schools of doctrine. He had great versatility of talent, restless
activity, deep cunning, and much force of character. Hippolytus
tells us that he was sadly given to intrigue, and so slippery in
his movements that it was no easy matter to entangle him in a
dilemma. It may have occurred to him that, in the peculiar
position of the Church, the concoction of a series of letters,
written in the name of an apostolic Father, and vigorously
asserting the claims of the bishops, would help much to strengthen
the hands of the hierarchy. He might thus manage at the same time
quietly to commend certain favourite views of doctrine, and aid
the pretensions of the Roman chief pastor. But the business must
be kept a profound secret; and the letters must, if possible, be
so framed as not at once to awaken suspicion. If we carefully
examine them, we shall find that they were well fitted to escape
detection at the time when they were written.

The internal evidence warrants the conclusion that the Epistle to
the Romans was the first produced. It came forth alone; and, if it
crept into circulation originally in the Imperial city, it was not
likely to provoke there any hostile criticism. It is occupied
chiefly with giving expression to the personal feelings of the
supposed writer in the prospect of martyrdom. It scarcely touches
on the question of ecclesiastical regimen; and it closes by
soliciting the prayers of the Roman brethren for "the Church which
is in Syria." [69:1] "If," says Dr. Lightfoot, "Ignatius had not
incidentally mentioned himself as the Bishop 'of' or 'from Syria,'
the letter to the Romans would have contained no indication of the
existence of the episcopal office" [70:1] Whilst observing this
studied silence on the subject which above all others occupied his
thoughts, the writer was craftily preparing the way for the more