In the golden twilight of Athenian philosophy, a lone Christian voice rose not in rebellion, but in reasoned supplication—a philosopher appealing not to sentiment or spectacle, but to justice and truth. Athenagoras, eloquent and serene, offered the Roman emperors a defense of the faith more refined than polemical, more logical than loud. Though little is known of his life, his writings shimmer with classical elegance, moral clarity, and philosophical restraint. He enters Christian history not with thunder, but with the persuasive gravity of a soul shaped by Plato and sanctified by Christ.
Sources and Literature
Athenagoras’ writings are preserved in Otto’s Corpus Apologetarum Christianorum, Volume VII, and in Migne’s Patrologia Graeca, Volume VI, columns 890–1023. An American edition, translated by W. B. Owen, was published in New York in 1875.
Among the major studies on his life and doctrine are:
– Clarisse, De Athenagorae vita, scriptis doctrina (Lugduni Batavorum, 1819)
– Donaldson, Critical History, Volume III, pp. 107–178
– Harnack, Texte und Untersuchungen, I. 176 ff., and his article “Athenagoras” in Herzog, 2nd ed., Volume I, pp. 748–750
– Spencer Mansel in Smith and Wace’s Dictionary of Christian Biography, I. 204–207
– Renan, Marc-Aurèle, pp. 382–386
The Enigmatic Philosopher of Athens
Athenagoras, known as “a Christian philosopher of Athens,” lived during the reign of Marcus Aurelius (AD 161–180). Beyond this, his life remains cloaked in obscurity. Remarkably, he is not mentioned by Eusebius, Jerome, or Photius.1 His philosophical leanings were essentially Platonic, though colored by the eclecticism of the second century. While lacking the fervent originality of Justin or the fiery passion of Tatian, Athenagoras distinguished himself by a literary refinement and intellectual poise unmatched among his peers.
The Apology: A Plea to the Emperors
Athenagoras’ principal contribution is his Apology, also known as the Legatio pro Christianis—a formal appeal on behalf of Christians addressed to the emperors Marcus Aurelius and Commodus.² He pleads with them to extend the common rights of legal fairness to Christians, who alone, among all subjects of the empire, are persecuted solely for bearing the name of Christ. “If we are guilty,” he writes, “let us be punished; but give us the dignity of a fair trial. A name, in itself, is neither virtuous nor criminal.”
He responds to the three chief accusations hurled at Christians: atheism, cannibalism (Thyestean banquets), and incest (Oedipodean connections). Each charge is dismantled with quiet authority. Athenagoras especially defends Christians against the charge of atheism, explaining their worship of the one invisible God and their rejection of idolatry. Against the charge of moral depravity, he asserts with calm dignity that Christians are so pure that they do not even indulge lustful thoughts. Many abstain from marriage altogether; others marry only once, and solely for the purpose of procreation. Second marriages, he adds, are viewed with suspicion—“a decent form of adultery.”
This ascetic outlook, though shaped by the culture of the time, reflected a broader Christian emphasis on bodily discipline and purity. Athenagoras then contrasts Christian morality with the brutal practices of the pagan world: infanticide, abortion, and the bloodthirsty spectacle of the gladiatorial games. He positions Christians as champions of life, dignity, and restraint.
On the Resurrection of the Dead
A second work attributed to Athenagoras, On the Resurrection of the Dead, is a philosophical tour de force. In it, he argues for the resurrection not from Scripture—he avoids biblical citations entirely—but from reason, logic, and the nature of God. Drawing from the divine attributes of wisdom, justice, and omnipotence, he builds a compelling case that resurrection is not only possible, but necessary for the fulfillment of human destiny. That he delivered this work before a philosophical audience speaks to both its intellectual rigor and rhetorical skill.
Critical Estimations
Scholars have long admired the dignity and balance of Athenagoras’ prose. Donaldson praises him as a man “determined that the real state of the case should be exactly known.” He admires Athenagoras’ method: precise, elegant, and focused. Similes are rare but effective; poetry is used sparingly; argument never yields to display. Donaldson considers his Apology “the best defence of the Christians produced in that age.”
Spencer Mansel echoes this admiration: “Decidedly superior to most of the Apologists, elegant, free from superfluity of language, forcible in style, and rising occasionally into great powers of description. In his reasoning he is remarkable for clearness and cogency.”
Alleged Montanism and the Nature of Prophecy
Tillemont, ever cautious, detected possible traces of Montanism in Athenagoras’ disapproval of second marriages and his theory of prophetic inspiration. Yet both elements were common among Greek Christians and appear also in the writings of Justin Martyr. Athenagoras describes the prophets as being in an ecstatic state, instruments of the Spirit. “The Spirit of God,” he writes, “used them as if a flute-player were breathing into his flute”—a simile reminiscent of Montanus’ own metaphor of the plectrum and the lyre. But this poetic image does not confirm Montanist allegiance.
Historical Reliability and Manuscript Tradition
The account of Philippus Sidetes, preserved by Nicephorus Callistus, claims that Athenagoras was the first head of the Catechetical School of Alexandria under Hadrian and the teacher of Clement of Alexandria. But this is a chronological impossibility. Philippus also asserts that Athenagoras addressed his Apology to Hadrian and Antoninus, which contradicts the title inscription. Nevertheless, in a fragment from Methodius’ De Resurrectione, a citation from Athenagoras’ Apology (chapter 24) appears with his name clearly attached—confirming the authenticity of the treatise.
The Apology, or Πρεσβεία περὶ Χριστιανῶν, was frequently copied during the Renaissance, with seventeen Greek manuscripts extant. The three most reliable manuscripts include also the treatise On the Resurrection. Both works were first printed by Henry Stephens in 1557 and have since appeared in numerous editions. Challenges to their authenticity are weak and have been thoroughly refuted.
Footnotes
¹ The account of Philippus Sidetes, deacon of Chrysostom, as preserved by Nicephorus Callistus, is unreliable. It erroneously portrays Athenagoras as the first head of the Alexandrian school under Hadrian and teacher of Clement of Alexandria, and claims he addressed his Apology to Hadrian and Antoninus—contradicted by the book’s actual dedication.
² The title Πρεσβεία περὶ Χριστιανῶν (Legatio, also translated as Supplicatio or Intercessio pro Christianis) has led some to assume Athenagoras personally presented this “embassy” to the emperor. Regardless, the work survives in seventeen manuscripts, three of which also contain the treatise On the Resurrection. Both were first edited by Henry Stephens (1557) and often republished. Objections to their genuineness are weak and have been answered decisively.
