IGNATIUS
647
IGNATIUS
Amsterdam an edition from the famous Medicean
Codex at Florence. Ussher brought out another edi-
tion in 1647, entitled "Appendix Ignatiana", which
contained the Greek text of the genuine epistles and
the Latin version of the "Martyrium Ignatii".
In 1672 J. B. Cotelier's edition appeared at Paris, containing all the letters, genuine and supposititious, of Ignatius, with those of the other Apostolic Fathers. A new edition of this work was printed by Le Clerc at Antwerp, in 1698. It was reprinted at Venice, 176.5- 1767, and at Paris by Migne in 1857. The letter to the Romans was published from the "Martyrium Colbertinum" at Paris, by Ruinart, in 1689. In 1724 Le Clerc brought out at Amsterdam a second edition of Cotelier's "Patres Apostolici", which contains all the letters, both genuine and spurious, in Greek and Latin versions. It also includes the letters of Mary of Cassobola and those purporting to be from the Blessed Virgin in the "Martyrium Ignatii", the "Vin- diciae Ignatianse" of Pearson, and several dissertations. The first edition of the Armenian version was published at Constantinople in 1783. In 1839 Hefele edited the Ignatian letters in a work entitled "Opera Patrum Apostolicorum", which appeared at Tubingen. Migne took his text from the third edition of this work (Tubingen, 1847). Bardenhewer designates the fol- lowing as the best editions: Zahn, "Ignatii et Poly- carpi epistulse martyria, fragmenta" in "Patr. apos- tol. opp. rec", ed. by de Gebhardt, Harnack, Zahn, fasc. II, Leipzig, 1876; Funk, "Opp. Patr. apostol.", I, Tubingen, 1878, 1887, 1901; Lightfoot, "The Apos- tolic Fathers", part II, London, 1885, 1889; an Eng- lish version of the letters to be found in Lightfoot's "Apostolic Fathers", London, 1907, from which are taken all the quotations of the letters in this article, and to which all citations refer.
Dreher. S. Ignatii episc. Antioch. de Chrialo Deo doctrina (Sigrnaringen, 1877); Nirschl, Die Tlieologie des hi. Ignatius (Mainz, 1880); J. H. Newman, The Thajlogy of St. Ignatius in Historical Sketches, I (London, 1890); Von der Goltz, Igna- tius von Antiochien (Leipzig. 1894); Bruston, Ignace d\in- tioche, aes epitres, sa theologie (Paris, 1897); Pearson, Vindicice epistolarum S. Ignatii (Cambridge. 1672, Oxford, 1852; in Migne. P. G., V, 37-473); Dall.«us. De scriptis quce sub Diony- sii Areop., et Ignatii Antioch. nominibus circumferuntur (Ge- neva, 1666)- Cureton, Vindirice Ignatiance (London, 1S46); Harnack. Chronologie der altchristlichen Litteratur (Leipzig, 1897); Bardenhewer, Patrology, tr. Shahan (Freiburg im Br., 1908); Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers; II, S. Ignatius and S. Polycarp (London, 1889); J. H. Newman, Tej:t of the Seven Epistles of St. Ignatius in Tracts Theological and Ecclesias- tical (London. 1899). 99-135; Gasquet, St. Ignatius and the Roman Primacy in Studies (London, 1904), 248-81; Jenkins, Ignatian Difficulties and Historic Doubts (London, 1890); Nirschl, Die Brief e des heiligen Ignatius (Passau, 1870); Funk, Die Echtheit der Ignatianischen Bricfe (Tiibingcn, 18.S3); Zahn, Ignatius von Antiochien (Ootha, 1873); Harnack, Die Zeit des Ignatius (Leipzig, 1878); Funk, Die Echtheit der Ignatianischen Brief e aufsnene verteidigt (Tiibingen, 1883); Killen, The Igna- tian Epistles (Edinburgh, 1866).
John B. O'Connor.
Ignatius of Constantinople, Saint, b. about 799; d. 23 October, 877; son of Emperor Michael I and Procopia. His name, originally Nicetas, was changed at the age of fourteen to Ignatius. Leo the Ar- menian having deposed the Emperor Michael (813), made Ignatius a eunuch and incarcerated him in a monastery, that he might not become a claimant to his father's throne. While thus immured he voluntarily embraced the religious life, and in time was made an abbot. He was ordained by Basil, Bishop of Paros, on the Hellespont. On the death of Theophilus (841) Theodora became regent, as well as co-sovereign with her son, Michael III, of the Byzan- tine Empire. In 847, aided by the good will of the empress, Ignatius succeeded to the Patriarchate of Constantinople, vacant by the death of Methodius. The Emperor Michael III was a youthful profligate who found a worthy companion for his debauchery in Bardas, his maternal uncle. At the suggestion of the latter, Michael sought the assistance of Ignatius in an effort to force Theodora to enter a convent, in
the hope of securing for himself an undivided author-
ity and a free rein for his profligacy. The patriarch
indignantly refused to be a party to such an outrage.
Theodora, however, realizing the determination of her
son to possess at any cost an undivided rule, volun-
tarily abdicated. This refusal to participate in his
iniquitous schemes, added to a courageous rebuke,
which Ignatius had administered to Bardas for having
repudiated his wife and maintained incestuous in-
tercourse with his daughter-in-law, determined the
Caesar to bring about the disgrace of the patriarch.
An insignificant revolt, led by a half-witted adven- turer, having Ijroken out, Bartlas laid the blame at the door of Ignatius, and having convinced the emperor of the truth of his accusation, brought about the banishment of the patriarch to the island of Tere- binthus. In his e.xile he was visited by the emis- saries of Bardas, who sought to induce him to resign his patriarchal office. Their mission failing, they loaded him w-ith every kinil of indignity. Meanwhile a pseudo-synod, held under the direction of Gregory of Syracuse, an excommunicated bishop, deposed Ig- natius from his see. Bardas had selected his succes- sor in the person of Photius, a layman of brilliant parts, and a patron of learning, but thoroughly un- scrupulous. He stood high in the favour of the emperor, for whom he acted as first secretary of state. This choice having lieen approved by the pseudo- synod, in six days Photius ran the gamut of eccle- siastical orders from the lectorate to the episcopate. To intensify the feeling against Ignatius, and thereby strengthen his own position, Photius charged the exiled bishop with further acts of sedition. In 859 another synod was called to further the interests of Photius, by again proclaiming the deposition of Igna- tius. But not all the bishops participated in these disgraceful proceedings. Some few, with the cour- age of their episcopal office, denounced Photius as a usurper of the patriarchal dignity. Convinced that he could enjoy no sense of security in his office without the sanction of the pope, Photius sent an embassy to Rome for the purpose of pleading his cause. These ambassadors represented that Ignatius, worn out with age and disease, had voluntarily retired to a monas- tery; and that Photius had been chosen by the unani- mous election of the bishops. With an affectation of religious zeal, they requested that legates be sent to Constantinople to suppress a recrudescence of Icon- oclasm, and to strengthen religious discipline.
Nicholas I sent the required legates, Ijut with in- structions to investigate the retirement of Ignatius and to treat with Photius as with a layman. These instructions were supplemented by a letter to the emperor, condemning the deposition of Ignatius. But the legates proved faithless. Intimidated by threats and quasi-imprisonment, they agreed to de- cide in favour of Photius. In 861 a synod was con- vened, and the deposed patriarch cited to appear before it as a simple monk. He was denied the per- mission to speak with the delegates. Citing the pontifical canons to prove the irregularity of his depo- sition, he refused to acknowledge the authority of the synod and appealed to the pope. But his pleading was in vain. The prearranged programme was car- ried through, and the venerable patriarch was con- demned and degraded. Even after this, the relentless hatred of Bardas pursued him, in the hope of wringing from him the resignation of his office. Finally an orderfor his death was issued, but he had fled to safety. The legates returning to Rome, merely announced that Ignatius had been canonically deposed and Photius confirmed. The patriarch, however, suc- ceeded in acquainting the pope, through the arch- imandrite Theognostus, with the unlawful proceedings taken against him. To the imperial secretary, there- fore, whom Photius had sent to him to obtain the approval of his acts, the pope declared that he would
