« 上一页继续 »
in the condition he was in on earth, present and still living among men, delivered with hi own mouth those discourses which are contained in the gospels. As, also, he fled to the writings of the apostles whom he esteemed as the presbytery of the whole christian church, under Christ the universal bishop, which [ resbytery] taught all christian societies what the ought to believe. Whence it is sufficiently manifest, ow much the sacred books of the N. T. were esteemed at that time. He adds: “ Let us also love the prophets.” Which words intend the Old Testament as written: for the prophets could not be otherwise known to Ignatius. Nor ou ht it to be passed by without observation, that he in t e first place mentions the writings of the N. T. by which we are christians, as his “ refuge :” and in the second place the books of the O. T. because ‘ the New may be confirmed out of them.’
LI. Again: Philadelph. sect. ix. ‘ But8 the gospel has somewhat in it more excellent, the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ, his passion and resurrection. For the beloved prophets referred to him, but the gospel is the perfection of incorruption.’
Smyrn. sect. vii. ‘ Yef ought to hearken to the prophets, but especially to the gospel, in which the passion has been manifested to us, and the resurrection perfected.’
In these two places Mill sup oses to be meant the book of the gospels. And in the folrowing passa e by ‘ gospel ’ he supposes to be meant the canon of the_ ew Testament in general.
LlII. Smyrn. sect. v. ‘ Whomg neither the prophecies, nor the law of Moses, have persuaded; nor yet the gospel even to this day, nor the sufferings of every one of us.’
LIV. Philadelph. sect. viii. ‘ Becauseh I have heard of some who say, unless I find it in the ancients, [some are for archives], I do not believe in the gospel: and I said unto them, It is written : they answered me, It is not mentioned. But to me instead of all ancients is Jesus Christ. And the
uncorrupted ancient [doctrines] are his cross, and his death, and his resurrection, and the faith which is by him.”
This difficult text I have rendered as near as I could, according to the sense in which it is understood by Le Clerc,i which I think to be the most likely meaning. He supposes it to be an answer to the Jews, who refused to believe the gospel, for want of some clearer prophecies in the Old Testament. I have thought proper to take this notice of this passage, to prevent any wrong conclusions from it, as it stands in the Archbishop’s translation.
LV. We are to observe one place more. Smyrn. sect. iii. ‘ And when he [Christ] came to those who were with Peter, he k said unto them: Take, handle me, and see that I am not an incorporeal daemon :’ or, in other words, I am not a spirit.
Eusebius ' has quoted this passage of Ignatius, and says, he did not know whence Ignatius took these words of our Saviour. But Jerom m says it was taken out of the gospel according to the Hebrews. If these ancient writers, and some learned moderns, had not suspected these words to be taken out of some particular writing, I think one might have supposed, that Ignatius only quoted Luke‘s gos e1 in a loose manner, where is exactly the same sense. hap. xxiv. 39, “ Behold m hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me an see, for a spirit has not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.” And if it had not been a disputed point, I should have inserted this passage above, as a quotation of the gospel of St. Luke, or a reference to it. I find Mr. Le Clerc so much of the same mind, that I shall place his words ‘1 in the margin. And I would also add, that it was the opinion of ° Isaac Casaubon, and bishop Pearson, that Ignatius did not quote these words out of the gospel of the Hebrews, but that they were afterwards inserted in it.
‘ Vid. Hist. E. 116. 26. et ad 100. Ignat. ap. Patr. A. ed. 1724.
k Epr] avroig, Aaflere, nkaqmaere FE, Kat aim, on an up: 6a: oviov ao'wpa'rov- ‘ H. . l. 3. c. 36. p. 108. A. “‘ De ir. Ill. 11. 16. in Ignatio. Vid. et Grabe Spicil. T. i. p. 25. " Quae crediderim quidem Hieronymo fuisse in evangelio Hebraeorum ; sed videntur esse paraphrasis verborum, quaa sunt Lucas, cap. xxiv. 39. qua uti potuit Ignatius, pro more antiquissimorum patrum, qui persa=pe scripturae sensurn potius quam verba laudant. Certe Ignatius ea verba Matthaao non tribuit: et Nazaraei etiam historiam, quaa apud Lucam exstabat, potuerunt suo exemplari Matthaai nonnihi] immutatam inserere; its. ut utrique ex eodem fonte hauserint, non Ignatius ex Nazaraeis Dissertat. iii. quae est de iv. Evangeliis: ad calcem Harmonize Evangelicae. “Quin est fortasse verius, non ex evangelio Hebra'i'co Ignatium illa verba descripsisse, verum traditionem allegasse, non scriptam quie postea in literas fuerit relata, ct Hebraeorum evangelio, quod Matthaeo tribuebant, inserta. Camub. Exerc. ad Baron. xvi. Num. 126. Pearson having cited this passage approves it: Et hoc quidem multo mihi verisimilius videtur. Vindic. Ign. P. 2. Cap. 9.
Having shown the o inion of these learned men, Ibeg leave to detain the readhr a little longer, while I set before him this passage with the context more at large. In opposition to some heretics, Ignatius says: ‘ Christ truly suffered, as he also truly raised up himself: not as some unbelievers say, that he only seemed to suffer, they themselves only seeming to be. And P as they think, so shall it hap en to them, to be incorporeal and phantasticallgin the original, literally, “ incorporeal and daemoniac.”] ut I know, that after the resurrection he was in the flesh, and I believe him to be so still. And when he came to those who were with Peter, he said to them: Take, handle me, and see that I am not an incorporeal phantom.’ From whence I think it a pears, Ignatius was wont to use the words daemon and thOHIHC, as equivalent to phantom or spirit, and phantastical. This being his style, if he had not St. Luke before him, (as it is very likely, in his circumstances, he had not,) it was very natural for him to represent the sense of that text of St. Luke’s gospel just as we see in this passage.
I shall now make two observations :
I. That this is the first place of the apostolical fathers in which we have a passage, I do not say quoted from, but found in, an apocryphal book of the New Testament. And this is the first in Grabe’s collection of the fragments of the gospel according to the Hebrews. It will not be impro er for me to confirm this observation by the judgment of Ir. Le Clerc, who has been so conversant with these writers. He sa s thentl expressly, ‘ that he has not observed in any ‘ of t e apostolical fathers, (he means those already here ‘ quoted, and St. Pol carp, who will next follow,) any ‘ quotations of apocryphal books, concerning 'the doctrine or ‘ history of Christ, except only this one passage of Ignatius; ‘in which he may seem to quote the g0spel of the Naza
And again afterwards: Quidni pan'ter et S. Ignatius, [inquit Pearsonus,] qui cum apodolis et eorum discipulis versatus est, praasertim e0 tempore, quo scriptis evangeliis uli forte ei non licebat, eandem historiam quam nariat S. Lucas aliis verbis explicaret? Ibid. P Kat ma.ng IPpovovo'w, mt avpfirlo'srat avrotg, ovaw aaw aroig xat Eatpovucoig. '1 Non animadverti ulla uspiam evangeia, aut scripta apocrypha ad historiam aut doctrinam Christi pertinentia, ab iis laudari; excepto uno illo Ignatii, in quo vrderi possit laudare evangelium NaZaI‘tBOl'ulll; sed quem ex Luca exprmum potius existimaverim, ut jam dixi. Le Clerc, Harmon. Evangel. p. 542. b.
‘ renes: but I rather think, ays he, the place taken from ‘ St. Luke.’
2. I would observe concerning the gos el according to the Hebrews, that this passage of it affords an argument, that it was composed after our genuine gospels; because it appears to be taken out of St. Luke’s gospel, only with a little alteration; in conformity, perhaps, to this very place of Ignatius. I think I could argue the same thing from some other passages of that gospel of the Hebrews. But we may have a better opportunity of showing more at large that the ground-work of that gospel is St. Matthew’s g0spel; to which have been made additions of things taken out of St. Luke's, (and perha s other g0spels,) and other matters that had been delivere by oral tradition.
LVI. Thus I have given an account of the testimony which Ignatius affords to the books of the New Testament, without any res ect to the larger epistles, except in Numb. XLIV. where have particularly mentioned them. The larger epistles would have supplied me with many more, an express uotations of the gospels and tipistles, if we could allow t em to be genuine. But besi e the many other arguments against their genuineness, this may be one, that there are more quotations out of the Old and New Testament than could be well expected. The larger epistles were plainly composed by a man at leisure. Ignatius at his writing was very much straitened for time, being at once a traveller, and a prisoner under a stron guard; and, at the places where he rested, much engage by the kind and respectful visits of the Christians there, and from the neighbouring cities, and in giving them exhortations by wor of mouth. I have endeavoured to take nothing but what is genuine. The Greek edition, even of the smaller e istle to the Romans, as now published by Ruinart, wou d have afforded me two references or quotations more than I have taken: one of Matthew xvi. 26, the other of 2 Cor. iv. 8, the words of which texts are there at length. But Graber has honestly and ingenuously owned, he suspects them to be additions, they being wanted in the ancient Latin version of that epistle.
LVlI. We may now sum up the testimony of Ignatius. And in the first place, he has ex ressly ascribed the epistle to the Ephesians to St. Paul. n the next place, here are plain allusions to the gospels of St. Matthew and St. John. Whether he has alluded to the gospel of St. Luke, is doubt,ful, unless we allow him to refer to it in the passage at Numb. LV. The other allusions here taken from Ignatius relate to the Acts of the A ostles, the e istle to the Romans, first and second to the orinthians, galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, first to the Thessalonians, second to Timothy, to Titus, Philemon, Hebrews, first e istle of Peter, first and third epistles of John. And most of t ese allusions, I apprehend, will be allowed manifest. The least considerable seem to be those to the Colossians, Titus, and the Hebrews. And if any think, likewise, the agreement between Ignatius and some of the other books not material, I shall not contend about it. Every one is now able to judge for himself. But I think, there are some references to the greatest part of these books, which will not be disputed.
' Neque tamen dissimulare possum, et istud non omnino sincerum, sed
loca scripturae, 2 Cor. iv. et Malth. xvi. aliaque, addita videri, qua! fl vetere versione absunt. Grabe, Spicil. Patr. T. 2. p. 8.
And besides, here are terms used by him, importin a collection of the gospels, and of the epistles of the apost es, and of the books of the New Testament in general.
ST. POLYCARP. HIS HISTORY.
THE character and age of Polycarp, and the genuineness of his remaining epistle t0 the Philippians, will appear from some passages of Irenaeus, bishop of Lyons in Gaul. These passages will also serve to show at the same time the age, and consequently the authority, of Irenmus himself, and the value of his testimony, when we shall come to make use of it.
lrenaeus" says in his excellent work against all heresies: ‘ And Polycarp teaches the same things, who was not only ‘ taught by the apostles, and had conversed with many who ‘ had seen Christ, but was also by the apostles appointed ‘ bishop of the church of Smyrna in Asra. Whom also I ‘ saw in my early a 'e; (for he lived long, and at a great age ‘ had a glorious and splendid martyrdom :) Isay, Polycarp ‘ always taught these things, which he had learned from ‘ the apostles, which he delivered to the church, and which ‘ alone are true. To this bear witness all the churches in ‘ Asia, and they who to this time have succeeded Polycarp;
‘ L. 3. c. 3. sect. 4. Edit. Mass. at apud Euseb. H. E. 1. iv. cap. 14.