Saint Ignatius served as bishop in Antioch, before being shuttled around western Asia "Minor" on his way to Rome on which route he wrote those famous seven letters. Paul Wheatley considers Matthew an Antiochene document, alongside the Didache.
I came out against Ignatius having much to do with the Gospel of Matthew. Ignatius quotes "M" traditions without Matthew's special language. [CORRECTION 5/23/21: Further I had (then) thought that to the Trallians, Ignatius traces Jesus' lineage through Mary. I was mistaken on that; "seed of David" forces a male descent.] Meanwhile when Ignatius cites Jesus' later biography, particularly to the Smrynaeans, we see much more alignment with Luke and John. Although here Saint Jerome remarked we are dealing with another gospel entirely.
Where Ignatius seems closest to Matthew is in a shared understanding of Jesus' own baptism. For Matthew, when John baptised Jesus, John and Jesus together consecrated baptism as the means by which proselytes and children enter the Kingdom. Matthew nowhere discusses circumcision and he has utmost respect for righteous gentiles (as Jews might put it); contrast Luke, that great post-Pauline gospel, who must start his two volumes with Jesus' circumcision so as to lead up to Acts. Ignatius parallels Matthew 3:15 to the Smyrnaeans. Elsewhere to the Ephesians, Ignatius muses that Jesus' own baptism purified the water. [UPDATE 5/23: Although "seed of David" is a Paul quote, bypassing Matthew.]
I concur with Wheatley, then, that Ignatius and Matthew go together as Antiochenes. I continue, though, that Ignatius didn't quote from Matthew proper. An Antiochene might well have had Matthew's source-material; we see Papias rooting around for pre-Gospel ahadith, contemporaneously and independently. It may be that Matthew's Gospel was not yet accepted in Asia, so Ignatius tailored his message accordingly. This further supports the classical dating for his epistles for the reign of Trajan if not earlier.
No comments:
Post a Comment