apostolicfathers0201clem - Carmel Apologetics

156 EPISTLES OF S. IGNATIUS.
Passus est anno undecimo Trajani et reliquiae corporis ejus in
Antiochia jacent extra portam Daphniticam in coemeterio.
(ii)
Adv. Helvidium 17, Op. 11. p. 225.
Numquid non possum tibi totam veterum scriptorum seriem commovere,
Ignatium, Polycarpum, Irenaeum, Justinum Martyrem, multosque
alios apostolicos et eloquentes viros, qui adversus Ebionem et Theodotum
Byzantium, Valentinum, haec eadem sentientes, plena sapientiae
volumina conscripserunt
(iii)
Comvmit. iii Matthaeum i.
§ i, Op. vii. p. 12.
Quare non de simplici virgine, sed de desponsata concipitur Primum,
ut per generationem Joseph origo Mariae monstraretur. Secundo, ne
lapidaretur a Judaeis ut adultera. Tertio, ut in Aegyptum fugiens
haberet solatium mariti. Martyr Ignatius etiam quartam addidit causam,
cur a desponsata conceptus sit; Ut partus., inquiens, ejus celaretur diabolo,
dum eum putat non de virgine sed de uxore generatum.
(iv) Adi). Pelagianos iii. 2, Op. 11. p. 783.
Ignatius, vir apostolicus et martyr, scribit audacter; Elegit Dominus
apostolos, qui super oinnes homines peccatores erant.
It is obvious from these passages that Jerome had no personal acquaintance with
the writings of Ignatius. 'Y\^q first passage ( Vir. III. 16) is taken almost entirely from
Eusebius (see above p. 146). He only adds two particulars to the account of the historian,
(i) He is able to point out the source of the apocryphal quotation in Smyrn.
3, of which Eusebius was ignorant {oiiK ol5^ birbdev), namely the Gospel according to
the Hebrews, which he himself had translated (see the note 11. p. 295 sq). (2) He
can point out the resting-place of the bones of Ignatius, the Cemetery at Antioch,
which probably he himself had visited (see below, 11. pp. 577sq, 431 sq). On the other
hand he is so ignorant of the facts, that whereas Eusebius mentions two letters, one to
the Smyrna'ans and the other to Polycarp, Jerome blundering over tSt'ws (by which
Eusebius meant 'in a separate epistle') supposes him to speak of only one letter.
This ignorance might have been pardoned
if it had not misled the gi'eatest of Ignatian
critics. The one blot on the critical scutcheon of Ussher is his rejection of the Epistle
to Polycarp as spurious on the ground that Jerome does not recognize The it. date
of the treatise de Viris Illustrihiis is a.d. 392.
The second passage {adv. Helvid. 17) is nothing more than a bold rhetorical venture
after Jerome's manner. Probably the sole foundation for this sweeping assertion, so
far as regards Ignatius, was the single fact known to Jerome (see the next passage)
that Ignatius spoke of the virginity of Mary (Ephcs. 19).
The description it is true
would better apply to such passages as Trail, ii, Philad. 6, in the Long Recension,
where Ebion (a purely imaginary person) and Theodotus (who lived long after the
age of Ignatius) with others are mentioned by name. But it is highly improbable
that Jerome should have seen this recension, and we need not look for the same precision
in him which we should expect in a more careful writer. Though well versed