The Bible in Athanasius of Alexandria (review)

Abstract

Reviewed by: The Bible in Athanasius of Alexandria Charles Kannengiesser James D. Ernest The Bible in Athanasius of Alexandria The Bible in Ancient Christianity 2 Boston and Leiden: Brill, 2004 Pp. xiv + 482. $190. In this promising and elegant series recently created by D. Jeffrey Bingham, the work of J. D. Ernest comes as an agreeable surprise, filling a gap often deplored by the experts during the intense debate on Athanasian issues in recent decades. The author focuses strictly on the textual data attesting to Athanasius' use and understanding of scripture. Framed by an introduction and a conclusion, this neglected aspect of Athanasian writings is investigated under four headings: apologetic, dogmatic-polemical, historical-polemical, and pastoral. A total of forty "tables" inserted in these chapters provide detailed notations for a more distinct survey of the uses of scripture and adjacent questions. A series of ten appendices together with a select bibliography and five indices cover the last hundred pages of the carefully edited volume. Just a few insignificant distractions occur on 21, 113, 145, 151, 273, and 296. The written exposition is sober, well informed, and open-minded about all controversial aspects of current scholarship on Athanasius' writings. With his balanced conclusions Ernest offers scholars in varied areas of inquiry the gracious possibility of reconsidering their tentative statements. Exposed in the light of a new lexical analysis of the whole corpus of Athanasiana, uncertainties connected to specific writings become easier to grasp, if not eliminated. The first chapter after the introduction concentrates on the double treatise Against the Pagans and On the Incarnation. It leads to the conclusion that "part of the subtlety of these apologies consists in the thoroughness with which Athanasius has digested his sources. In particular, most of his applications of scripture can be traced to particular antecedent writers" (104). In my view, these applications could also be highlighted by their later recurrence in the Contra Arianos, the original arrangement of anti-Judaic Testimonia with the Suffering Servant in the center, corresponding to the central emphasis on the paschal mystery of Christ in On the Incarnation itself and in Contra Arianos I. The subtitle "The Purpose and Shape of the Double Apology" (51) indicates the author's perspective. He takes the coupling and inner structuring of the two treatises as a given without paying much attention to their very making. More observations on the use of scripture could probably be gained from the more dynamic viewpoint of a biographical approach. The chapter dedicated to the "Dogmatic-Polemical Writings," under the significant title "The Word Enfleshed" centers on the three Contra Arianos (the third dated by the author from some time after the first two). Ernest discusses the substantial use of Scripture in these texts from a more rhetorical perspective. He shows how the scriptural citations in them, in order to retain their Athanasian flavor, are always based on a consistent interpretation framed by a meta-narrative and marked by chosen images and proper words. The "tripartite rule" and the "scope schema" in Athanasius' exegesis receive special attention. The author [End Page 126] stresses the fact that "Athanasius does not present himself as an exegete in his writings. . . . He showcases no exegetical learning, rarely offers multiple valid interpretations for a verse, and never says oimai to introduce an interpretation" as Origen frequently did (161). Following a thorough examination of "the scripture-use habits represented in the historical-polemical writings" (208), with typos and paradeigma as key terms for the rather judgmental portrayal of Athanasius' contemporaries, the next chapter describes "the Bible in the pastoral writings." Ernest takes advantage of recent publications by E. A. Clark and D. Brakke. His study of Festal Letters would need some complementary research, but his notations on the Life of Antony are highly suggestive. By its concise clarity this whole chapter could serve as a methodological model for any graduate student wishing to engage in research on Athanasius' works. Finally, the author concludes that Athanasius' "exegesis cannot be called scientific because he did not consistently apply any elaborate method" (369). "Athanasius was in some ways a simple man driven by one central idea, but in order to understand him more adequately, we need...