For further parallelisms with the language of the Gospels and for allusions to incidents in the life of Christ in the two writings so far considered, see among other passages—Clem. Rom. xvi. end (Mt 11%-®), xxiv. (Mt 138, Mk 48, Lk 8°); Polyc. v. (Mk 935, Mt 2078), xii. (Mt 5).
Ignatius was led by his controversy with Docet- ism to dwell upon the facts of our Lord’s human life and sufferings rather than upon His teaching ; and the only saying of Christ which he expressly quotes is one asserting the verity of His corporeal nature after His resurrection [ὅτε πρὸς τοὺς περὶ Πέτρον ἦλθεν, ἔφη αὐτοῖς " " Λάβετε, ψΨηλαφήσατέ με καὶ ἴδετε ὅτι οὐκ εἰμὶ δαιμόνιον ἀσώματον" (Smyrn. iii.)]. The incident referred to seems to be that recorded in Lk 24%, where the words of our Lord are similar in substance and partly in form. According to Origen, however (de Princ. pref. 8), they were contained in The Preaching of Peter in the same form as in Ignatius. Eusebius, on the other hand (HE iii. 36), who notes the fact that Ignatius has the saying, declares that he does not know whence it was taken; while Jerome (de Vir. Illustr. 16) says that it occurred in the Gospel acc. to the Hebrews. It is possible that a writing which con- tained the saying may have existed in the time of
Ignatius, and that he may have obtained it thence ; |
but it is at least an equally probable supposition that he derived it from oral tradition; and that from the same source it passed into one or more Apocryphal Gospels. We shall have occasion to recur to the question of the use made of apocryphal writings in the 2nd century.
NEW TESTAMENT CANON
There are in the Epp. of Ignatius several allu- sions to incidents in the life of Christ which are recorded in our Gospels as well as parallelisms of expression with them, and among these, in two places, some remarkable coincidences with the thought and language of Jn. See Eph. xiv. (Mt 12%, Lk 6); Trall. xi. (Mt 1618); Rom. vii. (Jn 4%) ; Philad. vii. (Jn 38); Smyrn. i. (Mt 315 and other points); Smyrn. vi. (Mt 1913}; Polye. ii. (Mt 10"). See also Magn. xi. and Trail. ix. In Philad. ν. his language suggests the idea that he was thinking of the Gospel as embodied in a written form; for he speaks of it as something to which Christians could as it were turn, and
refers in the same context to the prophets. At the same time a passage in c. viii. of the same Ep. seems to show the difference between the position which any written Gospels had so far attained and that of the OT (comp. Lightfoot, Epp. of Ignat. ad loc. and also ib. vol. i. p. 388).
(2) The evidence as to the use of other writings of NT at this time may be treated much more briefly —St. Paul’s first Ep. to the Corinthians is expressly referred to in the Ep. of Clement to the same Church (xlvii.), and St. Paul’s Ep. to the Philippians in that of Polyearp (xi.). Thus NT writings are actually mentioned in two of the cases in which it is most natural that they should be ; these are exceptions which, if they do not explain, are consistent with, the habit of not quoting by name where there was not the same kind of reason for it. Coincidences of phrase with various NT Epp., so striking from their character or number as to leave no doubt whence they are derived, occur in the three writers under consideration: in Clem. Rom. with He (xxxvi. and xliii.) ; in Polye. with 1 P (i. ii. v. vii. viii. x.) and 1 Jn (vii.) ; in Jgnat. with 1 Co (Zphes. xvi. xviii.) and with Eph (Polye. y.). Indications more or less clear of a knowledge of other NT writings might be named, e.g. of 2 Co, Gal, and 1 and 2 Ti in Polycarp. All these facts, while interesting and important as regards the books of NT immediately concerned, also have a bearing on the question of the use of the Gospels. They show that absence of direct citation in this age can have little weight for proving want of know- ledge. Further, the sign of acquaintance with 1 Jn in Ep. of Polyc. has significance in regard to the Gospel ace. to Jn also. On internal grounds there is strong reason for attributing these to the same author, and the circulation of the one cannot have been separated by any great interval from that of the other.
The signs of knowledge of the apostolic writings in Polyearp are, it may be observed in conclusion, remarkable, and far greater than in Clement or Ignatius, in spite of his Epistle being far shorter. This may be reasonably accounted for by the con- sideration that he was in all probability a much younger man, and that he had acquired familiarity with those writings from his youth.
ii, THE SECOND QUARTER OF THE SECOND CENTURY.—(1) Use of the Gospels.—The so-called Ep. of Barnabas—Critics have referred the com- position of this work to various dates between A.D. 70 and 130. Though it contains references to contemporary events, they are obscure. To notice only some of the more recent views, Lightfoot (Clem. Rom. ii. p. 505 ff.) has explained the allusions in a way that would bring the time