Polycarp and the apostle Paul.

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Polycarp and the apostle Paul.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

I am just collecting observations here. Polycarp mentions Paul by name four times in three different passages. First up:

Polycarp to the Philippians 11.3: 1 Nimis contristatus sum pro Valente, qui presbyter factus est aliquando apud vos, quod sic ignoret is locum, qui datus est ei. moneo itaque, ut abstineatis vos ab avaritia et sitis casti1 6 veraces. abstinete vos ab omni malo. 2 qui autem non potest se in his gubernare, quomodo alii pronuntiat hoc? si quis non se abstinuerit ab avaritia, ab idolatria coinquinabitur et tamquam inter gentes iudicabitur, qui ignorant iudicium domini. aut nescimus, quia sancti mundum iudicabunt? sicut Paulus docet. 3 Ego autem nihil tale sensi in vobis vel audivi, in quibus laboravit beatus Paulus, qui estis in principio epistulae eius. De vobis etenim gloriatur in omnibus ecclesiis, quae dominum solae tunc cognoverant; nos autem nondum cognoveramus. / 1 I am extremely sad for Valens, once a presbyter among you, that he should so misunderstand the office that was given him. Thus I urge you to abstain from love of money and to be pure and truthful. Abstain from every kind of evil. 2 For if someone cannot control himself in such things, how can he preach self-control to another? Anyone who cannot avoid the love of money will be defiled by idolatry and will be judged as if among the outsiders who know nothing about the judgment of the Lord. Or do we not realize that "the saints will judge the world?" For so Paul teaches. 3 But I have neither perceived nor heard that you have any such thing in your midst, among whom the most fortunate Paul labored and who are found in the beginning of his epistle [epistulae]. For he gloried in you among all his churches, which alone knew God at that time; for we had not yet come to know him.

The line about the saints judging the world comes from 1 Corinthians 6.2.

Here Polycarp refers to Paul's epistle (singular) to the Philippians, in which Paul glorified them. It seems clear that the introduction to our extant Pauline epistle to the Philippians is in view here:

Philippians 1.1-11: 1 Paul and Timothy, bond-servants of Christ Jesus, to all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, including the overseers and deacons: 2 Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. 3 I thank my God in all my remembrance of you, 4 always offering prayer with joy in my every prayer for you all, 5 in view of your participation in the gospel from the first day until now. 6 For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus. 7 For it is only right for me to feel this way about you all, because I have you in my heart, since both in my imprisonment and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel, you all are partakers of grace with me. 8 For God is my witness, how I long for you all with the affection of Christ Jesus. 9 And this I pray, that your love may abound still more and more in real knowledge and all discernment, 10 so that you may approve the things that are excellent, in order to be sincere and blameless until the day of Christ, 11 having been filled with the fruit of righteousness which comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God.

The use of the genitive singular (epistulae) and the easy matching of the first paragraph of our extant epistle to the Philippians with Polycarp's description of the beginning of that epistle suggest that Polycarp knew of one Pauline epistle to the Philippians, and that it resembled our own extant version.

However, earlier in his epistle Polycarp writes of epistles (plural) to the Philippians:

Polycarp to the Philippians 3.2: 2 Οὔτε γὰρ ἐγὼ οὔτε ἄλλος ὅμοιος ἐμοὶ δύναται κατακολουθῆσαι τῇ σοφίᾳ τοῦ μακαρίου καὶ ἐνδόξου Παύλου, ὃς γενόμενος ἐν ὑμῖν κατὰ πρόσωπον τῶν τότε ἀνθρώπων ἐδίδαξεν ἀκριβῶς καὶ βεβαίως τὸν περὶ ἀληθείας λόγον, ὃς καὶ ἀπὼν ὑμῖν ἔγραψεν ἐπιστολάς, εἰς ἃς ἐὰν εγκύπτητε, δυνηθήσεσθε οἰκοδομεῖσθαι εἰς τὴν δοθεῖσαν ὑμῖν πίστιν. / 2 For neither I nor anyone like me is able to replicate the wisdom of the blessed and glorious Paul. When he was with you he accurately and reliably taught the word of truth to those who were there at the time. And when he was absent he wrote you epistles [ἐπιστολάς]. If you carefully peer into them, you will be able to be built up in the faith that was given you.

At first blush, this reference could easily be taken as evidence of a partition theory of the Pauline epistle to the Philippians, which scholars have argued to actually consist of 2-3 separate letters rolled into one. Polycarp appears to know of more than one Pauline epistle to this church. So why does he write as if there were only one epistle (instead of writing, for example, of "one of the epistles" or such) later on?

Well, I suspect the answer to this question is probably to be found in the words of Paul himself:

Philippians 3.1: 1 Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. To write the same things [τὰ αὐτὰ] is no trouble to me, and it is a safeguard for you.

This verse would seem to imply that Paul has written to the Philippians before. I suspect that Polycarp was writing most naturally in chapter 9 of only one epistle because he himself possessed only one, but he assumed (probably correctly) that there were more than one because of this verse in the epistle itself; he also assumed that the Philippians had access to the other(s): "If you carefully peer into them...."

(This is not an argument against such partition theories, with which I am sympathetic in the case of Philippians and of other Pauline epistles, as I am fairly convinced that an editor has been at them. But it does mean that the plural which Polycarp uses probably should not be marshaled as evidence for them.)

Finally, we have the following reference to Paul:

Polycarp to the Philippians 9.1-3: 1 Παρακαλῶ οὖν πάντας ὑμᾶς, πειθαρχεῖν τῷ λόγῳ τῆς δικαιοσύνης καὶ ἀσκεῖν πᾶσαν ὑπομονήν, ἣν καὶ εἴδατε κατ’ ὀφθαλμοὺς οὐ μόνον ἐν τοῖς μακαρίοις Ἰγνατίῳ καὶ Ζωσίμῳ καὶ ῾Ρούφῳ, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν ἄλλοις τοῖς ἐξ ὑμῶν καὶ ἐν αὐτῷ Παύλῳ καὶ τοῖς λοιποις ἀποστόλοις· 2 πεπεισμένους ὅτι οὗτοι πάντες οὐκ εἰς κενὸν ἔδραμον, ἀλλ’ ἐν πίστει καὶ δικαιοσύνῃ, καὶ ὅτι εἰς τὸν ὀφειλόμενον αὐτοῖς τόπον εἰσὶ παρὰ τῷ κυρίῳ, ᾧ καὶ συνέπαθον. οὐ γὰρ τὸν νῦν ἠγάπησαν αἰῶνα, 3 ἀλλὰ τὸν ὑπέρ ἡμῶν ἀποθανόντα καὶ δι’ ἡμᾶς ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἀναστάντα. / 1 Therefore I urge all of you to obey the word of righteousness and to practice all endurance, which you also observed with your own eyes not only in the most fortunate Ignatius, Zosimus, and Rufus, but also in others who lived among you, and in Paul himself and the other apostles. 2 You should be convinced that none of them acted in vain, but in faith and righteousness, and that they are in the place they deserved, with the Lord, with whom they also suffered. For they did not love the present age; 3 but they loved the one who died for us and who was raised by God for our sakes.

Polycarp seems to be treating all Christians in Philippi throughout the generations as a single unit covered by the second person plural "you" — it is not that the present generation of Philippians actually saw Paul himself, but rather that Christians in general have seen him, older generations passing down the knowledge from and of that eyewitness experience (in this case, mainly through a preserved epistle) to younger generations. I have noted a similar way of writing elsewhere in Irenaeus:

Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.1.1: For in no other way could we have learned the things of God, unless our Master, existing as the Word, had become man. For no other being had the power of revealing to us the things of the Father, except His own proper Word. For what other person "knew the mind of the Lord," or who else "has become His counsellor? " Again, we could have learned in no other way than by seeing our Teacher and hearing His voice with our own ears, that, having become imitators of His works as well as doers of His words, we may have communion with Him, receiving increase from the perfect One, and from Him who is prior to all creation.

I do wonder whether this style of writing might have helped contribute, possibly innocently, to ongoing generations of Christians linking previous generations more closely to foundational events than was really the case.

Ben.
Last edited by Ben C. Smith on Tue Jun 27, 2017 7:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Polycarp and the apostle Paul.

Post by Bernard Muller »

I always thought the Pauline epistle to the Philippians is at least the combination of 2 short epistles (1:3-3:1a & 3:1b-4:9) and a thank-you note (4:10-4:20), plus a made up introduction (1:1-2).
http://historical-jesus.info/phpa.html
http://historical-jesus.info/phpb.html
http://historical-jesus.info/phpc.html

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Polycarp and the apostle Paul.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Bernard Muller wrote:I always thought the Pauline epistle to the Philippians is at least the combination of 2 short epistles (1:3-3:1a & 3:1b-4:9) and a thank-you note (4:10-4:20), plus a made up introduction (1:1-2).
http://historical-jesus.info/phpa.html
http://historical-jesus.info/phpb.html
http://historical-jesus.info/phpc.html
Those are good thoughts.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Bernard Muller
Posts: 3964
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2013 6:02 pm
Contact:

Re: Polycarp and the apostle Paul.

Post by Bernard Muller »

to Ben,
It is not only thoughts, but also deductions. And I did not know then that some scholars surmised the Pauline epistle is a combination of 2 or three letters.
Also, I wonder why J.B. Lightfoot's translations has a plural:
Polycarp 11:3
But I have not found any such thing in you, neither have heard
thereof, among whom the blessed Paul labored, who were his
letters
in the beginning. For he boasteth of you in all those
churches which alone at that time knew God; for we knew Him not as
yet. (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... tfoot.html)

Any ideas? Maybe some ancient copies of the Polycarp's letter have a plural?

Cordially, Bernard
I believe freedom of expression should not be curtailed
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Polycarp and the apostle Paul.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Bernard Muller wrote:to Ben,
It is not only thoughts, but also deductions. And I did not know then that some scholars surmised the Pauline epistle is a combination of 2 or three letters.
Your proposal is pretty close to some that I have seen, which is to your credit if you arrived at it independently.
Also, I wonder why J.B. Lightfoot's translations has a plural:
Polycarp 11:3
But I have not found any such thing in you, neither have heard
thereof, among whom the blessed Paul labored, who were his
letters
in the beginning. ....

Any ideas? Maybe some ancient copies of the Polycarp's letter have a plural?
No, it is just that qui estis in principio epistulae eius can mean either "who are in the beginning of his epistle" or "who are, in the beginning [of the gospel], his epistles" (epistulae can be the genitive singular or the nominative plural). Of course, the present tense (estis, "are") does not work as well with the second translation as with the first; Lightfoot acknowledges this (on page 342 of Apostolic Fathers 2.3) but thinks that the finite Latin verb is probably translating an ambiguous Greek participle. But I still prefer the first one, I think. It requires no guessing as to the original Greek, and explains the next line nicely ("for he gloried in you"). But I doubt either position is a lock.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3412
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Polycarp and the apostle Paul.

Post by DCHindley »

Bernard Muller wrote:to Ben,
It is not only thoughts, but also deductions. And I did not know then that some scholars surmised the Pauline epistle is a combination of 2 or three letters.
Also, I wonder why J.B. Lightfoot's translations has a plural:
Polycarp 11:3
But I have not found any such thing in you, neither have heard
thereof, among whom the blessed Paul labored, who were his
letters
in the beginning. For he boasteth of you in all those
churches which alone at that time knew God; for we knew Him not as
yet. (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/t ... tfoot.html)

Any ideas? Maybe some ancient copies of the Polycarp's letter have a plural?

Cordially, Bernard
I think Polycarp to the Philippians 11 only survives in Latin: "qui estis in principio epistulae eius." Google translate (and this may seem ghastly to Ben) it would be something like "and - you are - in - the beginning - a letter or messages - his". Epistulae is can be either the genitive/dative form of the singular 1st declension feminine noun Epistula, a letter, or the plural nominative/vocative form of same, messages, I think. So, it can mean either singular "letter" (this is most common in the genitive per Lewis & Short) or plural "messages" depending how you think you can interpret it in context.

Maybe there are Greek fragments, but so far as I can see, neither Lake nor Lightfoot/Harmer nor Roberts/Donaldson (ANF volume I) mention any variants here.

Kirsopp Lake, in his Loeb translation of this letter (Apostolic Fathers vol I), translated this as "who are praised in the beginning of his epistle."

Donaldson/Roberts translated it as "who are commended in the beginning of his Epistle."

That makes Lightfoot/Harmer's translation "and you were his letters of recommendation in the beginning" the odd-ball, but I can kind of see what he may have been getting at. "Each of you [Philippians] are an individual letter of recommendation] for Paul." Maybe that is slaughtering things a bit ...

DCH

PS: I noticed that the Latin text of this letter in BibleWorks 8 misspelled the word (left out the "t")
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Polycarp and the apostle Paul.

Post by Ben C. Smith »

DCHindley wrote:Maybe there are Greek fragments, but so far as I can see, neither Lake nor Lightfoot/Harmer nor Roberts/Donaldson (ANF volume I) mention any variants here.

Kirsopp Lake, in his Loeb translation of this letter (Apostolic Fathers vol I), translated this as "who are praised in the beginning of his epistle."

Donaldson/Roberts translated it as "who are commended in the beginning of his Epistle."

That makes Lightfoot/Harmer's translation "and you were his letters of recommendation in the beginning" the odd-ball, but I can kind of see what he may have been getting at. "Each of you [Philippians] are an individual letter of recommendation] for Paul." Maybe that is slaughtering things a bit ...
The translations with "praised" or "commended" are assuming that something like laudati ("lauded/praised") has fallen out of the text. But Ehrman dispenses with all of that and suggests by his translation that estis ("are") has the force of "are found" (basically: "who are in the beginning of his epistle").

The notion of the recipients being epistles would naturally come from 2 Corinthians 3.2.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Post Reply