Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:13:07.763Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prophecy and Anti-Episcopal Activity: a Third Error Combatted by Ignatius?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2011

Christine Trevett
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Discussion of the errors combatted by Ignatius of Antioch of centred on the question of whether they were one or two in number. While some scholars have discovered opposition to a single, composite Judaeo-Christian-Docetic error, others have argued that Ignatius opposed two groups, viz. Docetists and Judaisers. Here I intend to discuss a third error which appears to be connected with the continuing tension, observable in other writings of the time, between the priestly and prophetic ministries.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , January 1983 , pp. 1 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The case for the Antiochene provenance of these documents received its ‘classical’ presentation in the works of Streeter, B. H., The Four Gospels: a study of origins, New York 1925, 500ffGoogle Scholar, and The Primitive Church, London 1929Google Scholar, appendix C, 279ff. Eastern Syria and the Thomas tradition will not concern us in the present paper. See, however, Koester, H., ‘GNOMAI DIAPHOROI: the origin and nature of diversification in the history of early Christianity’, Harvard Theological Review (hereafter cited as H. T. R.), lviii (1965), 290–306Google Scholar.

2 Acts ii. 27f; xiii. 1 ff; xv. 32; Matt. vii. 16ff; chap, x; xxiii. 29, 34; xxviii. 19ff; Didache x. 7–xiii. 7. And see Kretschmar, G., ‘Ein Beitrag zur Frage nach dem Ursprung frühchristlicher Askese’, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirchc, lxi (1964), 27–67Google Scholar.

3 For discussion of Matthaean ethics see Davies, W. D., The Setting of the Sermon on the Mount, Cambridge 1964Google Scholar; Strecker, G., Der Weg der Gerechtigkeit, Göttingen 1966Google Scholar; Bornkamm, G., Barth, G. and Held, H. J., Tradition and Interpretation in Matthew, Philadelphia 1963Google Scholar.

4 See Bornkamm et al. op. cit., 24–32, 59–75, 159–64; Davies, op. cit., 202–6; Hill, D., ‘False prophets and charismatics...’, Biblica, lvii (1976), 327–48Google Scholar.

5 On office and order in Matthew's community, see W. Trilling, ‘Amt und Amtsverständnis bei Matthäus’, Mélanges Béda Rigaux, Gembloux 1970Google Scholar; Frankemölle, H., ‘Amtskritik im Matthäus-Evangelium?’, Biblica, liv (1973), 247–62Google Scholar; Kingsbury, J. D., ‘The figure of Peter in Matthew's Gospel as a theological problem’, Journal of Biblical Literature (hereafter cited as J.B.L.), xcviii (1979), 67–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 H. Koester wrote of Matthew's ‘tightly organized church of non-episcopal character’ in striking contrast to Ignatius, and of Matthew having had ‘no intention whatsoever of agreeing with the dangerous development of Paul's (and Ignatius's) radicalism’, ‘GNOMAI DIAPHOROI’, 288.

7 These Ignatian themes have been considered by Corwin, Virginia in St Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch (Yale Publications in Religion, i), New Haven 1960Google Scholar, and by Paulsen, Henning in Sluditn zur Theologie des Ignatius von Antiochien, Göttingen 1978Google Scholar.

8 This was one of the factors which led Kilpatrick, G. D. (The Origins of the Gospel according to St. Matthew, Oxford 1946)Google Scholar to argue for Phoenicia as the Gospel's place of origin, and Brandon, S. G. F. (The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church, London 1951)Google Scholar to suggest Alexandria.

9 This is Koester's. view: ‘Ignatius, bishop of Antioch A.D. ca. 100, represents an Antiochene Gentile Christianity that is emphatically Pauline’ and ‘Ignatius’ continuation of Paulinism in Antioch has to be seen over against the background of an equally strong development under the authority of Peter in the same area’ (‘GNOMAI DIAPHOROI’, 287). Cf. R. Bultmann, ‘Ignatius and Paulus’, Sludia Paulina, Haarlem 1951, 37–51Google Scholar (also in Existence and Faith, New York 1960, 267–77Google Scholar).

10 In recent decades scholars have come to recognise that Ignatius's language, in his letters to Asia Minor, was to a great extent conditioned by his experiences in Antioch. Corwin, W. R. Schoedel and P. J. Donahue, among others, have expressed such a view. It is shared by the present writer.

11 See Thompson, W. G., Matthew's Advice to a Divided Community, Mt. 17, 22–18, 35 (Analecta Biblica 44, Rome 1970)Google Scholar; Smith, C. W. F., ‘The mixed state of the Church in Matthew's Gospel', J.B.L., lxxxii (1963), 149–68Google Scholar.

12 See the bibliography in Bengt Holmberg's work, Paul and Power (Coniectanea Biblica NT series 11, Lund 1978).

13 Chadwick, H., The Early Church (Pelican History of the Church 1), Harmondsworth 1967, 46Google Scholar.

14 This has been recognised by a number of scholars. The following works should be noted: Weinel, H., Die Wirkungen des Geistes u. die Geisler im nachapostolischen zeitalter bis auf Irenäus, Freiburg 1899, 86 ffGoogle Scholar; Streeter, The Primitive Church, 152; Kraft, H., ‘Die altkirchliche Prophetie und die Entstehung des Montanismus’, Theologische zeitschrift (hereafter cited as Th.Z), xi (1955), 266Google Scholar; Müller, U. B., Prophetie u. Predigt im NT: formgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur urchristlichen Prophetie (Studien z. NT 10), Gütersloh 1975, 25 fGoogle Scholar, 51 ff, 174f and the literature there; G. Dautzenberg, Urchristliche Prophetie (Beiträge zur Wiss. vom ANT, 6te. Folge 4), Berlin 1975, 37 n. 117; H. Paulsen, Studien, 122f.

15 ‘Eκραγασα μεταξὺ μεταξὺ, λλoυν μεγλη φων, θεoῡ φων/... τò δ ττνεῡμα κρυσσευλγoν τδε/χωις τo ττισκóπoυ μηδν πpιεῖτε./τν σρκα ὐμ ν ὠς ναòν θεo τηρεῖτε,/τν ενωσιν γαπτε./τoὐς μερισμoὺ ς θεγετε,/μιμηταì γíνεσθε 'lησoῡ χριστo,/ὼς καìαὺτòς τoῡ πατρòς ατoῡ.

16 See Müller, Prophetie und Predigt, 53 n. 12; Dölger, F. J., ‘θEOY ØωNH. Die “Gottes-Stimme” bei Ignatius von Antiochien, Kelsos und Origenes’, Antike und Christentum, v (1936), 218–23Google Scholar; cf. Acts xi. 27f; xiii. 2; xxi. 11; Rev. ii. 7, 11, 17, 29; iii. 6, 13 and (for the use of ‘self-predication formulae’) Gillespie, T. W., ‘A pattern of prophetic speech in First Corinthians’, J.B.L., xcviii (1978), 74–95Google Scholar.

17 See Hill, D., New Testament Prophecy, London 1979, 122–33Google Scholar, 146ff, and cf. Matt. x. 7, 18ff; 1 Cor. xiv. 2ff, 24f.

18 See Hill's definition of prophecy, op. cit., 4–9 and cf. idem, ‘Christian prophets as teachers or instructors in the church’, in Prophetic Vocation in the New Testament and Today (Novum Testamentum Supplement Series xlv), Leiden 1977, 130Google Scholar.

19 J. Rius-Camps has recognised the prophetic milieu in which Ignatius operated (The Four Authentic Letters of Ignatius, the Martyr, XPICTIANICMOC 2, Pont. Inst. Orient. Stud. Rome 1979, 173, 181,207,275, 288, 304), but has, nevertheless, assigned to a third-century forger many of those passages which provide the best evidence of it - including Phld. vii.

20 Further examples cannot be considered here. Each aspect of the case presented in the present paper has been discussed more fully in my unpublished thesis for the degree of Ph.D.:’ Ignatius and his opponents in the divided church of Antioch in relation to some aspects of the early Syrian Christian tradition’, University of Sheffield, England 1980. Pp. 390–406 concern the ‘prophetic’ character and function of Phld. vii.

21 Cf. Matt. xix. 11f (ò χωρν χωρετω is used by Ignatius Smyrn. vi. i), and Didache xi. 11 has often been interpreted by scholars in terms of the practice of ‘spiritual marriage’, the counterpart of the ‘heavenly mystery’ of Christ's marriage to the Church.

22 This self-aggrandisement is considered in Trevett,’ Ignatius and his opponents’, 291 ff, 429ff.

23 Ignatius distinguished between γινώσκω) and oῑδα. The former refers to knowledge obtained by human agencies (e.g. Eph. ix. 1; Magn. i. 1, iii. i, xi. 1; Trail, i. if, viii. 1; Phld. vii. 2) whereas oῑδα reveals insight into the spiritual state of communities, or the nature of Christ, and it is associated with the activity of the Spirit (e.g. Eph. xii. 1; Magn. xii. 1, xiv. 1; Phld. vii. [; Smyrn. iii. 1, iv. 1; Pol. vii. 3). Cf. Hill, New Testament Prophecy, 78, for the use of oῑδα in Revelation and Paulsen, Studien, 95f. for the discussion of the language of Ignatius and Revelation, πρooρω occurs in Trail, viii. 1 and Phld. vii. 2.

24 Many scholars have suggested that θεoφóρoς is a title suggestive of pneumatic status. Among them have been Lightfoot, Schlier, Turner, von Campenhausen, Meinhold, Kraft, Dautzenberg and Reiling.

25 Cf. the use of Oῑδα in Rom. vi. 3.

26 The word is peculiar to Ignatius among the Apostolic Fathers; Käsemann, E. (‘Sentences of holy law’, in New Testament Questions of Today, London 1969, 66–81Google Scholar) regarded the charismatic's proclamation, with prophetic authority, of the criterion of his εκδκησις)ais as ‘characteristic of Christianity's earliest days’ (p. 78). For examples in the Ignatian letters of the ‘pareneti c warning or prophetic threat’ (introduced by a casuistic legal expression and conforming to a chiastic structure) of which Kasemann wrote, see Trevett, ‘Ignatius and his opponents’, 414–20.

27 Ignatius uses oικoδεoπóτης, a word particularly associated with Matthaean tradition (Matt. x. 25; xiii. 27, 52 el al.).

28 The ‘silence’ of bishops has been variously interpreted: in terms of ‘Gnosticism’, as an anti-heretical device and as a response to pneumatics. See especially Chadwick, H., ‘The silence of bishops in Ignatius’, H.T.R. xliii (1950), 169–72Google Scholar; Bieder, W., ‘Zur Deutung des kirchlichen Schweigens bei Ignatius von Antiochien’, Th.Z., xii (1956), 28–43Google Scholar; Meinhold, P., ‘Schweigende Bischöfe: die Gegensätze in der kleinasiatischen Gemeinde nach den Ignatianen’, in Glaube und Geschichte (Festgabe für J. Lortz, Bd 2), Baden Baden 1958, 467–90Google Scholar and Pizzolato, L. F., ‘Silenzio del vescovo e parola degli eretici in Ignazio d'Antiochia’, Aevum xliv (1970), 205–18Google Scholar. For a fuller defence of the present interpretation see Trevett, ‘Ignatius and his opponents’, 435–47, 542–5.

29 Cf. Acts iv. 2ff; vi. 2ff; xiii. 5; xv. 31; Didache iv. 1 et al.

30 See Bultmann, R., Theology of the New Testament, II, London 1955, 108f.Google Scholar

31 See especially Chadwick's article, ‘The silence of bishops’.

32 See Vilela, A., ‘Le Presbyterium selon S. Ignace d'Antioche’, Bulletin de litterature ecclésiastique lxxiv (1973), 161–86Google Scholar.

33 Ignatius expressed a special affinity with the deacons, who were ‘most dear’ to him (Magn. vi. 1) and were his ‘fellow-servants’ (Eph. ii. 1; Magn. ii. 1; Phld. iv.; Smyrn. xii. 2). In the Didache it was the appointment of bishops and deacons which was being met with some reservation and in Philadelphia it was Bishop Ignatius and the deacons Rhaius and Philo, who encountered opposition (Phld. vii-viii; xi. 1, contrast Smyrn. x. 1).

34 The matter is discussed more fully in Trevett, ‘Ignatius and his opponents’, chaps. 3 and 4. Unlike Streeter (The Primitive Church), the present writer does not consider that the Didache would have been regarded as a religious classic by Ignatius, although it might have been for some of his opponents.

36 Cf. John iii. 8 and with Ignatius's following statement cf. 1 Cor. ii. 10.

36 Even for Christians more loyal to the Ignatian ideal, diversions might have offered a temptation. Cf. F. F. Bruce: ‘in any local church there would always be some people who would find the ministry of a visiting prophet wonderfully inspiring by contrast with that of their own humdrum elders’ (The Spreading Flame, Exeter 1958, 216)Google ScholarPubMed.

37 Ash, J. L., ‘The decline of ecstatic prophecy in the early Church’, Theological Studies xxxvii (1978), 250Google Scholar and cf. A. Adam, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, I, Gütersloh 1965, 133 (cited by Paulsen, Studien, 24 n. 12) and Rathke, H., Ignatius von Antiochien und die Paulusbriefe (Texte und Untersuchungen 99), Berlin 1967, 81Google Scholar.

38 Cf. the views of Ash, art. cit., 238 (the bishop alone could speak ‘with God's own voice’), Richardson, C. C., ‘The church in Ignatius of Antioch’, Journal of Religion, xvii (1937), 47Google Scholar (officers were particularly endowed with spiritual gifts) and J. Reiling, Hermas and Christian Prophecy, a Study of the Eleventh Mandate (Nov. Test. Suppl. series, xxxvii, Leiden 1973). 150 n. 2 (of Ignatius ‘he is not set apart from the church as a special Spirit-bearer’). For other writers, however, prophecy in particular was destroyed with the triumph of ordination and office.

39 See n. 14.

40 Cf. Meinhold, ‘Schweigende Bischöfe, 467–90. Particularly appropriate is Corwin's tentative suggestion (St. Ignatius, 81 and n. 47) that ‘perhaps some of the small church groups had a less formally recognised leadership and were therefore open to the preaching of travelling prophets... the travelling prophets of the Didache fit well into this picture’.

41 The case for a single error was argued by Zahn, T. (Ignatius von Antiochien, Gotha 1873)Google Scholar, Goltz, E. F. von der (Ignatius von Antiochien als Christ und Theologe, Leipzig 1894)Google Scholar and Lightfoot, J. B. (The Apostolic Fathers, Part 2, Ignatius and Polycarp, 2nd edn, London 1889)Google Scholar among others. More recently, it has been defended by Molland, E., ‘The heretics combatted by Ignatius of Antioch’ (this Journal V (1954)Google Scholar), Koester (‘GNOMAI DIAPHOROI’ 1965), Barnard, L. W. (Studies in the Apostolic Fathers and their Background, Oxford 1966)Google Scholar and others, including Barrett, Prigent, Ellis and Batiffol.

42 In recent decades including Corwin (St. Ignatius), Grant, R. M. (The Apostolic Fathers, I and IV, New York 1964Google Scholar, 1966), Gunther, J. J., ‘Syrian Christian dualism’, Vigiliae Christianae, xxv (1971)Google Scholar, P. J. Donahue, ‘Jewish Christianity in the letters of Ignatius of Antioch’, loc. cit., xxxii (1978) and Rius-Camps (Four Authentic Letters), but previously also by Hilgenfeld, Schlier, Rathke, Richardson and Bartsch.

43 Cf. n. 42.

44 The ‘some deny him’ of Magn. ix. 1 is also problematic. Against Ignatius's opposition to Docetism at these points are Donahue (Vigiliae Christianae, xxxii (1978), 85), Rius-Camps (Four Authentic Leters, 44f 63) and Corwin (St. Ignatius, 59ff).

45 ‘Let us learn to lead Christian lives. For whoever is called by any name other than this is not of God.’ Donahue, ‘Jewish Christianity’, 87, suggests that they referred to themselves collectively as ‘Israel’.

46 Cf. Donahue, art. cit., 90ff, who considers, like the present writer, that the Judaisers would reject ‘any view of episcopal authority which would jeopardize their own self-understanding’. But our analyses of which passages refer to such judaising errorists would differ.

47 For discussion of this issue see Trevett, ‘Ignatius and his opponents’, 389–414.

48 Cf. Koester, ‘GNOMAI DIAPHOROP, 280. Ignatius does not write of apostolic succession, however. Nor should we overlook the familiar title ΔlΔAχH κυρípυ τν δώδεκα πoστoλν τoῖς θυεσιν.

49 It is beyond the scope of the present paper to consider whether and to what extent Ignatius's own understanding might have been influenced by Platonic or Gnostic ideas. Chadwick, ‘Silence of bishops’, Bieder, ‘Zur Deutung des kirchlichen Schweigens’, Meinhold,’ Schweigende Bischöfe’, Vogt, H. J., ‘Ignatius von Antiochien über den Bischof und seine Gemeinde’, Theologische Quartalschrift, clvii (1978), 15–27Google Scholar, and Pizzolato, ‘Silenzio del vescovo’ should be consulted.

50 Cf. the association ofsilence and activity in Eph. xix. 1 and Magn. viii. 2. Like Corwin, I would not posit any difference in meaning between σιγ and συχα as used by Ignatius.

51 The ‘silent’ bishop of Philadelphia was, of course, ‘perfect’ (Phld. i. 2).

62 Not least, of course, they differed in interpreting the significance of the silence of bishops and also, I suggest, regarding the meaning of ‘perfect’.

53 For a variety of views cf. Streeter, The Primitive Church (the neurotic Ignatius forcing his unrepresentative views on unwilling congregations), Bauer, W., Orthodoxy and Heresy in Earliest Christianity (translated from 1934 German edn), Philadelphia 1971Google Scholar (Ignatius representative of a substantial but minority group) and Corwin, St. Ignatius (Ignatius's group held a mediating position).

54 The vexed questions of the origin of monarchical episcopacy and of Ignatius's understanding of it cannot be considered here. The literature on the topic is vast. Cf. the recent contributions by Burke, P., ‘The monarchical episcopate at the end of the first century’, Journal of Ecumenical Studies, vii (1970), 499–518Google Scholar; Padberg, R., ‘Das Amtsver-standnis der Ignatiusbriefe’, Theologie und Glaube, lxii (1972), 47–51Google Scholar; Vilela, ‘Le Presby-terium’; Dassmann, E., ‘Zur Entstehung des Monepiskopats’, Jahrbuch für Antike und Christentum, xvii (1974), 74–90Google Scholar and Vogt, ‘Ignatius von Antiochien’.

55 Schweizer, E., Church Order in the New Testament, London 1961, 153Google Scholar n. 562.

56 Cf. Bruce, The Spreading Flame, 217.

57 See also Bultmann, R., Theology of the new Testament, II, London 1955, 108 fGoogle Scholar.

58 Gager, J. G., Kingdom and Community: the social world of early Christianity, New Jersey 1975, 73Google Scholar (emphasis mine).