You might be missing some context?GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 11:58 pmYou may well be right, but I'm still trying to understand what you mean. Loisy writes "he recites the symbol of faith that the Catholic Church has specified against Marcion, and that is why he does not forget Pontius Pilate". Is he saying that the Nicene Creed refers to Pilate, so that is why the interpolater put that in? Or what? Can you give me an actual quote from Loisy that you think is the problem with the mention of Pilate?Giuseppe wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 8:44 pmAs Carrier points out, Marcion believed that Pilate crucified Jesus, so I don't see why Loisy assumes so easily, with so much nonchalance, that the Catholic interpolator used Pilate in function anti-marcionite. Your emphasis on "persecuted" as possibly different from "crucified" doesn't work.GakuseiDon wrote: ↑Thu Jun 22, 2023 5:22 pmthe passage in Trallians reads "truly was persecuted under Pontius Pilate". The reconstructed version of Marcion's Gospel shows a Pilate who didn't scourge Jesus, and I guess that may be what that refers to. Might this be what Loisy is referring to?
Here is your claim again:
"Loisy claims that the false "Ignatius" interpolated Pilate in the Epistle to Trallians (originally a marcionite epistle), explicitly against Marcion."
https://archive.org/details/MN41487ucmf ... ew=theater
Sur ce bouquet marcionite nous pouvons clore notre enquête. Ce qui importe à nos recherches sur les Epîtres du Nouveau Testament est de savoir que les lettres dites ignatiennes leur étant, autant que nous en pouvons juger, postérieures, ne sont pas elles-mêmes antérieures à la fin du second siècle, parce que le secret de leur origine se ramène à la distinction d'une correspondance fondamentale, de caractère marcionite, qui n'a pas dû être écrite avant l'an 170, et d'une élaboration cathohque qui se place approximativement vers l'an 200. Peu nous importe le détail des procédés par lesquels le document fondamental a été adapté aux fins édifiantes que se proposait le dernier rédacteur. Le fait essentiel est celui de la double rédaction, le trait caractéristique de la première, œuvre d'un martyr marcionite, étant moins son hétérodoxie que sa hauteur morale, et le trait caractéristique de la seconde étant beaucoup moins son orthodoxie massive que son inexprimable gaucherie. Ajoutons que certains traits de Théophore nous autorisent à voir en lui un marcionite assez mitigé sur certains points, comme il y en eut d'assez bonne heure, tel Apelles.
What matters to our research on the Epistles of the New Testament is to know that the so-called Ignatian letters, as far as we can judge, are not themselves prior to the end of the second century because the secret of their origin can be traced back to the distinction between a fundamental correspondence of Marcionite character, which must not have been written before the year 170, and a Catholic elaboration that roughly takes place around the year 200. The details of the processes by which the fundamental document was adapted to the edifying purposes intended by the final redactor are of little importance to us. The essential fact is the double redaction, with the characteristic feature of the first being less its heterodoxy than its moral stature, and the characteristic feature of the second being much less its massive orthodoxy than its inexpressible awkwardness. Furthermore, certain traits of Theophorus allow us to see him as a somewhat moderate Marcionite on certain points, as there were some fairly early on, such as Apelles.
What matters to our research on the Epistles of the New Testament is to know that the so-called Ignatian letters, as far as we can judge, are not themselves prior to the end of the second century because the secret of their origin can be traced back to the distinction between a fundamental correspondence of Marcionite character, which must not have been written before the year 170, and a Catholic elaboration that roughly takes place around the year 200. The details of the processes by which the fundamental document was adapted to the edifying purposes intended by the final redactor are of little importance to us. The essential fact is the double redaction, with the characteristic feature of the first being less its heterodoxy than its moral stature, and the characteristic feature of the second being much less its massive orthodoxy than its inexpressible awkwardness. Furthermore, certain traits of Theophorus allow us to see him as a somewhat moderate Marcionite on certain points, as there were some fairly early on, such as Apelles.
So, yes, for Loisy here, "anti-Marcionite" in the letters of Ignatius would imply interpolation / a second redaction.
I'm not sure if the Pilate thing was viewed this way by Loisy. But "That this profession of faith was anti-Marcionite in its main intention" would seem to imply it.
