Professor Lightfoot next makes a vehement attack upon me in connection with “THE IGNATIAN EPISTLES,” [57:1] which is equally abortive and limited to details.  I do not intend to complain of the spirit in which the article is written, nor of its unfairness.  On the whole I think that readers may safely he left to judge of the tone in which a controversy is carried on.  Unfortunately, however, the perpetual accusation of misstatement brought against me in this article, and based upon minute criticism into which few care to follow, is apt to leave the impression that it is well-founded, for there is the very natural feeling in most right minds that no one would recklessly scatter such insinuations.  It is this which alone makes such an attack dangerous.  Now in a work like this, dealing with so many details, it must be obvious that it not possible altogether to escape errors.  A critic or opponent is of course entitled to point these out, although, if he be high-minded or even alive to his own interests, I scarcely think that he will do so in a spirit of unfair detraction.  But in doing this a writer is bound to be accurate, for if he be liberal of such accusations and it can be shown that his charges are unfounded, they recoil with double force upon himself.  I propose, therefore, as it is impossible for me to reply to all such attacks, to follow Professor Lightfoot and Dr. Westcott, with some minuteness in their discussion of my treatment of the Ignatian Epistles, and once for all to show the grave misstatements to which they commit themselves.

Dr. Lightfoot does not ignore the character of the discussion upon which he enters, but it will be seen that his appreciation of its difficulty by no means inspires him with charitable emotions.  He says:  “The Ignatian question is the most perplexing which confronts the student of earlier Christian history.  The literature is voluminous; the considerations involved are very wide, very varied, and very intricate.  A writer, therefore, may well be pardoned if he betrays a want of familiarity with this subject.  But in this case the reader naturally expects that the opinions at which he has arrived will be stated with some diffidence.” [58:1] My critic objects that I express my opinions with decision.  I shall hereafter justify this decision, but I would here point out that the very reasons which render it difficult for Dr. Lightfoot to form a final and decisive judgment on the question make it easy for me.  It requires but little logical perception to recognize that Epistles, the authenticity of which it is so difficult to establish, cannot have much influence as testimony for the Gospels.  The statement just quoted, however, is made the base of the attack, and war is declared in the following terms: