The Undivided Church and Authority: what Ignatius believed

I recently read a summary of Ignatius' letters, by H.P.V. Nunn, from 1946. In them there are many things confirming evangelical thought, and one thing that makes me wonder.

Ignatius wrote several letters on the way to his martyrdom in Rome, in a bit of a hurry, sort of as a "thank-you" to churches and people who supported him. With careful attention, one concludes that the text is largely Baptist-friendly: the gospel is preached; passages from Matthew, Paul, and John are clearly in Ignatius' mind; and baptism is not assumed to be salvific (i.e. it's a believer's baptism POV).

The two elements which a Texas Baptist may struggle with are: (1) an apparent sacramental value to the Lord's Supper, and (2) a perhaps personal opinion that martyrdom is a required part of his justification.

One element which tends to reassure me, on the other hand, is Ignatius' mentions of the office of Bishop. Ignatius places a very high value on the authority of the "Bishop and presbyters and deacons". This formula shows up more than once. Therefore it is clear in Ignatius' mind that the church has a human monarchical head: one head honcho, one big cheese, practically or potentially acting as a representative of God.

If this makes you think of Rome, the CofE, or the Orthodox churches, don't. While affirming the role of the Bishop in other letters, he yet doesn't name, imply, or address the Bishop of Rome, ever. The implication is crystal clear: he believed in local monarchical administration by a Bishop, with an attending council of Elders (presbyters), and aided by Deacons. Local autonomy.

Well if that part doesn't sound downright evangelical or Baptist, I don't know what does. All the Baptist churches I know of -- and all the evangelical ones as well, and heck, even the Plymouth Brethren ones -- have:

(1) A "lead pastor". Usually (but not always!!) the main preacher.
(2) A presbytery council of sorts. Some call them pastors, or associate pastors. Some call them elders. It sure seems like the New Testament presbuteros. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...
(3) Deacons.

I've attended two Plymouth Brethren churches here in Dallas. They were very strictly elder-deacon church models, very New Testament. Even so, there was always a chief elder. In both cases, the chief elder was not the preaching elder. So in praxis these churches could easily be fit in the same church model as your typical omnipotent-Pastor Baptist church. They are on opposite ends of the same spectrum. The EFCA church I currently attend (link) is closer to a Baptist model.

OK, the official term is Congregational.

The Lord's Supper issue will require more reading. Baptists think Communion is an ordinance, not a sacrament -- i.e. it's just a remembrance. But that something has sacramental value to a believer isn't the same as saying it has salvific value; i.e. the washing of water doesn't save the unregenerate.  So his belief appears clear, that communion was to him sacramental. So what? Maybe the Baptists should re-evaluate Zwingli on this one, and move closer to Calvin or Luther.