Charisma in the Ignatian Epistles
The Social Setting of the Ministry This letter contains sufficient evidence to suggest that Polycarp was relatively affluent. In 6:1-2 we learn that he was betrayed by young "slaves (παιδάρια) of his own house". Again, the implication from the reference to the two farms mentioned as his hiding places (5:1; 6:1) is that they were his own.63 Also, Ignatius* instruction that Polycarp be not haughty to slaves (Pol. 4:3) harmonizes well with this other evidence. We may cautiously conclude from the evidence we have that Polycarp was well-to-do. It is possible that like certain well-to-do individuals described in the apocryphal literature listed above, Polycarp invited the church into his home for the common eucharist. This provides a plausible background for Ignatius' exhortation that Polycarp make the meetings more numerous (cf. also Eph. 13:1) and that he seek all by name (έξ ονόματος Pol
4:2).64 As in the case of 3 John, where we argued that an explanation for Diotrephes' power to exclude members from the church was connected with his power as a host of the church, so in the case of Polycarp, the ability to convene meetings more often may have arisen from his position as a host of the church meeting in his home. We do not have any evidence of the economic position of the other bishops.
A possible social setting for the meetings regarded by Ignatius as legitimate were the households of local bishops. Just as a Smyrnaean presbyter probably welcomed Ignatius' opponents into his home and allowed meetings to occur in what Ignatius regarded as defiance of the bishop, so bishops of these churches may have led the common meeting in their own homes. This is only one possible reconstruction, but it is consonant with what was probably the case in the setting presented in 2 and 3 John, and it gains a degree of extra support from other early evidence which presents a setting similar to the one suggested here.
Summary We have attempted to reconstruct the social setting of the communities Ignatius addressed. The house church provides a compelling setting for the activities of these communities and the problems confronting them. 2 and 3 John as well as later apocryphal literature have been explored in our attempt to understand more precisely how these communities operated. We suggested that behind this literature there was a house-church setting in which patrons of the church had a central role of leadership. We saw that evidence concerning the social status of Polycarp helps to confirm this. On this basis we tentatively suggested that house-church patrons had a similar role in the governance of the communities
Ignatius addressed. In the case of Smyrna we were able to be more precise concerning divisions arising from the support of a church leader. Perhaps a presbyter invited Ignatius' opponents into his home. Our reconstruction of legitimate meetings included a common eucharist with other smaller meetings such as agapes taking place in the homes of presbyters or other members.
Charisma in the Ignatian Epistles The personality of Ignatius — the bishop from Syria who marched from his home in Antioch to distant Rome, chained "to ten leopards — which is a company of soldiers" (Rom. 5:1) — has fired the imagination of scholars for over a century.
Ignatius
May I benefit from the wild beasts prepared for me, and I pray that they will be found prompt with me, whom I shall even entice to devour me promptly — not as with some whom they were too timid to touch; and should they not consent voluntarily, I shall force them. Indulge me; I know what is to my advantage; now 1 begin to be a disciple. May nothing of things visible and invisible envy me, that I may attain Jesus Christ. Fire and cross, and packs of wild beasts, the wrenching of bones, the mangling of limbs, the grinding of my whole body, evil punishments of the devil — let these come upon me, only that I may attain Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:2-3 — trans, Schoedel).
Ignatius' gory imagination has resulted in mixed judgments. According to Streeter, he suffered from "a psychic over-compensation for an inferiority complex."65 In short, he was neurotic. Not so, responded Moffatt: he may have been neurotic but his passion for martyrdom originated in an intense personal religiosity—his letters "are one of our first items in the psychology of the saints."66 Yes, agreed Campenhausen, but his belief that he could attain God through martyrdom made him the first Catholic saint, and it was not so much a personal relationship with Jesus that motivated him as a need to win salvation for himself 6 7 And not only was he Catholic, contended Preiss. He was also a mystic who desired (through his martyrdom) to cast off the dregs of material flesh and to set his semi-gnostic spirit free through unity with God.68 Yes, he was a mystic, responded Tinsley, but his mysticism was not "a kind of yoga of self-endeavor after God" as Preiss argued; rather it was "profoundly and penetratingly Christian... a good early example of Christian 'incarnational' mysticism in which the historical life of Jesus has a central place."69 Not so much a mystic, contended Bultmann, as a Pauline Christian; Ignatius was
"existentiell" — the only second-century writer to conceive of Christian existence in a way close to the "even now — not yet" paradox of primitive Pauline Christian eschatology.70
The attempts to reconstruct Ignatius' personality, though valuable in reminding the reader that with Ignatius' epistles we have to do with flesh and blood and not a theological construct,71 perhaps reveal more about those who set about the task, than about the man himself. For if it is true that one age's madman is another's saint, then the, perhaps insurmountable, difficulty of choosing a model of personality with which to analyse a historical character which is not question begging may doom the venture from the start. At the least, one must be very cautious in reconstructing Ignatius' self-conception if only because we have a mere seven letters, and most of those written to persuade audiences of the desirability of a certain course of common action rather than to chronicle the thoughts of a soul. If it is true that Ignatius was employing rhetoric in his letters,72 then the distinction becomes all the more important. For what appear to the modern reader as expressions of existential angst, neurosis, the desire for the mystical unity, or the winning of salvation may have been intended for a quite different effect.
Still, we cannot get past Ignatius' personality. It dominates his letters, for it is not as a bishop or holder of some other official position that he exhorts the Asia
Minor communities to avoid schisms and unite with their bishops — Ignatius
The Social Setting of the Ministry never makes use of this kind of authority — but as an individual who demands
(without demanding, Ignatius would add) obedience to his exhortations. If we cannot solve the puzzle of his personality, perhaps we can come to a solution of his ability to command others to follow certain courses of action. We shall be in a better position to assess the authority of Ignatius' person if we step back from the personality and direct our attention to the situation. Ignatius relates to a particular group as an authority and it is by analysing how those around him may have seen him that we can gain a more accurate picture of how he viewed himself.
A point often overlooked in theological accounts of the Ignatian letters is the great effort which was undertaken by Ignatius' comrades to meet with him and to carry out his requests. There is evidence of much travelling in these letters, not only by Ignatius, but also by several others. A messenger was sent ahead of Ignatius to Rome to bring his situation to the attention of others (Rom. 10:2); messengers had probably preceded Ignatius' arrival in western Asia Minor to inform the communities that he was coming (Eph. 1:2); the Ephesians, Magnesians, and Trallians sent representatives (five from Ephesus and four from Magnesia) to meet with Ignatius; the Ephesians and Smyrnaeans contributed funds to allow a deacon to accompany Ignatius to Troas {Eph. 2:1); Philo and Rheus
Agathopous followed Ignatius from Cilicia and Syria to Troas to give Ignatius the news of peace at Antioch (Phld. 11:1; Smyr. 10:1); and Ignatius requested that all the Asia Minor communities send letters and personal messengers to congratulate the Antiochenes on their peacc (Phld.
10; Smyr, 11:2-3; Pol. 8:1), which was carried out soon after Ignatius' departure from Philipp! (cf. Pol. Phil
13:1). Since travelling in the ancient world involved a good deal of expense, time, and energy, the evidence of travel in these letters is significant.73
The evidence of energy exerted to meet with Ignatius or to fulfil his requests is impressive. Schoedel argues that behind all this activity was a good deal of "staging," that is, a carefully planned strategy both to establish boundary division between the Asia Minor communities and to vindicate Ignatius' ministry by sending messengers to Antioch to ensure the success of its new-found peace.74 But behind all of this activity there is also an authority relation. Ignatius makes great requests of the Asia Minor churches and he expects them to conform with his wishes. Thus, if he often describes himself as unworthy to give orders in his letters (Eph. 3:1; TraL 3:3; Mag. 12:1), he does also on occasion write with a note of strong authority (Trat. 5:1-2). We turn to a closer analysis of this authority relation.
Ignatius9 Charismatic Authority As in the case of Paul,75 so, too, with Ignatius, Weber's charismatic type helps us to illuminate certain important aspects of his authority. Weber describes charisma as a certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is considered extraordinary and treated as endowed with supernatural, superhuman, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities. These are such as are not accessible to the ordinary person, but are regarded as of divine origin or as
exemplary, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader'.76
Unlike legal and traditional types of authority, the exercise of which involves some appeal to an external standard, charismatic authority rests upon a personal quality which testifies to extraordinariness. In its pure form, charismatic leadership is revolutionary: "It is written, but I say to you" is a typical charismatic statement. In contrast to the bureaucratic machinery typical of legal forms of authority, charisma knows no formal and regulated appointment or dismissal, no career, advancement or salary, no supervisory or appeals body, no local or purely technical jurisdiction, and no permanent institutions . . . which are independent of the incumbents and their personal charisma. Charisma is self-determined and sets its own limits. Its bearer seizes the task for which he is destined and demands that others obey and follow him by virtue of his mission.77
Weber is not interested in the question of whether the charismatic does in fact have these qualities; what is important for him is that the qualities of the charismatic leader are "regarded as of divine origin or as exemplary."78 For those dominated by the charismatic leader, obedience is a compelling duty. But what it is in the charismatic that makes obedience to him or her compelling was not a problem which Weber successfully addressed.
He sometimes appealed to a pathological state among a charismatic leader's followers, born of various kinds of socio-economic distress, in order to explain their predisposition to follow him or her.79 More recent sociologists prefer instead to focus on the bond uniting the group to the charismatic leader and to analyse charisma as a distinct form of social action.80 Weber already hinted at the direction more recent sociologists have developed his type when he noted that a prophet (an example of a "purely individual bearer of charisma"81) presents "a unified view of the world" to his or her followers.82 If the prophetic message is to have any significance, it must be relevant to persons other than the prophet; the perception of the charismatic quality by others is culturally determined. Shils has developed this understanding of charisma more fully by noting how charisma is related to that which is in contact with or embodies something "serious" or "awe-arousing"83 Weber's pure charismatic is charismatic by virtue of what the group finds awe-inspiring. His or her authority is not fully intelligible without reference to the values, beliefs, and norms of his followers.
In Shils' terms, perceived contact with what the group thinks is "sacred" gives the charismatic his or her authority84 This revision of the charismatic type provides us with some heuristic tools with which to understand Ignatius' authority. Ignatius was probably perceived as extraordinary. Several passages suggest that he too thought this. In both cases it seems likely that this belief rested on a perceived closeness to what was sacred to these communities. Schoedel notes his extraordinary position when he writes
Ignatius is . . . far from seeing his journey in sober historical terms. He views it rather as a triumphant march ... of mythic proportions.... He thus invites fellow Christians to see beyond appearances and to grasp the hidden meaning
The Social Setting of the Ministry of his wretched condition. It seems obvious that Christians who had been nurtured on the story of the crucified Lord and who had experienced the rejection of society in their own lives . . . would be prepared to welcome such a figure.85
In the following discussion we shall attempt to explicate more fully the social factors which contributed to the perception of Ignatius as an extraordinary authority.
The Asian communities were not only called upon to welcome Ignatius, they were also challenged to obey him. This may be partially accounted for by recognizing that he was probably regarded as possessing prophetic qualities.86 The most explicit evidence of this appears in Phld. 7:1-2, where Ignatius describes a meeting with members of the Philadelphian church. He argues that some of his opponents entered the meeting surreptitiously, and he defends his knowledge of local divisions by an appeal to what may classified as prophetic inspiration:
For even if some desired to deceive me according to the flesh, still the spirit which is from God is not deceived. For it knows whence it comes and whither it goes, and it exposes the hidden things. I cried out when I was among you, speaking with a great voice, with the voice of God, "Devote yourselves to the bishop and to the presbytery and deacons." But as for those who suspected me of saying these things because I had foreknowledge about the division of some — he is my witness in whom I am bound, I did not know of this from any human being. It was the spirit who proclaimed, saying these words, "Do nothing apart from the bishop, keep your flesh as a temple of God, love unity, flee divisions, be imitators of Jesus Christ, as also he was of his father." (my translation) Here Ignatius makes direct reference to an inspired utterance.87 His description of himself as speaking "with a great voice, with the voice of God" is similar to other accounts in early Christian and Hellenistic literature which describe prophetic or inspired pronouncements.88 In this passage, then, Ignatius claims to have been the vehicle of a prophetic utterance. A less clear instance which may also reveal that he regarded himself as in some sense inspired with a prophetic spirit may be found in Rom. 7:2. Here, in a way reminiscent of a Johannine theme,89 Ignatius refers to "living water" which speaks in him, saying from within, "Come to the Father." In the Hellenistic world, water and prophecy were traditionally linked together, and it is possible that such a connection was intended in this passage.90
Alongside the evidence of prophetic characteristics, we may also place Ignatius' conviction that he possessed great spiritual insight. In Tral. 4:1, he writes that he has "much knowledge in God." He continues in 5:1-2,
Am I not able to write heavenly things to you? Yes, but I am afraid that 1 should do you harm seeing you are infants. Pardon me, for I refrain test you be choked by what you cannot receive. For I myself, though I am in bonds and can understand heavenly things and the places of the angels and the gatherings of principalities, and the things seen and unseen (άόρατα), not for this am I a disciple even now, for much is lacking to us, that we may not lack
God. (trans. Lake and Schoedel)
Ignatius
There is no direct reference to prophetic ability in this passage, but there is a claim to extraordinary spiritual knowledge, which may have been associated in Ignatius' mind with prophetic insight. In Pol 2:2, Ignatius exhorts Polycarp to pray for unseen things (άόρατα) to be revealed to him, so that he may "abound in every spiritual gift (χαρ(σμα)." The term άόρατα here and in Tral, 5:2, where he uses it to describe his ability to comprehend invisible things, probably refers to theological mysteries. Since Polycarp is exhorted to pray for the revelation of invisible things to him, it is likely that Ignatius regarded his own spiritual insights as divinely bestowed. Ignatius was confident of the value of his spiritual knowledge; Eph. 19 may be an example of it, and in Eph. 20:1-2 he promises that there is more to follow.91 In Tral 4:1, Ignatius states that he has many thoughts (πολλά φρονείν) "in God," and he knows that he is in a position to boast about it. This may be taken as a reference to a high degree of spiritual knowledge; πολλά φρονείν is a phrase used in Greek literature to express this.92
If the communities Ignatius addressed also saw in him an individual with prophetic gifts and remarkable spiritual knowledge, which is likely given Polycarp's comment concerning the value of Ignatius' letters (Pol. Phil 13:2), this could well have been the main ground for their regarding him as an authority figure.
But alongside the more evident expression of charismatic authority, there is evidence of a more subtle form which may also be described as charismatic.
Ignatius was especially indirect when he exhorted his audience to pursue a certain course of action. The complexity of his authority is that he seemed conscious of the prestige that being a potential martyr conferred upon him, while at the same time being diffident when he exhorted or admonished his readers.
This is most clearly to be seen in passages where he uses concessive clauses to express his authority. In Eph. 3:1, for example, after requesting that Burrhus may stay on with him as an assistant and recommending that the Ephesians be subject to their bishop and presbytery (2:1-2), Ignatius writes, "I do not command you as being someone; for even though (εί γάρ καί) I have been bound in the name, I have not yet begun to be perfected in Jesus Christ" (trans.
Schoedel — also, Mag. 12:1; cf. Tral 5:2; Rom. 9:2; Smyr. 11:1). Conscious of the authority he is in a position to wield, Ignatius curiously qualifies it by referring to his unworthiness.
Taking up the positive side first, Ignatius was aware that being bound to Christ conferred a large degree of prestige upon him. The passages in which he uses concessive clauses are an instance of this. The positive content of his selfconception may be seen in Mag. 1:2, where he describes himself as "being counted worthy to bear a most godly name." Again, in Eph. 21:2 he states that he was "thought worthy to attain honour for God." The references to members of his audience who "puff" him up or praise him (Tral 4:1; Smyr. 5:2) indicate that these communities, too, saw Ignatius as in some way set apart from them.
His reference to his need for humility in Tral 4:1 and his criticism of those who revere him indicate his consciousness of the high repute his position as a prisoner for Christ conferred upon him. He was probably not exaggerating the high regard accorded to him. Polycarp is witness to the honour given to him as one on his way to be martyred. In Polycarp's view Ignatius was specially elected by God specifically, as in the context of the passage shows, to be a martyr (Pol. Phil
The Social Setting of the Ministry 1Ά).93 He has borne the chains fitting for a saint, which are in fact his crown.
His endurance is set alongside that of the apostles as an example for the Philippians to follow (Pol. Phil. 9:1).
Ignatius' attitude to his chains is similar to that of Polycarp. He is most explicit about the honour he feels himself to be enjoying where he describes his bonds and his journey as a prisoner. If he sometimes portrays himself as a common criminal (Eph. 12:1; Tral. 3:3; cf. Smyr. 10:2), in other passages he refers to his status as a prisoner in a way that suggests he saw in his condition a more honourable significance. He regards himself as a "prisoner for (έν) Christ
Jesus" (Tral 1:1; also, 12:2; Eph. 3:1; Rom. 1:1; Phld. 5:1). And like Polycarp, he describes his bonds as having a sacred significance. They are "spiritual pearls"
(Eph. 11:2) or "most God-pleasing bonds" which he has been counted worthy to bear (Smyr. 11:1); they exhort his readers (Tral 12:2); and it is in them that Ignatius "sings the praise of the Churches" (Mag. 1:2). It is perhaps in this metaphor of bearing the bonds of Jesus that the explanation of Ignatius' second name, Theophorus, is to be found (e.g. Eph. Inscr.; Mag. Inscr.).
Whatever the explanation of Ignatius' second name, it is probable that he, together with the members of the Asia Minor churches, regarded his martyrdom as bearing a deep significance. "Why have I given myself up to death?" he asks his docetic opponents.
Because near the sword is near to God; with the wild beasts is with God; in the name of Jesus Christ alone am I enduring all things, that I may suffer with him, and the perfect man himself gives me strength. (Smyr. 4.2)
If Christ did not really suffer, he argues in Tral 10, then he is dying in vain; he is lying about the Lord. Behind these statements is an a fortiori argument which relies for its success on a recognition that Ignatius' anticipated death echoes the death of Christ (cf. Rom. 6:3). If Christ did not suffer, then why is he going to suffer? Since it is true that Ignatius is or will soon be suffering, the claim that Christ suffered is all the more vindicated. Of course, the docetists could have responded that he was begging the question by arguing this way, but for a group centred, as we shall see, on the symbols of Christ's death, it is Ignatius' anticipated martyrdom that provides his most powerful argument for Christ's true passion. Anyway, Ignatius was apparently not very optimistic about convincing his opponents (Smyr. 4:1). He expended most of his energy exhorting those relatively unaffected by docetic opinions, in order to ensure that his opponents enjoyed no further successes in these communities. If the members of this group recognized that Ignatius was participating to a large degree in a sacred reenactment of the drama of Christ's passion, this would have made his argument very compelling.
It was probably because of his perceived participation in what, for him, was the sacred symbol of Christ's suffering that Ignatius could portray his experience as a prisoner in sacrificial terms (Eph. 8:1; Tral 13:3)95 and describe "fighting with wild beasts" as a hope (Eph. 1:2). In fact, the symbolism of bloody martyrdom was probably associated in Ignatius' mind with supreme identification with Christ. In Smyr. 4:2, Ignatius states that he is enduring his tribulations so that he may suffer with Christ, and in Rom. 6:3, he states that he wishes to fol-
Ignatius
low the example of Christ's passion.96 It is in his suffering that he is becoming a true disciple (Eph. 3:1).
If the communities Ignatius addressed were convinced by his interpretation of his imprisonment and anticipated suffering - a claim we shall attempt to substantiate in the following section — it seems probable that he would have enjoyed a status which separated him from the rest of the community and earned him reverence. In the context of the group's beliefs, Ignatius was regarded as being in contact with a certain llawe-arousing centrality" which clothed him with a nimbus of authority. When he stated that he carried his bonds for the sake of Jesus Christ (e.g. Trat. 12:2), or that his chains were the bonds of Jesus (Phld. 5:1), the nearness to the sacred and group-defining symbols of his audience with which these statements endowed him set him apart from local members and conferred upon him an extraordinary quality. Those whom he addressed probably believed that, as a Christian about to be martyred, he was in intense contact with a very central feature of human existence and the cosmos. This enables us to account for his ability to exhort and admonish communities hitherto unconnected with him.
Ignatius' Charismatic Authority and the Sectarian Identity of the Asian Churches According to Weber, the legitimacy of a charismatic leader's authority arises from the perception among his followers that it is their duty to recognize its authoritativeness and to act accordingly.97 Such feelings of dutifulness on the part of the leader's followers cannot be comprehended without reference to their social context, beliefs, values, and interests. So too, Ignatius' charismatic appeal cannot be understood apart from his status as a prisoner and potential martyr — a status which was interpreted by him and his audience as echoing the passion of Christ. This way of interpreting his suffering and anticipated martyrdom would have placed him close to those symbols most meaningful to the group.
We are interested here in those general community beliefs, ideals, and norms which were associated with Christ and which contributed to the community's self-definition. An understanding of these phenomena provides the context necessary to make Ignatius' authority more intelligible. The relationship between that authority and the experiences and beliefs of the Asian communities has been overlooked by those who focus exclusively on theological aspects of Ignatius' thought in order to account for his leadership. According to Campenhausen, for example, Ignatius' authority originates in the fact that he "feels himself to be a man of the Spirit," and his position as a "pneumatic" "is simply a case of an exceptional heightening of the general 'spiritual' nature, as this is made known to and bestowed upon Christians as a corporate body... ,"98 Campenhausen adds that it was Ignatius' superior knowledge of spiritual matters that gave him superiority over others.99 While this may be part of the explanation for his authority, it is not a full enough account of it What is more important in this authority relation than how Ignatius "feels" himself to be, is the way he is perceived. Without reference to the beliefs of the group, the authority Ignatius
The Social Setting of the Ministry possessed in the Asia Minor communities, several of which he had never met, is hard to understand.
It is here, however, that we must proceed cautiously. For we do not possess a definitive account of the beliefs of Ignatius' audience. How can we know that Ignatius' conviction of the importance of certain symbols was shared by the Asian churches? Indeed, there were members of that audience who held docetic beliefs. But having stated this, it is important to note that it seems unlikely that these members were in a majority position in these communities.100 And it was not one unsure of the allegiance to his own beliefs who asked the Philadelphians and Smyrnaeans to send messengers hundreds of miles to congratulate the Antiochene Christians on their restoration of peace (Phld. 10:1; Smyr. 11:2-3;
Pol. 7:2-3). Further, Polycarp describes Ignatius' letters as of great benefit (Pol.
Phil. 13:2), a statement which indicates that he found in Ignatius' teaching and exhortation instruction that was compelling. But more importantly, the symbols of the death and resurrection of Christ were used by Polycarp in ways similar to Ignatius to define Christian existence.101 If we add to these observations the recognition that Ignatius probably wrote his letters with the intended result of protecting his audiences from false teaching, it seems unlikely that he would have consciously employed imagery which had little significance to his readers. The high regard accorded Ignatius by Polycarp (Pol. Phil 1:1; 9:1-2) probably indicates that Ignatius' use of symbolism and interpretation of the Christian life were consistent with the beliefs of certain portions of his audience.
Placing Ignatius and the Asian churches he addressed in a more general sectarian context facilitates our understanding of what made obedience to him a compelling duty. We recall from Bryan Wilson's sect type that sects emphasize exclusiveness, conceive of themselves as an elect, gathered remnant, and are hostile or indifferent to secular society and the state; their beliefs provide a framework for interpreting life both within and outside the group and for discerning the purposes that are thought to underlie the universe.102 Wilson's ideal type is a useful heuristic tool to determine the self-defining beliefs of the Asian churches which contributed to their reception of and obedience to Ignatius. In particular, the close identification of the churches with Christ's death and resurrection, creating a framework within which all aspects of human life and experience were placed and interpreted, the self-conception of being an elect group marginal to the rest of society, together with a consciousness of being a privileged minority, provide a sectarian background of beliefs for Ignatius' authority.
The symbols of the suffering and raised Christ were of more than merely theoretical interest to Ignatius' readers — we are probably right to see them as definitive for their self-understanding. It is likely that these were group-defining symbols for most members of these communities.103 In several passages Ignatius identifies Christians with the cross: he calls true members of the church
"branches of the cross" (Tral. 11:2); in Smyr. 1.2 he describes them as the fruit of the cross and nailed upon it; Christian life springs up from Christ's death
(Mag. 9:1; Tral 2:1; cf. Smyr. 5:3); Christ is the life of the church (Eph. 3:2;
11:1; Mag. 1:2). Christians act and live in Christ's suffering, as, indeed, in his resurrection. This may be seen in Phld. Inscr., where the preposition έν with the dative is employed to describe the Philadelphians as rejoicing "in the passion of
Ignatius
our Lord," and being "fully assured . . . in his resurrection."104 In Eph. 1:1» Ignatius employs a phrase similar to "in the blood of Christ" used in the Philadelphian greeting and in Smyr. 12:2 to describe the aid offered to him.
If we may cautiously conclude that the symbols of Christ's death and resurrection functioned as group-defining images, in a way similar to that found in Ignatius' letters, then it seems probable that when the Syrian passed through these communities and interpreted his imprisonment with christological language, this would have made a profound impact on most members and marked him as an extraordinary example of devotion. These churches would have seen in Ignatius a supreme embodiment of the sacrally significant events defining their existence. His position as a potential martyr probably embodied in a concentrated or intense form the sectarian identity of a community defined by the symbols of the suffering and raised Christ.
Closely associated with the symbols of the suffering and resurrected Christ are references to special election. Such passages bespeak a privileged position of favour for the Asian communities. Language of election appears repeatedly in the lgnatian corpus and probably indicates a consciousness of separation from the rest of the world. In his salutation to the Ephesians Ignatius recalls images from New Testament Eph. l:3f.105 by describing that church as "predestined before the ages, for abiding and unchangeable glory, united and chosen through true suffering by the will of the Father and Jesus Christ our God
" Direct language of election also appears in the opening of Ignatius' letter to the Trallians, where the Syrian prisoner describes this church as "elect and worthy of God, at peace in flesh and spirit by the suffering of Jesus Christ, who is our hope through our resurrection unto him."
But it is not only where Ignatius refers directly to election that there is evidence that he considered the Asia Minor communities as an elect group. Again, in a way which echoes the image employed in New Testament Eph. 2:20-22,106 he uses the sacred image of a temple in Eph. 9:1 to portray the identity of the Ephesian church. He describes the Ephesians as "stones of the temple of the Father, made ready for the building of God our Father, carried up to the heights by the engine of Jesus Christ, that is the cross, and using as a rope the Holy
Spirit." They are incorporated into a distinct sacred identity which distinguishes them from the rest of the world. In 9:2 the Ephesians are described as "all companions on the way, God-bearers and temple-bearers, Christ-bearers, bearers of holy things, in every way adorned with the commandments of Jesus Christ"
(Schoedel trans.). He again makes use of the temple image in Eph. 15:3: "Let us do everything in the conviction that he dwells in us. Thus we shall be his temples and he will be our God within us".107 The image of the indwelling
Christ or God is repeatedly employed (Mag. 12:1; Rom. 6:3; cf. Mag. 14:1). All of these images indirectly testify to separation from the rest of the world, and a consciousness of being a special elect, enjoying the favour of God.
The sectarian language of separation is evidenced in passages which contrast the church with the world. In Mag. 5:2, Ignatius, identifying the members who meet apart from the bishop as unbelievers, writes
The Social Setting of the Ministry just as there are two coinages, the one of God, the other of the world, and each has its own stamp impressed on it, so the unbelievers bear the stamp of this world, and the believers the stamp of God the Father in love through Jesus Christ This is an example of a series of statements in which Ignatius speaks of the world or the rest of society. Not all refer to separation, but there is an undercurrent of a sense of distinction from the rest of society. He hopes converts will be won, but he is also conscious of society's hostility to the church. Eph. 10:1-3 contains Ignatius' most positive references to the outside world, but even here there is a consciousness of being separate. He exhorts the Ephesians to pray for the repentance of "other men", i.e., non-Christians,108 but as the imprisonment of Ignatius indicates, outsiders were not so accommodating. An indication that these communities also suffered opposition appears in 10:2-3 where Ignatius appeals to them to respond to the hostility of outsiders with openness. "Yield to them therefore so that they may become disciples, at least through your deeds."
Before their wrath be gentle, before their boasting be humble minded, before their slanderings offer prayers, before their error be steadfast in the faith; before their fierceness be gentle, not being eager to imitate them in return.
(Trans. Schoedel with some alteration) Consciousness of opposition from outsiders also appears in Tral. 8:2, where he exhorts the Trallians not to have anything against their neighbours. Ignatius connects church discord with outside opposition when he continues, "Do not give any pretext to the gentiles, in order that the congregation in God may not be slandered because of a few fools" (my translation). These passages imply an awareness of being separate, alien, and vulnerable to outside persecution. When
Christianity is hated by the world it is characterized by greatness (Rom. 3:3).
It is peculiar that, aside from the two appearances of the term in Mag. 5:2, Ignatius' only use of the term κόσμος appears in his Roman epistle (2:2; 3:2,3;
4:2; 6:1,2; 7:1). Among these passages, 3:3 and 7:1 contain the most direct contrasts between the the church and the world. There seems to be more here to Ignatius' references to the world than a deepening of "negative attitudes toward
Rome shared by many an eastern inhabitant of the empire."109 To a member of a group which identified itself as separate from the wider society, it is more likely that the imperial capital symbolized the world. A better interpretation than that offered by Schoedel for Ignatius' numerous references to the world in this epistle is that as the Syrian prisoner contemplated his anticipated martyrdom and the meaning of his identity as a member of a group conscious of being separate, the world-church dichotomy became most explicit. He probably also knew the tradition of Peter and Paul's martyrdom in Rome (Rom. 4:3),110 and this knowledge may have contributed to an association between Rome and the world and to the identification of the capital as a symbol of opposition. Thus, it was not primarily eastern hatred of Rome that resulted in the several references to the world in the Roman epistle, but what Rome symbolized to a member of a sect already conscious of its separateness.
The mythic imagery which describes "the prince of this age" also indicates separation from the world. Scholars traditionally focus their attention on Reli-
Ignatius
gionsgeschichtliche and Traditionsgeschichtliche questions concerning Ignatius' use of such imagery to such a degree that they overlook the role it may have played in self-definition.1 n If we are to understand more fully the social meaning of certain images Ignatius employed, it is necessary to determine the role certain symbols played in his social world.
Wayne Meeks, in an essay on the man from heaven imagery in John's gospel, has shown that mythic language and social identity were related in early Christian groups.112 Meeks asks what social function myths, such as the descending/ascending redeemer, played in John's community.113 He recognizes that Johannine symbols were intended for a certain community, and that they reflected and integrated its self-identity, experience, and beliefs. Turning again to Ignatius, it seems possible to deduce a social identity from cosmic and mythic imagery employed by him. We must proceed cautiously, since symbols which were relevant to Ignatius may not have been meaningful to his readers. But Ignatius' direct contact with representatives and, in some cases, with the communities themselves, makes it likely that, even if his themes may have originated in another context, they will have been adapted to their new setting.
Further, the position he enjoyed as an inspired instructor (Eph. 20:1-2; Tral, 5:1-2; cf. Pol. Phil 13:2), allows us to suggest that Ignatius and portions of the communities shared a more or less similar symbolic universe.114
One of the "world passages" which appears in a more mythical context is Rom. 7:1.
The prince of this age (ο άρχων του αιώνος τούτου) wants to abduct me and to corrupt my mind set on God. Let none of you present help him, rather be on my side, that is, God's. Do not profess Jesus Christ, and desire the world (κόσμος), (trans. Schoedel and Grant)
Professing Jesus Christ and desiring the world are contrasted as opposites, and the term κόσμος is apparently associated with the "prince of this age." The Romans are not to assist him — they are not to desire the world — rather they are to be on God's side, that is on the side of Ignatius' desire for martyrdom.
References to the "prince of this age" reappear several times throughout Ignatius' correspondence (Eph. 17:1; 19:1; Mag. 1:2; Tral 4:2; Rom. 7:1; Phld. 6:2).
Grant notes that Ignatius employs the terms "age" (αιών) and κόσμος synonymously115 (as is most clearly evident in Rom. 6:1).116 If this is the case, the ascription of "this age" to the rulership of the άρχων further defines the separation of the church from the world. Not only are these communities separated from society, their separation is symbolized by a belief concerning the ultimate powers controlling the realm of the church and that of the world.
Ignatius also identifies persecution by society as an attempt of the ruler of this age to destroy the church. In Mag. 1.2, Ignatius' persecution at the hand of authorities is interpreted as an act of this power. He writes:
.. if we endure the whole abuse of the ruler of this age and escape, we shall attain God." The first person plural is ambiguous, since it is not clear from the context whether
Ignatius is referring only to himself or to the Magnesians as well. But in Smyr.
9.2, he again alludes to endurance, this time clearly applying it generally.117
If the groups Ignatius addressed were conscious of being marginal in the way his descriptions of the world and their status as the elect suggest, it is plausible
The Social Setting of the Ministry that as a martyr Ignatius would have embodied this marginality in a particularly striking way.118 Although to the wider society he was a common criminal (Trat.
3:3; Rom. 4:3; cf. Eph. 12:1), to these communities he would have appeared as an embodiment of separation from the world and an extraordinary example of devotion in the face of hostile opposition. Ignatius' vivid and somewhat mythic language in Rom. 5:1, perplexing as it is to the modern reader, probably expressed for his contemporaries the struggle facing all Christians,
The basis of Ignatius' charisma can be more fully understood by placing Ignatius in the context of the group's wider beliefs and values. His authority arose out of a more general system of beliefs which were self-defining for the group and of supreme significance to them. Both as a marginal person suffering imprisonment by the world and as an individual who regarded himself, and perhaps was regarded by those to whom he wrote, as being identified with the passion of Christ, Ignatius was seen as an extraordinary embodiment of the group's values. By understanding Ignatius as a charismatic authority and placing him in a sectarian context, the social power he wielded becomes more readily explicable.
The Unworthiness of Ignatius Ignatius' authority was not clear-cut. Tral 4:1 and Smyr, 5:2 are evidence that he was aware of the reverence accorded him as a prisoner and potential martyr for Christ. However, here he is also critical of those who praise and revere him.
Consonant with such criticism is his language of self-effacement: he describes himself as less than his audience (Eph. 12:1; Mag. 11:1), unworthy (Mag. 14:1;
Tral 4:1-2; 13:1; Rom. 9:2; Smyr.
11:1) — a self-effacing sacrificial victim ( π ε ρ ί φ η μ α , α ν τ ( ψ υ χ ο ν - Eph. 8:1; 18:1; Eph. 21:1; Smyr. 10:2; Pol
2:3; 6:1).119 Why did Ignatius feel himself so unworthy? What constrained him to decline the honour accorded a potential martyr? Is such self-negation compatible with charismatic authority? It was precisely this ambiguity which led
Streeter to suppose that Ignatius was neurotic.120 Ignatius' references to his unworthiness, while in tension with a charismatic type of authority, are peculiar to his circumstances and analogous to statements of unworthiness employed by Paul, also a charismatic authority.
The complexity of these references to unworthiness originates in the ambiguity connected with contrary claims about his status. Ignatius sometimes interprets his bonds or status as a prisoner in sacral terms; at others times he refers to himself as a convict, even a slave (Tral 3:3; Eph. 12:1; flom. 4:3). Even though he describes himself in some places as bearing the bonds of Christ, in Rom. 9:2 he calls himself an "abortion" (έκτρωμα); he has the honour of suffering for the name, but regards himself as least (έσχατος) of the Antiochenes (Eph.
21:2; Tral 13:1; Rom. 9:2; Smyr. 11:1; cf. Mag. 14). Schoedel, following Swartley, argues that this ambiguity is a real one, arising from a responsibility Ignatius felt for a lack of church unity in Antioch.121 In our view, any opinions about what was or was not happening at Antioch during Ignatius' sojourn are highly tentative,122 and it is not always evident that the freedom from care after the announcement of peace which Schoedel and Swartley adduce is as marked as they suggest. Three of the five instances of the term ά ν τ ί ψ υ χ ο ν (sacrificial lan-
guagc which Schoedel argues is indicative of self-effacement) appear after he learns of the peace! If Ignatius felt himself responsible for an Antiochene schism, then his self-deprecating language becomes explicable. But, in our opinion, conclusions on this matter are so speculative that the question must remain open.
Still, scepticism about attempts to loeate the historical origins of Ignatius' unworthiness does not remove the difficulty of assessing its place in the context of his charismatic authority. Here it is important to remember that ideal types are not definitions. They are heuristic devices designed to isolate phenomena, such as Ignatius' feelings of unworthiness, which are then subjected to further analysis. Our understanding of his self-effacement is facilitated by focusing briefly on similar language used by an earlier charismatic authority, the apostle
Paul.
Jacob Jervell captures the paradox of Paul's authority when he calls the apostle. "the weak charismatic."123 Its complexity emerges most clearly in 2 Cor.
10-12: Paul claims that he performed "signs and wonders and mighty works"
(12:12), he endured hardships for the sake of Christ (11:23-28) — a heroic wonder-worker, in these passages he ascribes to himself the characteristics of a charismatic authority. But this portrait is obscured by references to his weakness, in which he, characteristically, boasts (11:30; 12:9-10).124 Paul developed this theme as a strategic counter to criticisms: he knows that some say his personal presence is weak, his speech unimpressive (10:10). Rather than entering into a competition of claims and counter-claims with his opponents, he focuses on the power given him as a servant of Christ (12:9). When Paul is weakest, he is strongest. It is in his weakness that God's power shines forth and compensates for any of his shortcomings.125 This paradoxical language is explicable sociologically as an instance of what Weber called routinized charisma.126 Weber argued that Jesus had no successor; he was the only figure in the period of the early church to exercise a pure form of charisma.127 All others, including Paul, possessed a derived or conferred form of charisma. Paul's separation of his person from his role as apostle is most clearly evidenced where he distinguishes between himself and the source of his authority (1 Cor. 7:10,12,25; 2 Cor.
4:5-7; cf. Gal. 1:8).128 Paul qua Paul is nothing; qua apostle he is a heroic wonder-worker. His charisma resides in his role. His argument in 2 Cor. 10-12 rests upon this distinction.
Returning again to Ignatius' self-effacement, we find a similar form of routinized charisma. Ignatius is thrown in the role of a martyr for Christ, but feels himself unworthy of it; the authority he possesses is conferred upon him by virtue of his status as one imprisoned and about to die for the faith. Smyr.
11:1 contains the clearest reference to this conferred authority.
I greet all as one who comes thence [from Syria] in bonds which are most God-pleasing, although I am not worthy to be from there, for I am the least
(έσχατος) of them; but by the will of God I have been counted worthy, not because of the witness of my own conscience [thus Schoedel], but because of the grace of God Ignatius may regard himself as personally unworthy, but he knows that the status of being a prisoner and future martyr for Christ is a worthy one. When he