What are the Letters / Epistles of Ignatius?
Answered from the commentary of Church History, For the Young and J. N. Darby
The Letters or Epistles of Ignatius are seven letters said to have been written by Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, on his journey as a prisoner from Antioch to Rome: to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smyrnaeans, and Polycarp. They are letters to churches and to Polycarp, and are described as exhorting faithfulness and patience and warning against errors. The copies differ: longer and shorter versions exist, and Syriac copies of three letters differ from both; some passages and letters are considered spurious or interpolated. One account says five of eight letters are wholly spurious and the three remaining are interpolated; another accepts the Syriac form as genuine and says the dispute over genuineness is not material to its point.
The above is AI generated summary based on the writers below.
What the commentators say
The passages the answer is drawn from, the most direct first, with the words that bear on the question marked.
Ignatius. There are, bearing his name, Epistles — 1, to the Ephesians; 2, to the Magnesians; 3, to the Trallians; 4, to the Romans; 5, to the Philadelphians; 6, to the Smyrnaeans; and 7, an Epistle to Polycarp. Of all these there are longer and shorter copies; and of those to the Ephesians, to the Romans, and to Polycarp, Syriac copies have been discovered, differing from both the long and the short. The whole shews how shamefully the writings have been tampered with, so that no one knows really what Ignatius wrote. Some consider the short epistles in the Syriac copies as most likely to be genuine. We have elsewhere quoted these Epistles on the subject of the place and power to be given to the bishop. Besides the above, there are several others (one to the Virgin Mary) undoubtedly spurious.
Scarcely had the voice of inspiration become silent in the church, than we hear the voice of the new teachers crying loudly and earnestly for the highest honours being paid to the bishop, and a supreme place being given to him. Not a word about the Spirit's place as sovereign ruler in the church of God. This is evident from the Epistles of Ignatius, said to have been written A.D. 107. Many great names, we are aware, have questioned their authenticity; and many great names contend that they have been satisfactorily proved to be genuine. The proofs on either side lie outside of our line. The Church of England has long accepted them as genuine, and considers them as the basis, and as the triumphant vindication, of the antiquity of episcopacy. The following are a few specimens of his admonitions to the churches.
Ignatius, in the course of his journey from Antioch to Rome, wrote seven Epistles. One to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smyrneans, and one to his friend Polycarp. Being written on the eve of his martyrdom, and with great earnestness and vehemence, and having been the disciple and friend of St. John, and at that time bishop of Antioch, probably the most renowned in Christendom, his Epistles must have produced a great impression on the churches; besides the way to office, authority, and power has always a great charm for vain human nature.
In writing to the church at Ephesus he says, "Let us take heed, brethren, that we set not ourselves against the bishop, that we may be subject to God.... It is therefore evident that we ought to look upon the bishop even as we do upon the Lord Himself." In his Epistle to the Magnesians he says, "I exhort you that ye study to do all things in a divine concord; your bishops presiding in the place of God; your presbyters in the place of the council of the apostles; and your deacons, most dear to me, being entrusted with the ministry of Jesus Christ." We find the same strain in his letter to the Trallians: "Whereas ye are subject to your bishop as to Jesus Christ, ye appear to me to live, not after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ who died for us.... Guard yourselves against such persons; and that you will do if you are not puffed up: but continue inseparable from Jesus Christ our God, and from your bishop, and from the commands of the apostles." Passing over several of his letters to the churches, we only give one more specimen from his Epistle to the Philadelphians: "I cried whilst I was among you, I spake with a loud voice, Attend to the bishop, and to the presbytery, and to the deacons. Now some supposed that I spake this as foreseeing the division that should come among you. But He is my witness for whose sake I am in bonds, that I knew nothing from any man; but the Spirit spake, saying on this wise: Do nothing without the bishop; keep your bodies as the temples of God: love unity; flee divisions, be the followers of Christ, as He was of His Father."*
IGNATIUS, Bishop of Antioch. Seven epistles are supposed to have been written by him, but they have been grossly interpolated; eight or nine others are wholly spurious. He was a martyr.
Ignatius, a disciple and friend of the apostle John, who survived him only by about seven years and was Bishop of Antioch, metropolis of Syria, wrote seven epistles on his journey to martyrdom, around AD 107. Therein he stressed submission to the bishop, and "to look upon the bishop even as we do upon the Lord Himself." Another sentence from his letters shows how a clerical system, not found in Scripture, had already formed in the Church at this early date: "I cried whilst I was among you; I spake with a loud voice, 'attend to the bishop, and to the presbytery, and to the deacons.'" (See Miller's Church History, Vol.1, pages 150-157). (It may be of interest to know that the Episcopal form of church government is based on Ignatius' writings.)
THE LETTERS OF IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH
The letters of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, are interesting documents. During a persecution in his city he was sentenced to death. This sentence would have been carried out in Rome in the year AD 110, when the persecution itself had already passed. He
THE LETTERS OF IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH
The letters of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, are interesting documents. During a persecution in his city he was sentenced to death. This sentence would have been carried out in Rome in the year AD 110, when the persecution itself had already passed. He
had to travel from Antioch to Rome and during this trip he passed through Asia Minor and visited the churches in Philadelphia, Sardis and Smyrna. In Smyrna moreover he had an interview with delegates from the churches of Ephesus, Magnesia and Tralles and wrote letters to these churches and to the church of Rome. When he came to Troas, in the north of Macedonia, he also sent letters to the churches in Philadelphia and Smyrna and to Polycarpus, bishop of Symrna.
When we compare his letters we see that things were changing in a certain direction. He presupposes a threefold structure of office: one bishop at the head of a local church, and several elders and deacons. This ministerial structure came to prevail in all the churches in the second century. There was a natural evolution of the twofold into the threefold structure of office, because Ignatius did not condemn the twofold structure expressis verbis. As a kind of foundation of the new situation he pointed to the essential unity of the church; he wrote to the Philadelphians in chapter 4 (translation Lightfoot):
Be ye careful therefore to observe one eucharist (for there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ and one cup unto union in His blood, there is one altar, as there is one bishop, together with the presbytery and the deacons …
had to travel from Antioch to Rome and during this trip he passed through Asia Minor and visited the churches in Philadelphia, Sardis and Smyrna. In Smyrna moreover he had an interview with delegates from the churches of Ephesus, Magnesia and Tralles and wrote letters to these churches and to the church of Rome. When he came to Troas, in the north of Macedonia, he also sent letters to the churches in Philadelphia and Smyrna and to Polycarpus, bishop of Symrna.
When we compare his letters we see that things were changing in a certain direction. He presupposes a threefold structure of office: one bishop at the head of a local church, and several elders and deacons. This ministerial structure came to prevail in all the churches in the second century. There was a natural evolution of the twofold into the threefold structure of office, because Ignatius did not condemn the twofold structure expressis verbis. As a kind of foundation of the new situation he pointed to the essential unity of the church; he wrote to the Philadelphians in chapter 4 (translation Lightfoot):
Be ye careful therefore to observe one eucharist (for there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ and one cup unto union in His blood, there is one altar, as there is one bishop, together with the presbytery and the deacons....
Ignatius next draws our attention; and some important elements of history are here afforded us to consider. And, first of all, what a proof of the propensity of the orthodox in these early days to commit pious frauds! What a mass of toil has been imposed on sagacious Ushers, very orthodox and much read Pearsons, and keen Dailles, to unravel what is genuine and is not genuine of the martyred bishop! We have universally acknowledged forgeries, longer interpolated editions, shorter stoutly defended ones, and then Syrian MSS adduced to prove that five more out of the eight, admitted by many to be genuine, are also forgeries, and that the greater part of the three genuine ones has been added by the forging hand. It is a poor foundation to build on. It is curious enough, and is to the credit of his sagacity, that Usher declared the letter to Polycarp, which is admitted to be genuine, to be spurious; the style was so very different from the others then supposed to be genuine. He saw the difference, and that both could not be from the same author; and, assuming the others to be genuine, rejected this. What the Syriac leaves of the others, as far as matter and style of thought go, does not militate against that to Polycarp. For myself, while not pretending to be learned in such matters, I do not doubt, in spite of Hefele and Jacobson, that Cureton has come to the right conclusion. The plea made, that what is found in the Syriac MSS was an abridgment made for the use of the monks of the convent for pious uses, seems to me without the smallest foundation, as there are three distinct letters and not the substance of eight or of three either, and nothing monkish in them. They are parts of the three larger, not the substance of three made a pious treatise of. I take therefore the Syriac edition as genuine. Their local origin confirms this; but for my present purpose it is not very material. In Ignatius's letters, even in those as I believe not genuine, or in the interpolated portions of the genuine, the catholic Church is not the subject, nor catholic unity, but local unity in subjection to the bishop - unity with him. He is to be viewed as God, the presbyters as Christ, the deacons as the college of the apostles. I take the strong expressions of the whole eight in the form defended by many. The point insisted on is the union of one local flock with one local bishop, and in everything. He who leaves that is outside everything. Diocesan episcopacy does not appear in Ignatius; in truth, it was unknown in that age.
What I have given is practically the history of the great house, and at the close in its worst and most appalling forms - surely not of the body of Christ; yet this, in its very worst form - the papacy, it pretended to be, and that exclusively. Such was the result of confounding the building of God upon earth, placed under the responsibility of man (1 Cor. 3), with the body composed of living members united to Christ. We have seen, that the urging of unity by the various Fathers was always interested, and bore only on their own position. First Ignatius presses unity of a local assembly with its bishop: episcopal thought went no further then. Then, as the inroad of heresies took place, the same apostolical doctrine, held by all, was proved by the uniform doctrine of the apostolic sees; and, as the truth proved the Spirit and the Church, the heretics could not be it, for they had not the truth. The order of this argument is to be noted, however; for it is entirely anti-Roman-catholic: they prove the truth by the Church; while the Irenaeus and Tertullian school, the Church by the possession of the truth. The truth they find from scripture, or the continuous doctrine of the apostolic sees as a fact. This is not a fact now; for Rome has changed or added in important points, as the addition of Filioque in the doctrine of Procession, and changes of prayers for the dead to prayers to the dead, the addition of purgatory, and in many others. Alexandria and Antioch are Monophysites, that is, they hold only one nature in Christ.