B.
The Recensions of Ignatius’ Letters
Eusebius (Hist. Eccl. 3.36) places Ignatius’ martyrdom
in the reign of Trajan (A.D. 98–117), and a date in
the second half of Trajan’s reign or somewhat later
seems to fit the picture of the conditions reflected
in the letters. Arguments are still advanced (notably
by Joly 1979) that call into question the authenticity
of these documents, but the researches of Zahn (1873)
and Lightfoot (1885, 21889) and their followers continue
to dominate the scholarship. Thus the authenticity
of (a) what is now often, though misleadingly, called
the “middle recension” is generally accepted. By the
same token, (b) the so-called “long recension” is
usually regarded as a 4th-century (perhaps Neo-Arian)
revision (Hagedorn 1973:xxxvii–lii) consisting of
interpolations into the original letters and the addition
of 6 spurious letters. This recension is found in
numerous Greek and Latin manuscripts and came to be
the form in which Ignatius was most often known until
Archbishop Ussher, in his Polycarpi et Ignatii Epistolae
of 1644, brilliantly unearthed an earlier (Latin)
form of the text akin to that quoted by Eusebius.
Ussher had rediscovered the middle recension. The
Greek of that recension (except for the letter to
the Romans) became available with the publication
of Ignatius’ letters from Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus
57,7 by Isaak Voss in 1646. The Greek text of Ignatius’
letter to the Romans had a separate history as part
of an account of Ignatius’ martyrdom (Codex Parisiensis-Colbertinus
1451), and this too was soon published by Th. Ruinart
(1689). Our knowledge of the middle recension has
been increased somewhat by the discovery of several
important oriental versions: Coptic (fragments), Syriac
(fragments), Armenian, Arabic. It should be noted
that almost all of the collections of the letters
of the middle recension in the manuscripts also include
some or all of the spurious letters. Since the interpolations
and the spurious letters are in all likelihood the
work of one person, these collections represent a
curious mixture of textual traditions. Finally, (c)
what some have called the “short recension” proves
to be no recension at all but merely an abridgment
of a Syriac version of the middle recension. The term-short
recension, then, would serve most accurately to describe
the so-called middle recension and is often so used.
C.
The Form and Style of Ignatius’ Letters
Although the epistolography of the authentic letters
of Ignatius owes something to Paul, Ignatius is more
deeply indebted to the formulae of the Hellenistic
letter; and he varies such formulae in ways that are
distinctively his own. Thus he works up the greetings
at the beginning and end of his communications from
a wider range of conventional materials; he developes
special forms of common transitional devices at the
beginning of the body of the letter (where he avoids
the thanksgiving) and elsewhere; and he reflects more
directly the Hellenistic idea of the letter as a substitute
for face-to-face encounter (Schoedel Ignatius of Antioch
Hermeneia, 7). Perler (1949) has shown that the colorful,
ornate, and sometimes reckless style of the letters
has connections with a stream of popular and, in some
quarters, suspect rhetoric known as “Asianism.” Ignatius
is saved from vacuity and bombast, however, by the
fire and passion that fuses the elements of his style
into a single, if somewhat dense, whole.
D.
Ignatius’ Theology
Ignatius’ self-understanding as a martyr provides
the most useful point of departure for appreciating
his thought. His experience in this regard may be
seen as a heightened form of the experience of all
Christians (Ign. Eph. 10), and the special difficulties
that he faced may be taken as extensions of the difficulties
confronted by every bishop (Pol. 1–5). Among these
was resistance from the bishop’s own people and, in
Ignatius’ own case, a sense of possible unworthiness.
More than conventional self-depreciation seems to
be involved in the doubts that Ignatius expresses
about his spiritual condition. His arrest may well
have precipitated the crisis. But there is also a
good possibility that he was shaken by a challenge
to his authority in Antioch. This possibility depends
on taking the “peace” restored in Antioch and reported
to Ignatius by the two messengers on their arrival
in Troas (Phld. 10.1; Smyrn. 11.2; Pol. 7.1) not as
the cessation of persecution in Antioch but as the
capitulation of those formerly opposed to their bishop
(Harrison 1936: 79–106). In any event, Ignatius is
gratified by those who see beyond his bonds and the
apparent unworthiness that they symbolize (Smyrn.
10.2; Pol. 2.3); and it seems fair to suggest that
his persistent call for unity in the churches and
obedience to the bishop was at the same time a call
for recognition and support and a search for the ratification
of his own worthiness (Schoedel 1985: 10–14). Certainly
the level of activity involved in terms of letters
written, messengers sent on ahead, and representatives
assembled (or yet to be assembled in Antioch) is extraordinary
and suggests that more was involved than simply a
spontaneous outpouring of sympathy for a persecuted
fellow Christian.
Ignatius links his self-understanding as a martyr
and his theology at one crucial point: He asks how
his impending death can have any meaning if the Lord
did not truly die (Trall. 10; Smyrn. 4.2). Anti-docetic
themes are common in Ignatius and are found concentrated
especially in the letters to Tralles and Smyrna. Ignatius
probably responds also to a distinct Judaizing form
of Christianity in his letters to Magnesia and Philadelphia
(Magn. 8–10; Phld. 5–9). But it is significant that
he tends to deal with it in terms drawn from his debate
with docetism (Magn. 9.1; 11). Any threat to the authority
of a bishop is naturally resisted by Ignatius. But
at a deeper level he senses a connection between the
reality of the incarnation and passion of the Lord
(as well as his presence in the elements of the sacred
meal) and a genuine commitment to concrete deeds of
faith and love (Smyrn. 6.2–8.2); such faith and love,
as Ignatius sees it, are to be found only in a community
united under its bishop and not in an elitist conventicle.
Corollaries of Ignatius’ emphasis on the incarnation
include the relegation of the doctrine of creation
to the periphery of his thought, the attentuation
of eschatological themes, and a preoccupation with
the worshipping community as the sphere of divine
influence in the world. It is characteristic that
when Ignatius turns his attention to the cosmos, it
is to describe (in mythological terms that are far
from clear) the mysterious events that surround the
entrance of Christ into the world and his departure
from it (Eph. 19). In doctrinal terms, Ignatius anticipates
orthodox theology in seeing the incarnation as the
paradoxical union of flesh and spirit in the God-Man
(Eph. 7. 2; Smyrn. 3.2). And this in turn presupposes
a definition of the divine nature as timeless and
changeless in good Hellenistic terms (Eph. 7. 2; Pol.
3.2). The association of God (and bishops) with silence
elsewhere in Ignatius (Eph. 6. 1; 14.2–15. 2; 19.
1; Magn. 8.2; Phld. 1.1) may indicate that his conception
of divine transcendence owes something to Gnosticism
as well (Paulsen 1978: 110–22); but it is perhaps
more likely that his language here has metaphorical
significance (Magn. 8.2) and that it represents an
extension of his insistence on the superiority of
the silent deed over empty words (Schoedel, 56–57,
76–78, 91, 170–71).
An important feature of Ignatius’ view of the incarnation
is his teaching that flesh and spirit complement rather
than oppose one another in the God-Man. Flesh and
spirit in this context, however, refer to two spheres
or two dimensions; and it is significant that Ignatius
describes not only Christ but also redeemed humanity
in terms of the complementarity of the two spheres
(Martin 1971). Thus things fleshly become spiritual
when done by those who are spiritual (Eph. 8.2). This
reinterpretation and reversal of the NT formula opens
up the way for a more-open attitude toward the things
of this world and probably has something to do with
the greater appreciation that Ignatius himself shows
for the popular culture of the Greek city. It should
be noted that when he speaks of the hatred shown Christians
by the “world” (Rom. 3.3), he is thinking primarily
of the exercise of Roman power. Pagans in the immediate
vicinity of Christians, on the other hand, are to
be dealt with as “brothers” (Eph. 10.2).
E.
Ignatius, the NT, and Early Christian Literature
In developing his thought, Ignatius was in a position
to draw on many strands of the theology reflected
in the NT, and he absorbed much of the basic religious
vocabulary of his sources (with a notable lack of
attention to “sin” however). He had been particularly
impressed by Paul, not least because he had found
in the apostle a model for dealing with his sense
of possible unworthiness (Ign. Rom. 9.2; cf. 1 Cor
15:8–9). In appropriating the earlier materials, Ignatius’
thought seems to have been shaped especially by two
somewhat antithetical yet ultimately reconcilable
developments: the emergence of more “mystical” strands
of Christianity (which the gospel of John and Ephesians
also reflect); and a growing emphasis on the need
for discipline and order (which Matthew and the Pastorals
also reflect). It was a theology of the incarnation,
as we have seen, that served to give coherence to
these diverse tendencies in Ignatius.
The gospel material in the letters is reminiscent
especially of Matthew, and one passage in particular
(Smyrn. 1.1) suggests that Ignatius may in fact have
had the gospel of Matthew before him (Köhler 1987:
73–96). That, however, is not certain (Koester 1957:
24–61). There is no real trace of Mark in Ignatius,
and we find only one passage with special affinities
with Luke (Smyrn. 3.2). And that passage (in which
the resurrected Lord “came to those about Peter” and
said, “Take, handle me, and see that I am not a bodiless
demon”) may well depend on tradition independent of
the gospel. Some (Maurer 1949) argue that Ignatius
knew the Gospel of John (Rom. 7.3; Phld. 7.1; 9.1),
but that seems unlikely (Paulsen 1978: 36–37).
Of Paul’s letters only 1 Corinthians can confidently
be said to have been read with any care by Ignatius,
though echoes of other letters of Paul are probably
also discernible from time to time. Points of contact
between Ignatius and Paul’s (or Deutero-Paul’s) Ephesians
are sometimes striking, yet probably not sufficient
to require a literary relation. That is even more
obvious in the case of similarities between Ignatius
and the Pastorals.
One striking parallel between Ignatius and 1 John
is found (Eph. 14.2), but it provides no guarantee
that the bishop had read that document. Equally problematic
are parallels involving 1 Clement, 2 Clement, Hermas,
the Preaching of Peter, and the Odes of Solomon.
The numerous echoes in Ignatius of Rom 1:3–4 are likely
to go back not to Paul himself but to a development
of semi-credal material in the tradition. other strands
of tradition seem to stand behind formulized passages
elsewhere in Ignatius, but it is not at all clear
what accounts for the shape that they have. The prior
crystallization around baptism of statements about
the birth, ministry, and passion of Jesus seems possible
at times (Eph. 18.2). Elsewhere such a listing of
events reflects anti-docetic concerns more strongly
and may represent in part a response to the immediate
situation (Trall. 9). Certainly the series of Christological
antitheses in one celebrated passage (Eph. 7.2; cf.
Pol. 3.2) looks like a rhetorical elaboration of a
few traditional elements created by Ignatius himself
(von Campenhausen 1972: 241–53). Contact with apologetic
themes in another passage (Smyrn. 1–3) suggests yet
another context within which collections of statements
about the ministry of Jesus once figured (Schoedel,
220–29).
F.
Ignatius’ Conception of the Ministry
Ignatius’ conception of the local ministry consisting
of a single bishop (overseer), presbyters (elders),
and deacons goes beyond the NT but is close in spirit
to the Pastorals. Ignatius apparently found the arrangement
in place in the congregations of Asia Minor. He seems,
however, to have emphasized the authority of the bishop
in ways that appeared unusual to his contemporaries,
and he no doubt assumed too readily that monarchic
bishops were to be found everywhere in the church
(Eph. 3.2). The threefold ministry reflected in the
letters may represent a fusion of a Jewish-Christian
system of elders and a gentile-Christian system of
overseers and deacons (cf. Phil 1:1). In any event,
there are hints that the arrangement is still somewhat
in flux in Ignatius. Also still missing in Ignatius
is any convincing evidence of the idea of apostolic
succession, for episcopal authority is seen as derived
directly from God or Christ. This in turn probably
does not mean, as some have suggested, that Ignatius
conceives of the bishop as embodying the presence
of God or Christ in an extraordinary manner. Ministerial
authority has been significantly enhanced by Ignatius,
but it is difficult to show that it has been legitimated
in a fundamentally new way. The elaborate and quite
varied comparisons between the bishop and God or Christ,
between the presbyters and the apostles, and between
the deacons and divinely approved service seem to
remain true comparisons and to express conventional
ideas about receiving the one sent as the one who
sent him (Schoedel, 112–14). It is also interesting
to note in this connection that when Ignatius reflects
on the words of inspired prophecy that he delivered
in Philadelphia about the need to obey the bishop,
he does not link the charisma of prophecy formally
with the office of bishop (Phld. 7). In principle
the Spirit still blows where it wills.
There is also no convincing evidence in Ignatius of
an overarching ecclesiastical authority above the
level of the local bishop. The preeminence accorded
the Roman church in the address of his letter to them
(the one letter that fails to draw attention to the
bishop of the community) is a spiritual preeminence
and is emphasized precisely because the Roman Christians
form the last and presumably most important link in
a chain of churches to whom Ignatius looks to give
his martyrdom significance. It is the approval of
the churches that will assure Ignatius of the value
of his ministry and thereby confirm his worthiness
to “become a disciple” and “to attain God” in martyrdom
(Eph. 1.2). For the churches are made up of Christians
who apparently realize their discipleship here and
now (Magn. 9.1; 10.1; Pol. 2.1) and who walk united
in the path marked out for them by the apostles (Eph.
11.2–12.2). In this connection Ignatius may well have
been thinking of his own presumed failure to unite
the church of Antioch until the turn of events announced
to him by the messengers in Troas. In any event, Rome
is the place where the reality of Ignatius’ Christianity
is to be decisively demonstrated, and the Roman Christians
are the last in a line of well-wishers who will paradoxically
show their love for their visitor by urging on the
wild beasts.
G.
Ignatius, Judaism, and Hellenism
The broader cultural horizons of Ignatius have proved
difficult to define. He does little with the OT Scriptures
(Eph. 5.3; Magn. 12; Trall. 8.2; cf. Eph. 15.1; Magn.
10.3; 13.1); and he regards “Judaism” as an entity
distinct not only from “Christianity” but also from
Scripture and the prophets (Magn. 8.1–2;9.2; 10.3).
Important light on some points in Ignatius is shed
by parallels from Philo and Josephus, however, and
Ignatius met a group of Judaizers in Philadelphia
who worked with a Hellenistic-Jewish conception of
the Scriptures as “archives” (Phld. 8.2). The gnostic
affinities of Ignatius were stressed by Schlier (1929)
who took the mythological account in Eph. 19 as his
point of departure. Daniélou (1964: 39–43) accepted
Schlier’s analysis as a whole but reclassified what
emerged as “Jewish Christianity.” And the importance
of the Ascension of Isaiah as an item in the background
reconstructed by Schlier lends plausibility to this
shift of perspective. Bartsch (1940), on the other
hand, chose to take the emphasis on oneness as the
main indicator of Ignatius’ indebtedness to gnostic
and quasi-gnostic thought. But it now seems clear
that more relevant parallels to such themes as “unity”
and “concord” are to be found in less esoteric realms
of Hellenism and Hellenistic Judaism (Schoedel, 51–55;
74; 116–17). As suggested above, this may well be
true also for the theme of “silence” in Ignatius.
The reflections of these and other features of popular
culture in the letters go a long way to account for
the literary and theological peculiarities of Ignatius.
Bibliography
Bartsch, H.-W. 1940. Gnostisches Gut und Gemeindetradition
bei Ignatius von Antiochien. Gütersloh.
Campenhausen, H. F. von. 1972. “Das Bekenntnis im
Urchristentum.” ZNW 63: 210–53.
Daniélou, J. 1964. The Theology of Jewish Christianity.
London and Philadelphia.
Hagedorn, D. 1973. Der Hiobkommentar des Arianers
Julian. Patristische Texte und Studien 14. Berlin.
Harrison, P. N. 1936. Polycarp’s Two Epistles to the
Philippians. Cambridge.
Joly, R. 1979. Le dossier d’Ignace d’Antioche. Université
libre de Bruxelles, Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres
69. Brussels.
Koester, H. 1957. Synoptische Überlieferung bei den
Apostolischen Vätern. TU 65. Berlin.
Köhler, W.-D. 1987. Die Rezeption des Matthäusevangeliums
in der Zeit vor Irenäus. WUNT, 2d ser. 24. Tübingen.
Lightfoot, J. B. 1889. The Apostolic Fathers, Part
2: Ignatius, S. Polycarp. 2d ed. 3 vols. London.
Martin, J. P. 1971. “La pneumatologia en Ignacio de
Antioquia.” Sal 33: 379–454.
Maurer, C. 1949. Ignatius von Antiochien und das Johannesevangelium.
ATANT 18. Zurich.
Paulsen, H. 1978. Studien zur Theologie des Ignatius
von Antiochien. Forschungen zur Kirchen- und Dogmengeschichte
29. Göttingen.
———. 1985. Die Briefe des Ignatius von Antiochia und
der Brief des Polkarp von Smyrna. 2d ed. HNT 18. Tübingen.
Perler, O. 1949. Das vierte Makkabäerbuch, Ignatius
von Antiochien und die ältesten Martyrerberichte.
RivArCr 25: 47–72.
Rathke, H. 1967. Ignatius von Antiochien und die Paulusbriefe.
TU 99. Berlin.
Schlier, H. 1929. Religionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen
zu den Ignatiusbriefen. BZNW 8. Giessen.
Smith, J. D. 1985. The Ignatian Long Recension and
Christian Communities in Fourth Century Syrian Antioch.
Diss. Harvard.
Zahn, T. 1873. Ignatius von Antiochien. Gotha.
