John (cf. Rom. 7.3; Phld. 7.1) is unlikely. He has read 1 Corinthians, and probably Ephesians and 1 and 2 Timothy. There are numerous echoes of other Pauline documents (his collection may have included 1 Corinthians, Ephesians, Romans, Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, and 1 and 2 Timothy), but it is difficult to determine whether these echoes reflect literary dependence or the use of traditional elements. The parallel between 1 John and Ephesians 14.2 is notable, as are parallels between Ignatius and 1 Clement, 2 Clement, and The Shepherd of Hermas, but again these are insufficient to demonstrate knowledge of documents.[15]
The character of Ignatius’s debt to Hellenistic culture is much debated. Gnostic affinities have been alleged on the basis of mythological elements in such passages as Ephesians 19 or the themes of “oneness” and “silence,” but recent investigations have indicated that these elements are also found in the wider popular culture.[16] These investigations, together with observations about the form and style of his letters, suggest that Ignatius mirrors more the popular culture of his day than any specific esoteric or Gnostic influences.
Text and Order of the Letters
The Greek text upon which the translation is based has been reconstructed on the basis of the following primary witnesses: Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus (eleventh century; the only surviving copy of the middle recension); the Latin translation of the middle recension; the Greek manuscripts of the long recension; the Latin manuscripts of the long recension; the Syriac abridgment (the short recension). In addition, Syriac, Coptic, and Armenian translations of the middle recension are available. For Romans, which has a separate textual history, the following are the main additional witnesses: Codex Parisiensis-Colbertinus (tenth-eleventh century); Codex Hierosolymitanus S. Sabae (tenth century); Codex Sinaiticus 519 (tenth century); Codex Taurinensis (thirteenth century).
The order in which the letters are presented is that of Eusebius (Church History 3.36), which reflects a geographical arrangement based upon the order of cities from which and to which they were sent (cf. above, “Setting and Occasion”). In Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus, however, they stand in the following order:
Smyrnaeans
Polycarp
Ephesians
Magnesians
Philadelphians
Trallians
This sequence is consistent with Polycarp’s remark to the Philippians (Pol. Phil. 13.2)—“We are sending you the letters of Ignatius that were sent to us by him [i.e., the letters to the Smyrnaeans and Polycarp] together with any others that we have in our possession [i.e., the letter to the Ephesians, etc.]”—and may well represent the order of the letters in the earliest collection made of them.
Bibliography
Commentaries
Grant, R. M. Ignatius of Antioch. Vol. 4 of The Apostolic Fathers, edited by R. M. Grant. Camden, NJ: Nelson, 1966.
Lightfoot, J. B. The Apostolic Fathers. Part 2, S. Ignatius; S. Polycarp. 2nd ed. 3 vols. London: Macmillan, 1889. Repr. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981.
Schoedel, W. R. Ignatius of Antioch: A Commentary on the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985.
Studies
Barnard, L. W. “The Background of St. Ignatius of Antioch.” Vigiliae Christianae 17 (1963): 193–206.
Barrett, C. K. “Jews and Judaizers in the Epistles of Ignatius.” In Jews, Greeks and Christians, edited by R. Hammerton-Kelly and R. Scroggs, 220–44. Leiden: Brill, 1976.
Bauer, W. Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity. Edited by R. A. Kraft and G. Krodel. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971.
Campenhausen, Hans von. Ecclesiastical Authority and Spiritual Power in the Church of the First Three Centuries. Translated by
J. A. Baker. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1969. Repr. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1997.
Corwin, Virginia. St. Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1960.
Donahue, Paul J. “Jewish Christianity in the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch.” Vigiliae Christianae 32 (1978): 81–93.
Foster, Paul. “The Epistles of Ignatius of Antioch and the Writings That Later Formed the New Testament.” In The Reception of the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers, edited by Andrew Gregory and Christopher Tuckett, 159–86. Vol. 1 of The New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.
———. “The Epistles of Ignatius of Antioch.” Part 1, Expository Times 117, no. 12 (2006): 487–95. Part 2, Expository Times 118, no. 1 (2006).
Hammond Bammel, C. P. “Ignatian Problems.” Journal of Theological Studies 33 (1982): 62–97.
Maier, Harry O. The Social Setting of the Ministry as Reflected in the Writings of Hermas, Clement and Ignatius. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1991.
Massaux, E. The Influence of the Gospel of Saint Matthew on Christian Literature before Saint Irenaeus. Book 1, The First Ecclesiastical Writers. New Gospel Studies 5/1. Translated by N. J. Belval and S. Hecht. Edited and with an introduction and addenda by A. J. Bellinzoni. Macon, GA: Mercer University Press, 1990.
Norris, F. W. “Ignatius, Polycarp, and I Clement: Walter Bauer Reconsidered.” Vigiliae Christianae 30 (1976): 23–44.
Rius-Camps, J. The Four Authentic Letters of Ignatius, the Martyr. Christianismos 2. Rome: Pontificium Institutum Orientalium Studiorum, 1979.
Schoedel, W. R. “Are the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch Authentic?” Religious Studies Review 6 (1980): 196–201.
———. “Polycarp of Smyrna and Ignatius of Antioch.” ANRW 2.27.1 (1993): 272–358.
Sumney, Jerry L. “Those Who ‘Ignorantly Deny Him’: The Opponents of Ignatius of Antioch (Identified in Three Letters).” Journal of Early Christian Studies 1 (1993): 345–65.
Trevett, Christine. A Study of Ignatius of Antioch in Syria and Asia. Studies in the Bible and Early Christianity 29. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen, 1992.
THE LETTER OF IGNATIUS TO THE EPHESIANS
Salutation
Ignatius the Image-bearer to the church at Ephesus in Asia, blessed with greatness through the fullness of God the Father, predestined before the ages for lasting and unchangeable glory forever, united and elect through genuine suffering by the will of the Father and of Jesus Christ our God, a church most worthy of blessing: heartiest greetings in Jesus Christ and in blameless joy.
Thanks for Visit and Assistance
1 I welcomed in God your well-beloved name, which you possess by reason of your righteous nature, characterized by faith in and love of Christ Jesus our Savior. Being imitators of God, once you took on new life through the blood of God you completed perfectly the task so natural to you. 2 For when you heard that I was on my way from Syria in chains for the sake of our shared name and hope, and was hoping through your prayers to succeed in fighting with wild beasts in Rome—in order that by so succeeding I might be able to be a disciple—you hurried to visit me. 3 Since, therefore, I have received in God’s name your whole congregation in the person of Onesimus, a man of inexpressible love who is also your earthly bishop, I pray that you will love him in accordance with the standard set by Jesus Christ and that all of you will be like him. For blessed is the one who has graciously allowed you, worthy as you are, to have such a bishop.
Salutation the Image-bearer Gk Theophoros. In Greek inscriptions the term is commonly used as a title, describing those who carry divine images or shrines in religious processions (imagery and terminology that Ignatius applies to the Christian community in 9.2). It is possible that here the term is used as a name (“Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus”); if so, it would be the first instance of such a usage. 1.1 name I.e., that of “Christian.” • by reason . . . nature Other ancient authorities read possess by natural right in an upright and righteous mind 1.3 earthly Some ancient authorities omit this word. If original, the contrast is likely with Christ, their heavenly bishop.
2 Now concerning my fellow servant Burrhus, who is by God’s will your deacon, blessed in every respect, I pray that he may remain with me both for your honor and the bishop’s. And Crocus also, who is worthy of God and of you, whom I received as a living example of your love, has refreshed me in every way; may the Father of Jesus Christ likewise refresh him, together with Onesimus, Burrhus, Euplus, and Fronto, in whom I saw all of you with respect to love. 2 May I always have joy in you—if, that is, I am worthy. It is proper, therefore, in every way to glorify Jesus Christ, who has glorified you, so that you, joined together in a united obedience and subject to the bishop and the council of presbyters, may be sanctified in every respect.
2.1 pray Or wish.
Obedience to the Bishop
3 I am not commanding you, as though I were someone important. For even though I am in chains for the sake of the Name, I have not yet been perfected in Jesus Christ. For now I am only beginning to be a disciple, and I speak to you as my fellow students. For I need to be trained by you in faith, instruction, endurance, and patience. 2 But since love does not allow me to be silent concerning you, I have therefore taken the initiative to encourage you, so that you may run together in harmony with the mind of God. For Jesus Christ, our inseparable life, is the mind of the Father, just as the bishops appointed throughout the world are in the mind of Christ.
4 Thus it is proper for you to run together in harmony with the mind of the bishop, as you are in fact doing. For your council of presbyters, which is worthy of its name and worthy of God, is attuned to the bishop as strings to a lyre. Therefore in your unanimity and harmonious love Jesus Christ is sung. 2 You must join this chorus, every one of you, so that by being harmonious in unanimity and taking your pitch from God you may sing in unison with one voice through Jesus Christ to the Father, in order that he may both hear you and, on the basis of what you do well, acknowledge that you are members of his Son. It is, therefore, advantageous for you to be in perfect unity, in order that you may always have a share in God.
5 For if I in a short time experienced such fellowship with your bishop, which was not merely human but spiritual, how much more do I congratulate you who are united with him, as the church is with Jesus Christ and as Jesus Christ is with the Father, so that all things may be harmonious in unity. 2 Let no one be misled: if anyone is not within the sanctuary, he lacks the bread of God. For if the prayer of one or two has such power, how much more that of the bishop together with the whole church! 3 Therefore whoever does not meet with the congregation thereby demonstrates his arrogance and has separated himself, for it is written: “God opposes the arrogant.” Let us, therefore, be careful not to oppose the bishop, in order that we may be obedient to God.
5.2 bread of God Cf. John 6:33. 5.3 separated Or judged. • God . . . arrogant Prov. 3:34; cf. James 4:6; 1 Pet. 5:5. • be obedient to God One ancient authority reads belong to God by our subjugation.
6 Furthermore, the more anyone observes that the bishop is silent, the more one should fear him. For everyone whom the Master of the house sends to manage his own house we must welcome as we would the one who sent him. It is obvious, therefore, that we must regard the bishop as the Lord himself. 2 Now Onesimus himself highly praises your orderly conduct in God, reporting that you all live in accordance with the truth and that no heresy has found a home among you. Indeed, you do not so much as listen to anyone unless he speaks truthfully about Jesus Christ.
6.2 heresy Or faction. • unless . . . Christ An editor’s emendation. One ancient authority reads except Jesus Christ speaking in truth; another has a grammatically impossible reading.
Warnings about Teachers of Error
7 For there are some who are accustomed to carrying about the Name maliciously and deceitfully while doing other things unworthy of God. You must avoid them as wild be
asts. For they are mad dogs that bite by stealth; you must be on your guard against them, for their bite is hard to heal. 2 There is only one physician, who is both flesh and spirit, born and unborn, God in man, true life in death, both from Mary and from God, first subject to suffering and then beyond it, Jesus Christ our Lord.
7.2 God in man Other ancient authorities read God come in flesh (cf. John 1:14).
8 Therefore let no one deceive you, just as you are not now deceived, seeing that you belong entirely to God. For when no dissension capable of tormenting you is established among you, then you indeed live God’s way. I am a humble sacrifice for you and I dedicate myself to you Ephesians, a church that is famous forever. 2 Those who belong to the flesh cannot do spiritual things, nor can those who are spiritual do fleshly things, just as faith cannot do the things of unfaithfulness, nor unfaithfulness the things of faith. Moreover, even those things that you do according to the flesh are in fact spiritual, for you do everything in Jesus Christ.
8.1 dissension Other ancient authorities read lust. 8.2 Those who belong . . . the things of faith Cf. Rom. 8:5, 8.
9 But I have learned that certain people from elsewhere have passed your way with evil doctrine, but you did not allow them to sow it among you. You covered up your ears in order to avoid receiving the things being sown by them, because you are stones of a temple, prepared beforehand for the building of God the Father, hoisted up to the heights by the crane of Jesus Christ, which is the cross, using as a rope the Holy Spirit; your faith is what lifts you up, and love is the way that leads up to God. 2 So you are all participants together in a shared worship, God-bearers and temple-bearers, Christ-bearers, bearers of holy things, adorned in every respect with the commandments of Jesus Christ. I too celebrate with you, since I have been judged worthy to speak with you through this letter, and to rejoice with you because you love nothing in human life, only God.
The Apostolic Fathers in English Page 12