3. Of SMYRNA, a Christian writer of the age immediately succeeding that of the Apostles. Of the early history of this eminent father we have no trustworthy account. The time of his birth is not known, and we can only determine it by approximation. At the time of his martyrdom, to which various dates are assigned, he had been a Christian eighty-six years. Now if we adopt for the present Tillemont's date of his martyrdom, A. D. 166, and suppose Polycarp to have been of Christian parents, or at least educated from childhood in the Christian faith, and so interpret the eighty-six years, as several eminent critics do, of the term of his natural life, his birth will fall in A. D. 80; but if with other critics we suppose him to have been converted at a riper age, and compute the eighty-six years from the time of his conversion, his birth must be placed at a considerably earlier period. A vague passage in the Latin text of Polycarp's epistle to the Philippians (c. xi.), which we think merely indicates that the church at Smyrna was not in existence when the Apostle Paul wrote his epistle to the Philippians, has been adduced to prove that Polycarp was born before that time; but the words are too indefinite to bear out any such inference.
An ancient life, or rather a fragment of a life of Polycarp, ascribed by Bollandus to a certain Pionius of unknown date, and given by him in a Latin version in the Acta Sanctorum Januarii (a. d. 26), vol. ii. p. 695, &c., dwells much on the early history of Polycarp, but the record (if indeed it be the work of Pionius) is some centuries later than its subject, and is evidently false in several particulars. We are inclined to think, however, that it embodies some genuine traditions of Polycarp's history. According to this account, the Apostle Paul visited Smyrna in his way from Galatia, through the proconsular Asia to Jerusalem (the writer apparently confounding two journeys recorded in Acts, 18.18-22, and 23, &c.), and having collected the believers, instructed them in the proper time of keeping Easter. After Paul's departure, his host, Strataeas, the brother of Timotheus, became bishop of the infant church; or, for the passage is not clear, Strataeas became an elder and Bucolus was bishop. It was during the episcopate of Bucolus (whether he was the contemporary or the successor of Strataeas) that Callisto, a female member of the church, eminent for riches and works of charity, was warned of God in a dream to go to the gate of the city, called the Ephesian gate, where she would find a little boy (puerulum) named Polycarp, of Eastern origin, who had been reduced to slavery, and was in the hands of two men, from whom she was to redeem him. Callisto, obedient to the vision, rose, went to the gate, found the two men with the child, as it had been revealed to her; and having redeemed the boy, brought him home, educated him with maternal affection in the Christian faith, and, when he attained to manhood, first made him ruler over her house, then adopted him as her son, and finally left him heir to all her wealth. Polycarp had been from childhood distinguished by his beneficence, piety, and self-denial; by the gravity of his deportment, and his diligence in the study of the Holy Scriptures. These qualities early attracted the notice and regard of the bishop, Bucolus, who loved him with fatherly affection, and was in return regarded by him with filial love. By Bucolus he was ordained first to the office of deacon, in which he laboured diligently, confuting heathens, Jews, and heretics; delivering catechetical homilies in the church, and writing epistles of which that to the Philippians is the only extant specimen. He was subsequently when of mature age (his hair was already turning gray) and still maturer conduct, ordained presbyter by Bucolus, on whose death he was elected and consecrated bishop. We omit to notice the various miracles said to be wrought by Polycarp, or to have occurred on different occasions in his life.
Such are the leading facts recorded in this ancient narrative, which has, we think, been too lightly estimated by Tillemont. That it has been interpolated with many fabulous admixtures of a later date, is clear; but we think there are some things in it which indicate that it embodies earlier and truer elements. The difficulty is to discover and separate these from later corruptions. The chief ground for rejecting the narrative altogether is the
Polycarp was bishop of Smyrna at the time when Ignatius of Antioch passed through that city on his way to suffer death at Rome, some time between A. D. 107 and 116. [IGNATIUS, No. 1.] Ignatius seems to have enjoyed much this intercourse with Polycarp, whom he had known, apparently, in former days, when they were both hearers of the apostle John. (Martyr. Ignatii, 100.3.) The sentiment of esteem was reciprocated by Polycarp, who collected several of the epistles of Ignatius, and sent them to the church at Philippi, accompanied by an epistle of his own. (Polyc. Epistol. ad Ptilipp. 100.13.) Polycarp himself visited Rome while Anicetus was bishop of that city, whose episcopate extended, according to Tillemont's calculation, from A. D. 157 to 168. Irenaeus has recorded (Epistol. ad Victor. apud Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 5.14) the difference of opinion of these two holy men on the time of observing Easter, and the steadfastness of Polycarp in adhering to the custom of the Asiatic churches, derived, as they affirmed, from the Apostles; as well as their mutual kindness and forbearance, notwithstanding this difference. Indeed, the character of Polycarp appears to have attracted general regard: Irenaeus retained for him a feeling of deepest reverence (Epistola ad Florin. apud Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 5.21); Jerome speaks of him (De Viris Illustr. c. 17) as "totius Asiae princeps," the most eminent man in all proconsular Asia. An anecdote given elsewhere [MARCION] shows that even reputed heretics, notwithstanding his decided opposition to them, desired to possess his esteem; and it is not improbable that the reverence excited by his character conduced to his success in restoring them to the communion of the church. It has been conjectured that he was the angel of the church of Smyrna to whom Jesus Christ directed the letter in the Apocalypse (2.8-11); and also that he was the bishop to whom the apostle John, according to a beautiful anecdote recorded by Clement of Alexandria (Liber "Quis Dives salvetur ?" 100.42), committed the care of a young man, who, forsaking his patron, became a chief of a band of robbers, and was re-converted by the apostle: but these are mere conjectures, and of little probability.
The martyrdom of Polycarp occurred, according to Eusebius (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 4.15), in the persecution under the emperors Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus ; and is recorded in a letter of the Church at Smyrna to the Churches of Philomelium and other places, which is still extant, and of which Eusebius (ibid.) has given the chief part. The persecution began : one Germanicus, an ancient man, was thrown to the wild beasts, and several others, including some who were brought from Philadelphia, were put to death at Smyrna. Polycarp had at first intended to remain in the city and brave the danger of martyrdom; but the intreaties of his flock led him to withdraw to a retreat in the adjacent country, where he passed his time in prayer. Here, three days before his apprehension, he had a remarkable dream, which his anticipation of his fate led him to interpret as an intimation that he should be burnt alive, a foreboding but too exactly verified by the event. Messengers having been sent to apprehend him, he withdrew to another hiding place; but his place of retreat was discovered by the confession of a child, who had been forced by torture to make known where he was. Polycarp might still have escaped by leaving the place on the approach of those sent to apprehend him; but he refused, saying, "The will of God be done." His venerable figure and calm and courteous deportment commanded the respect of his captors; and a prayer offered by him affected some of them with remorse for their share in his apprehension. The
The chief authorities for the history of Polycarp have been cited. The account of Eusebius (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 4.14, 15, and 5.20) is chiefly taken from Irenaeus (ll. cc.), and from the letter of the Church at Smyrna, giving an account of his martyrdom, which will be noticed below. Halloix (Illustr. Eccles. Orientalis Scriptorum Vitae), Cave (Apostolici, or the Lives, &c., of the Primitive Fathers), and Tillemont (Mémoires, vol. ii.), have collected the chief notices of the ancients, and embodied them ill their narrative. See also Ceillier, Auteurs Sacrés, vol. i. p. 672, &c. The English reader may consult (beside Cave's work just mentioned) Lardner (Credibility, &c. part ii. ch. 6, 7), Neander (Church Hist. trans. by Rose, vol. i. p. 106, &c.), Milman (Hist. of Christianity, bk. ii. ch. 7), and other ecclesiastical historians.
[J.C.M]