All we know of Ignatius is what he tells us in his letters, namely that he is a Christian from Antioch in Syria who has been condemned to be executed in the circus, to be destroyed by wild animals.
The Letters, Ignatius of Antioch
A good part of my journey at this blog is being taken up by a study of the early Church, the key theologians and the history of the development of thought to include the earliest Church councils. I recall reading some time ago that to understand the development of theology and doctrine, and before deciding to agree or disagree with where the Church has arrived or the pros and cons of why various groups split, one should start at the beginning.
I have been doing that, somewhat in fits and starts, and continue here with St. Ignatius. As regular readers know, I have already come to some sort of position regarding the split at Chalcedon which reflects my view that, once confirming that Jesus Christ is somehow both God and man, it seems a bridge too far to try to put too fine a point on exactly how this might be worded (as if we ever could understand it in any meaningful detail).
Yet, even here, don’t go somewhere that the Scripture does not lead – in other words, avoid heretical teaching but not at the cost of exceeding Scriptural understanding.
In any case, part of this journey will include working through Ignatius, followed at some point by Irenaeus of Lyon and Cyril of Alexandria. I have already touched on each of these through various overview books, but now intend something a little more detailed.
So, on to Ignatius, and this from the introduction to his letters. Yes, we know he is on his way to his execution; we do not really know what year this is taking place. Further, while he was a bishop, it doesn’t mean he was “bishop of Syria” or “bishop of Antioch.” He was the leader of a congregation in Antioch, designated episkopos, which we now translate as “bishop.” However, “supervisor” might be an equally valid translation (and more on this shortly).
Regarding his fate, he writes that he is willingly dying for God. He beseeches those to whom he writes: “Leave me to be bread for the beasts…” Nothing should be done by the Christians in Rome to prevent his martyrdom. Yes, extreme to us, but Ignatius sees himself as an imitator of Paul, and sees Paul as an imitator of Christ.
This is the means by which he gains unity with God through Christ, namely by literally participating in his death.
However, through these letters, Ignatius addresses a number of issues beyond his coming martyrdom, issues which affect the lives of Christians. For example, he warns of Docetism – the belief that Jesus was only human in appearance, instead that He was some sort of disembodied ghost or phantom. No, Ignatius makes clear: Jesus was a real, earthly person who physically suffered.
Further, he warns of those who insist on keeping Jewish practices. It seems, this warning might go further (although I will wait to better understand this when getting to Ignatius’s actual writing); he warns that performing these practices, especially keeping the Jewish Sabbath, is spiritually perilous. This seems at least a bit contrary to what we read in the New Testament; for example, circumcision was kept by Christian Jews, but not required of Christian Gentiles.
Most importantly, he writes of the importance of unity and concord in a Christian assembly centered on a bishop. However, again, we might think of this as a “supervisor.” Ignatius describes the role of this bishop as domestic and economic, and, explicitly, not a teacher.
For example, he directs Polycarp in his duties to take care of widows, orphans, and the dispossessed, to regulate the marriage of Christians, and to ensure everyone is fed at the eucharistic meal. In other words, a church “society” is centered on the bishop, who brings the society together by the celebration of the Eucharist.
He opposes the development where the bishop was becoming a teacher! If he becomes a teacher, he will attract financial support which would then divert support from those in need – the very people the bishop is to help.
For Ignatius, the true bishop is God; the bishop on earth is the broker of the benefits of Christ.
By broker, it is intended that we understand one who regulates access to patronage. So, here we see: if the bishop becomes a teacher, he will attract patronage that should, instead, go to the needy. His concern is not merely one of good order; it is a concern that the goods of the church be distributed fairly.
The community around a bishop represents the worship of heaven, but also represents the mercies of God to all. And this ties right into his view of Docetism:
The Docetic vision of Christ destroys this, because, as Ignatius sees, these people cannot keep a Eucharist, cannot hold an agapē meal in integrity, because they have no true belief in the unity of flesh and spirit in Christ.
There is controversy about just when Ignatius was travelling, and when he wrote these letters. Some see this as happening during the reign of the emperor Trajan, which would place this somewhere in the early second century. Others see it much later in the second century, thus making the letters a forgery. The translator of this work, Alistair Stewart, argues that the journey took place in the summer of 134 and in the entourage of emperor Hadrian who was returning from Syria when fighting in the Bar Kosiba revolt in Palestine.
The dating is somewhat important, as it might help explain something of the context in which Ignatius writes. If accepted as 134, it would inform us of the progress of gnostic forms of Christianity. Further, it brings background to why Ignatius writes of distinctions between Jews and Christians:
The revolt under Bar Kosiba led to the alienation of Christians of Jewish heritage and practice from other Jews, as Christians of Jewish heritage failed to support the rebellion.
Finally, this timing enables us to see the extent to which the various offices – bishp and deacon, along with the presbytery – have formed within Christian circles. Stewart argues elsewhere that the ecclesial governance known to Ignatius had not changed from the first generations of the Church. In other words, the move to a system where a bishop had charge of a large number of congregations, via subordinate officers, had not taken places even by the 130s.
There is a repeated emphasis on the Eucharistic meal. It is a means of economic support for the poor; when the church community is gathered together, the powers of Satan are cast down; the harmonious gathering of Christians preserves the church.
And here was one of the issues causing division in Antioch at the time: the division between Jewish and Gentile Christians over matters of table fellowship – a division evident even in the time of the apostles, and, apparently, not yet resolved between law-observant Jews and Gentiles.
Which brings me to a thought: I don’t think we are commanded in the Gospel to bring uniformity in cultural practices. I know this gets a bit mixed up when thinking of Christian Jews, as “Jew” can mean something cultural, something religious, and something ethnic.
But I think of the organization of the early Church, around local communities. Perhaps a glimpse of this best remains in the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches, which, in their traditional homelands, remain tied to their national identities.
So, to use what I hope will be a not very controversial example (silly as it is) to make the point: that the Greeks drink Ouzo, the Antiochenes drink Arak, and those in formerly Ottoman lands (e.g., the Armenians) drink Raki – these are not matters that are of concern to the Gospel message and therefore need not be reconciled.
Therefore, if a Jewish community of Christians chooses to organize their Eucharistic meal in a certain fashion, so be it. Which seems not inconsistent with what might be derived from the conclusion of the Jerusalem Council as recorded in the book of Acts.
Conclusion
At the center of Ignatius’ thought, therefore, is the eucharistic gathering. Ignatius does not derive a theology from the Eucharist, but rather sees the Eucharist representing what his hearers already recognize, the expression of the love of God in Jesus Christ.
This ends the introduction to Ignatius. From here, his letters will be reviewed.
Someday I hope you will do a commentary on Fulton J. Sheen's book, Life of Christ. Afterall Christ under lies all of Ignatius's work.
As always, I am looking forward to your further commentary. One of my colleagues suggested that the Church of Jerusalem and the Church of Rome set distinct patterns for church governance. Jerusalem presented that governance being divided between the apostles (later their successors, the episkopoi) and the presbyters, while in Rome, the governance was shared by the bishop and his deacons. Hence the importance of the rank of archdeacon in the western church, denoting that individual who would succeed to the episcopal throne upon the death of the incumbent. It came to pass that individuals known still as archdeacons were actually presbyters in the western churches, testifying to the importance of the diaconate in the early days.