The catholic church to which Ignatius belonged...?

[joe370]

I have been told by certain non-Catholics that men such as Ignatius and Polycarp did not belong to the present day Catholic Church in full communion with the Bishop of Rome, but we know Jesus’ Catholic Church to which Ignatius belonged will last until the end of time, so where in the world today is the Catholic Church to which Ignatius of Antioch belonged, if in fact you do not believe it is the present day Catholic Church in full communion with the Bishop of Rome?

“See that you all follow the Bishop, as Christ does the Father, and the presbyterium as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as a command of God. Let no one do anything connected with the Church without the Bishop…Wherever the Bishop appears, there let the multitude of the people be; just as where Christ Jesus is, there is the catholic church.” Ignatius of Antioch, c. 111 AD, Letter to the Smyrneans 8

 

[Bohm_Bawerk]

It depends on how you define “Catholic”. To some, it means a church body with a clear structure of authority (i.e. the Roman Catholic Church), and to others it means the universal body of all the Christian faithful, i.e. the mystical body of Christ, regardless of denomination.

 

[JM3]

The Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans.

Ignatius, who is also called Theophorus, to the Church which has obtained mercy, through the majesty of the Most High Father, and Jesus Christ, His only-begotten Son; the Church which is beloved and enlightened by the will of Him that willeth all things which are according to the love of Jesus Christ our God, which also presides in the place of the region of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honour, worthy of the highest happiness, worthy of praise, worthy of obtaining her every desire, worthy of being deemed holy, 819 and which presides over love, is named from Christ, and from the Father, which I also salute in the name of Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father: to those who are united, both according to the flesh and spirit, to every one of His commandments; who are filled inseparably with the grace of God, and are purified from every strange taint, * abundance of happiness unblameably, in Jesus Christ our God.*

Chapter III:

Ye have never envied any one; ye have taught others. Now I desire that those things may be confirmed [by your conduct], which in your instructions ye enjoin

[on others].

Chapter IV:

I do not, as Peter and Paul, issue commandments unto you.

 

[MartyrForJesus]

They are obviously wrong.

 

[BrianH]

I remembered, back when I studied such things, some dispute on this letter. I found this on the internet. It was in a discussion forum but essentially it encapsulates what I remembered

It is quite likely that this affirmation of the existence of a catholic church was a later interpolation into Ignatius’ epistle, if Ignatius actually wrote to the Smyrneans at all. There are three different recensions of Ignatius’ letters, a long, middle, and short version. The long version is generally recognized as a spurious fourth century forgery which projects later hierarchicalism and other developing Roman Catholic heresies into earlier centuries. The short recension only exists in Syriac, and contains only the letters to the Ephesians, Romans, and Polycarp, in a version shorter than either the long or middle recensions. The middle recension, the version quoted above, is found in Greek in only one manuscript, the eleventh century Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus. Scholarship is divided about the genuineness of either the middle or short recensions, with some maintaining that all the letters are extremely heavily interpolated and others arguing that “Ignatius bishop of Antioch did not exist” (pg. 66, “Ignatian Problems,” Journal of Theological Studies, C. P. Hammond Bammel, 33:1 (April 1982); see the article, pgs. 62-97, for a discussion of various theories on the authenticity or forging of the allegedly Ignatian epistles.) Even if one assumes that Ignatius actually wrote something similar to the middle recension, and his writings were then corrupted and falsified into the long and short recensions, there is no reason to conclude that the eleventh century Greek codex of the middle recension referring to a “catholic church” does not itself have numerous dogmatic interpolations designed to support later Roman Catholic dogmas—such as Smyrneans 8:2, the verse in question, and its reference to the catholic church—hJ kaqolikh\ e˙kklhsi÷a.

 

[Ruth_Catherine]

I have been told by certain non-Catholics that men such as Ignatius and Polycarp did not belong to the present day Catholic Church in full communion with the Bishop of Rome, but we know Jesus’ Catholic Church to which Ignatius belonged will last until the end of time, so where in the world today is the Catholic Church to which Ignatius of Antioch belonged, if in fact you do not believe it is the present day Catholic Church in full communion with the Bishop of Rome?

“See that you all follow the Bishop, as Christ does the Father, and the presbyterium as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as a command of God. Let no one do anything connected with the Church without the Bishop…Wherever the Bishop appears, there let the multitude of the people be; just as where Christ Jesus is, there is the catholic church.” Ignatius of Antioch, c. 111 AD, Letter to the Smyrneans 8

They are very, very wrong. I was in the protestant churches for years and used to hear stories like that. They will vary in what they say. It is just a way for protestants to attempt to prove the Catholic church wrong.

What is interesting, it is usually when protestants truly search past christian history, and truly seek what the early christians had to say, that is what brings them to the Catholic church. When they realize that the Catholic church is the church started by Jesus. That is what happened to me.

To become deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.
A quote by a convert from the Anglican Church, Cardinal John Newman.

But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth. 1 Timothy 3:15
We don’t have to listen to non-Catholics since the church is where we find the truth.

 

[Ruth_Catherine]

I remembered, back when I studied such things, some dispute on this letter. I found this on the internet. It was in a discussion forum but essentially it encapsulates what I remembered
Quote:
It is quite likely that this affirmation of the existence of a catholic church was a later interpolation into Ignatius’ epistle, if Ignatius actually wrote to the Smyrneans at all. There are three different recensions of Ignatius’ letters, a long, middle, and short version. The long version is generally recognized as a spurious fourth century forgery which projects later hierarchicalism and other developing Roman Catholic heresies into earlier centuries. The short recension only exists in Syriac, and contains only the letters to the Ephesians, Romans, and Polycarp, in a version shorter than either the long or middle recensions. The middle recension, the version quoted above, is found in Greek in only one manuscript, the eleventh century Codex Mediceo-Laurentianus. Scholarship is divided about the genuineness of either the middle or short recensions, with some maintaining that all the letters are extremely heavily interpolated and others arguing that “Ignatius bishop of Antioch did not exist” (pg. 66, “Ignatian Problems,” Journal of Theological Studies, C. P. Hammond Bammel, 33:1 (April 1982); see the article, pgs. 62-97, for a discussion of various theories on the authenticity or forging of the allegedly Ignatian epistles.) Even if one assumes that Ignatius actually wrote something similar to the middle recension, and his writings were then corrupted and falsified into the long and short recensions, there is no reason to conclude that the eleventh century Greek codex of the middle recension referring to a “catholic church” does not itself have numerous dogmatic interpolations designed to support later Roman Catholic dogmas—such as Smyrneans 8:2, the verse in question, and its reference to the catholic church—hJ kaqolikh\ e˙kklhsi÷a.

Consider a closer source to that time:

Perhaps the best evidence of their authenticity is to be found in the letter of Polycarp to the Philippians, which mentions each of them by name. As an intimate friend of Ignatius, Polycarp, writing shortly after the martyr’s death, bears contemporaneous witness to the authenticity of these letters, unless, indeed, that of Polycarp itself be regarded as interpolated or forged. When, furthermore, we take into consideration the passage of Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., V, xxviii, 4) found in the original Greek in Eusebius (Church History III.36), in which he refers to the letter to the Romans. (iv, I) in the following words: “Just as one of our brethren said, condemned to the wild beasts in martyrdom for his faith”, the evidence of authenticity becomes compelling. The romance of Lucian of Samosata, “De morte peregrini”, written in 167, bears incontestable evidence that the writer was not only familiar with the Ignatian letters, but even made use of them. Harnack, who was not always so minded, describes these proofs as “testimony as strong to the genuineness of the epistles as any that can be conceived of” (Expositor, ser. 3, III, p. 11).

Source New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia

 

[I_Thirst]

To become deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.
A quote by a convert from the Anglican Church, Cardinal John Newman.

Who is now Blessed John Henry Newman!

 

[joe370]

I remembered, back when I studied such things, some dispute on this letter. I found this on the internet. It was in a discussion forum but essentially it encapsulates what I remembered

So you believe that the use of the word “catholic” by Ignatius, was a later interpolation…?

 

[joe370]

They are very, very wrong. I was in the protestant churches for years and used to hear stories like that. They will vary in what they say. It is just a way for protestants to attempt to prove the Catholic church wrong.

What is interesting, it is usually when protestants truly search past christian history, and truly seek what the early christians had to say, that is what brings them to the Catholic church. When they realize that the Catholic church is the church started by Jesus. That is what happened to me.

To become deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.
A quote by a convert from the Anglican Church, Cardinal John Newman.

But if I should be delayed, you should know how to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth. 1 Timothy 3:15
We don’t have to listen to non-Catholics since the church is where we find the truth.

 

[joe370]

It depends on how you define “Catholic”. To some, it means a church body with a clear structure of authority (i.e. the Roman Catholic Church), and to others it means the universal body of all the Christian faithful, i.e. the mystical body of Christ, regardless of denomination.

Of course the catholic church is the universal body of all the Christian faithful, i.e. the mystical body of Christ.

Why would anyone define catholic as: the universal body of all the Christian faithful…regardless of denomination, other than to support the idea that there is more than one church founded by Jesus…

 

[Ruth_Catherine]

Who is now Blessed John Henry Newman!

Thanks, you’re right.

 

[BrianH]

So you believe that the use of the word “catholic” by Ignatius, was a later interpolation…?

I think that it could be. I do not see how it can be proven or disproven either way. Interpolations are hard enough to determine when there are several existing ancient manuscripts. When there are essentially none, it becomes what is most likely.
Just this morning, I got to read the scripture for church and it omitted Acts 8:37 because it is considered an interpolation.

 

[Newsy]

I think that it could be. I do not see how it can be proven or disproven either way. Interpolations are hard enough to determine when there are several existing ancient manuscripts. When there are essentially none, it becomes what is most likely.
Just this morning, I got to read the scripture for church and it omitted Acts 8:37 because it is considered an interpolation.

And here lies the issue, by rejecting the authority of the Catholic Church, we now have to determine what is true. Now we have to start over and build our faith on what we believe, according to our thoughts, interpretations and modern ideas. Even the Bible becomes suspect, if you cannot rely on the Bible in a Protestant church, then you have a real problem! So let’s reject 2000 years of teaching and start over, in essence, we will grow closer to Christ by getting further away.

This is not open to our own interpretation. All of the modern issues of dogma and theology have been solved, most for over 1000 years. When you reject the Church Christ gave us, the who becomes the Authority? As a former protestant, I sympathize with the plight of our separated bretheren. Every believer should ask themselves, “to whom do I serve and where is the truth?”. I have been accused of bowing to the traditions of men, by joining the Catholic Church, but really, men started all other denominations and injected their traditions into the Truth!

Please continue to research the interpolations you claim to have found, search for the truth! But be careful, many have swam the Tiber on a journey for the Truth!

 

[joe370]

I think that it could be. I do not see how it can be proven or disproven either way. Interpolations are hard enough to determine when there are several existing ancient manuscripts. When there are essentially none, it becomes what is most likely.
Just this morning, I got to read the scripture for church and it omitted Acts 8:37 because it is considered an interpolation.

Who said Acts 8:37 was an interpolation?

What was your answer to post #1?

 

[joe370]

And here lies the issue, by rejecting the authority of the Catholic Church, we now have to determine what is true. Now we have to start over and build our faith on what we believe, according to our thoughts, interpretations and modern ideas. Even the Bible becomes suspect,

Exactly.

 

[BrianH]

And here lies the issue, by rejecting the authority of the Catholic Church, we now have to determine what is true. Now we have to start over and build our faith on what we believe, according to our thoughts, interpretations and modern ideas. Even the Bible becomes suspect, if you cannot rely on the Bible in a Protestant church, then you have a real problem! So let’s reject 2000 years of teaching and start over, in essence, we will grow closer to Christ by getting further away.

This is not open to our own interpretation. All of the modern issues of dogma and theology have been solved, most for over 1000 years. When you reject the Church Christ gave us, the who becomes the Authority? As a former protestant, I sympathize with the plight of our separated bretheren. Every believer should ask themselves, “to whom do I serve and where is the truth?”. I have been accused of bowing to the traditions of men, by joining the Catholic Church, but really, men started all other denominations and injected their traditions into the Truth!

Please continue to research the interpolations you claim to have found, search for the truth! But be careful, many have swam the Tiber on a journey for the Truth!

Catholic and Protestant scholars both examine interpolations in early literature as well as the Bible. I am pretty sure that what church you belong to has absolutely nothing to do with textual criticism in an academic sense.
As to the content of your post as it relates to interpretation, I understand your point. I just do not share your interpretation. That is not the kind of thing that I can lie to myself about. As far as your part about being careful, that is just silly. Being Catholic would not mean any change in lifestyle, morals, etc. It would also not mean a change in belief because I would not be a Catholic unless I believed as they did.

 

[BrianH]

Who said Acts 8:37 was an interpolation?

What was your answer to post #1?

It is not in the new versions of Catholic Bibles. It was in the old versions. This is an example of a scrible inserting something into the text. That is an interpolation. There are substantial differences between older versions of the Bible and newer ones. That is not a Protestant issue. It is one for anyone who studies and compares translations.

 

[BrianH]

I have been told by certain non-Catholics that men such as Ignatius and Polycarp did not belong to the present day Catholic Church in full communion with the Bishop of Rome, but we know Jesus’ Catholic Church to which Ignatius belonged will last until the end of time, so where in the world today is the Catholic Church to which Ignatius of Antioch belonged, if in fact you do not believe it is the present day Catholic Church in full communion with the Bishop of Rome?

“See that you all follow the Bishop, as Christ does the Father, and the presbyterium as you would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as a command of God. Let no one do anything connected with the Church without the Bishop…Wherever the Bishop appears, there let the multitude of the people be; just as where Christ Jesus is, there is the catholic church.” Ignatius of Antioch, c. 111 AD, Letter to the Smyrneans 8

My answer to your question as requested is as follows.
Doctrine in the areas of polity, Marian dogmas, celebration of Easter, use of images, and other areas are different 2000 years later.
On the other hand, the view of the Eucharist, baptism, and salvation are similar.
So my answer is it is no where. The Christian Church developed and changed over time as the dominant factions of proto-Orthodoxy became more powerful than the Gnostic and Jewish Christians.

 

[Mickey]

so where in the world today is the Catholic Church to which Ignatius of Antioch belonged, if in fact you do not believe it is the present day Catholic Church in full communion with the Bishop of Rome?

The Holy Orthodox Church.