Folia Theologica et Canonica 1. 23/15 (2012)

SACRA THEOLOGIA - László Perendy, Athenagoras on the Triune God of Christians

FOLIA THEOLOGICA ET CANONICA I (2012) 67-90

László Perendy

ATHENAGORAS ON THE TRIUNE GOD OF CHRISTIANS A SURVEY OF 20™ CENTURY RESEARCH

I. The Author and his Work(s); II. Christians are in Possession of the Right Concept of God; III. Judging Athenagoras. The views of 20ih century scholars on his theological ideas, 1. Influenced directly by philosophers?, 2. Recognizing the Structural and Doctrinal Similarities as compared with Middle Platonic Works, 3. Admirable Command of Contemporary Platonic Terminology to Express Christian Faith?-, III. The Mosaic of his Icon of God; IV. Philosopher and Theologian

I. The Author and his Work(s)

Methodius of Olympus (ta. D. 311) was the first witness to identify the author of the Plea on behalf of the Christians (Legatio pro Christianis) as Athenagoras. A 14th century codex quotes Philip of Side, a fifth-century historian, in whose account Athenagoras is mentioned as the first head of the Alexandrian school. According to this record Athenagoras originally was the head of the Academy and read the Scriptures in order to refute the teaching of the Christians, but, like Paul, he also became a teacher and not a persecutor of the faith. According to Philip the Apologist addressed his Plea to Hadrian (a. D. 117-138) and Antoninus Pius (a. D. 138-161). Philip says that Clement of Alexandria was his disciple. In fact, the Plea was probably written between 176 (when the co-rulership of Marcus Aurelius and Commodus started) and 180 (when Marcus Aurelius died). The most likely date seems to be 178, when there was ‘deep peace’ in the empire. This also seems likely because the persecution of the Christians in Gaul in the previous year could have been an incentive for Athenagoras to write his apology. The Arethas codex (Codex Parisinus 451) also preserved the De resurrectione, whose authorship is highly disputed by several scholars.

It is remarkable that we know so little about this apologist, whose style is well above that of Tatian, his contemporary, and it is also interesting how little influence he made on theology of the next centuries. As we can see, this is also true of his doctrine of God and Trinitology. One can only speculate, as several