Bad Advertisement?
Are you a Christian?
Online Store:Visit Our Store
| Introductory Note to the Martyrdom of Ignatius
PREVIOUS SECTION - NEXT SECTION - HELP 
Introductory Note to the Martyrdom of
Ignatius
The
learned dissertation of Pearson, on the difficulties of reconciling the
supposed year of the martyrdom with the history of Trajan, etc., is given
entire 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,1395
| 1395 He published an edition of Ignatius, Oxford, 1709.
| 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, to be without
interpolation. 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 (see Boswell, anno 1784, chap. xi.),
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.1396
| 1396 [A most remarkable statement.
“References” may surely be traced, at least in
Eusebius (iii. 36) and Irenæus (Adv. Hæres. v. 28), if not in
Jerome, etc. But the sermon of St. Chrysostom (Opp. ii. 593) seems
almost, in parts, a paraphrase.] | 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. xviii. 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;1397
| 1397 [See on
this matter Jacobson’s note (vol ii. p. 262), and reference to
Pearson (Vind. Ignat., part ii. cap. 12). The false accentuation
(Θεόφορος) occurs in
some copies to support the myth of the child Ignatius as the
God-borne instead of the God-bearing; i.e., carried by
Christ, instead of carrying the Spirit of Christ within.] |
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.1398
| 1398 [But see the
note in Jacobson, vol. ii. p.557.] | E.C.F. INDEX & SEARCH
|
