Tags
Catholicism, Christianity, Faith, history, orthodoxy, St. Cyril
St. Cyril the Great of Alexandria, called the Pillar of the Faith in his own tradition, is the 34th Pope of the Coptic Orthodox Church, and should be, indisputably, one of the greatest Fathers of the Early Church.[1]
The Coptic Church has always preserved his reputation and venerated his memory, acknowledging, as it does, the tremendous part he paid in establishing orthodox Christian teaching on the Virgin Mary and on the nature of God; of all the successors of Athanasius, Cyril was the greatest. Yet he is almost entirely absent from the great nineteenth century collections of the Fathers, edited by Newman and entirely absent from that edited by Philip Schaff. Indeed, in the West he has remained a figure of controversy, better known, if known at all, for various episodes in his career, than for his theology and his pastoral care.[2] This is in part due to the brilliance of the eighteenth century historian, Edward Gibbon, whose Decline and fall of the Roman Empire has been a classic since its publication. In the forty-seventh chapter, Gibbon tells his readers that ‘the title of saint is a mark that his opinions and his party have finally prevailed’, accusing him of having ‘imbibed the orthodox lessons of zeal and dominion’ in ‘the house of his uncle … Theophilus’. We are told that St. Cyril ‘extended round his cell the cobwebs of scholastic theology, and meditated the works of allegory and metaphysics, whose remains, in seven verbose folios, now peaceably slumber by the side of their rivals.’ Accusing him of an arrogant and bigoted zealotry, Gibbon records that the ‘murder of Hypatia [a famous Greek female philosopher and mathematician] has imprinted an indelible stain on the character and religion of Cyril of Alexandria.’ [3]
Well, that has certainly been so until recently, and even now, when St. Cyril is being re-evaluated in the scholarship of the West, his name is most commonly associated with the Nestorian controversy and the Council of Ephesus in 431 AD. [4]
But gradually this process is bringing back from their ‘slumber’ those ‘verbose folios’ of which Gibbon wrote with such scorn. The collection of essays edited by Professor Weinandy finally offers some coverage of the whole scope of St. Cyril’s achievement, whilst Professor Keating’s work helps us towards a better understanding of the Saint’s views on theosis. [5] But, as The History of the Patriarchs of the Church of Alexandria (recently republished as part of the invaluable Oriental Orthodox Library) points out, in the Coptic tradition he is remembered also as a great pastor and teaching who ‘never wearied of composing discourses and homilies by the power of the Holy Ghost.’ [6] Thanks to that Library we now have four volumes of St. Cyril’s writings readily available. [7]
The scholarly world has also begun to evince an interest in the Saint’s theological writings outside of the Nestorian controversy, with Lars Koen’s, The Saving Passion concentrating on the Incarnational and Soteriological aspects of St. Cyril’s Commentary on the Gospel According to St. John. [8).] There is also an excellent recent work on St. Cyril as a New Testament Exegete, by a learned Coptic Nun, Sister Lois M. Farag. [9] Her work, from entirely within the Coptic tradition, provides the most sympathetic understanding yet of what, until late on his career, St. Cyril himself would have regarded as his main achievement – his elucidation of the Holy Scriptures.
To cover all the areas in which St Cyril’s writings illuminate our understanding of Scripture would be the work of a scholar with more time than I have, but in this short series I want to single out what he has to tell us about salvation by way of his commentary on the Gospel of St John.
[1] Fr. Matthias F. Wahba, He Became Flesh: St. Cyril the Great: the pillar of the Faith (St. Antonius, Ca. 1992) p. 5
[2] N. Russell, St. Cyril of Alexandria (London, 2000) p. vii
[3] E. Gibbon, The History of the decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, volume VII London, 1988 edition, pp. 30, 31, 33
[4] Recent works must be headed by Fr. John McGuckin, St. Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy (NY, 2004); other recent works include: N. Russell, St. Cyril of Alexandria (London, 2000); Susan Wessel, Cyril of Alexandria and the Nestorian Controversy (Oxford, 2004)
[5]T.G. Weinandy & D.A. Keating. The Theology of St. Cyril of Alexandra: a critical appreciation (London, 2003); D.A. Keating, The Appropriation of Divine Life in St. Cyril of Alexandria (Oxford, 2004)
[6] B. Evetts (ed.) The History of the Patriarchs of the Church of Alexandria (Oriental Orthodox Library, vol. VIII, 2006), p. 104][vi]
[7] Volumes IV and VI are the Commentary on the Gospel of St. John; volume IX, Selected Writings, and volume XII, Commentary of the Gospel of St. Luke part I (all 2006).
[8] Lars Koen, The Saving Passion concentrating on the Incarnational and Soteriological aspects of St. Cyril’s Commentary on the Gospel According to St. John (Uppsala, 1991).
[9] Lois M. Farag, St. Cyril of Alexandria, a New testament Exegete (Gorgias, 2007)
This is going to be interesting, since practically the first I heard of him was here, other than of course, in Gibbon. As to that, Gibbon, much as I love him, calling anybody verbose, well, glass houses come to mind. 🙂
I just restarted trying to make sense of Pusey’s pseudo-Jacobean text in his translation, liable to be slow going, very kind of Roger Pearse to transcribe it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is a YouTube reading – not sure it is easier going 😏
LikeLiked by 1 person
As somebody said, not sure that James I would find it easy either! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh gosh….do I have to read all those books in order to be saved?
LikeLike
No, but you might be better-educated 🙂
LikeLike
Thanks for recommending the books. just last nite, my friend Dave got in the mail 4 books of the hobbit series. He offerd to lend me the first one to read and told me I would like it. But I told him I cant justify wasting that much time because im splitting my spare time with advanced math and chemistry and music theory and chess already. I don’t have the energy to read fiction.
LikeLike
Bosco, dear, The Hobbit is one short book, even if they did spin it out to 3 films. It’s written for children, so would probably suit you very well.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Its a four book series you pea brain. But what do I care. I had a fiancée yrs ago who father was a top JPL scientist. In charge of Voyager as a matter of fact. he used to always say that…comic books are for children as novels are for women.
Speaking of pea brains, what gets you out from under your slimey rock? Good brother Chalcedon says you are not sister annie. But I think you are. Definitly you are female because your weak grasp of reality shows you are female.
LikeLike
The Hobbit was published first as a stand alone volume. The Lord of the Rings was a trilogy published later. Do try to be in possession of the fact before criticising someone who is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
-LIKE I SAID, ….WHAT DO I CARE.Its just a bunch of stuff made up by someone wanting to make a living by creating novels. Im guilty of everything I accuse other boneheads of doing. Rather recently, I read the novel…The Sum of All Fears, by Clancy and then another by him…I forgot the name of it, but the story was the same. Nuclear bombs.I didn’t buy the book. I got them for free. But the senarios were very real, unlike 99.99999 % of other novels, such as the catechism.
LikeLike
St Cyril’s writings illuminate our understanding of Scripture
Ive seen some of the writings of these guys. The just paraphrase what the passage says. they just say it in another way. And lots of times they slip in a falsehood.
If its pure gospel, you really cant get into it. If its explained by men, then you are all for it.
LikeLike
If you understood what you were saying it would be tragic:0;,as you don’t, it’s comic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ok, I understand listening to others thoughts on scripture. that’s where I get a lot of my understanding of scripture. Then, I can see where someone isn’t revealing anything but just saying the same thing in another way. You know, hey, at least you are concerned with the things of the spirit. it keeps you off the streets. That’s because you, good brother Chaledon, would be doing “smash and grabs” if you had more free time.
LikeLike
No, I’d be writing books as I used to if I had more free time.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Oh wow, you have written books. Well, im duly impressed good brother.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Eight in total 😊
LikeLike
Yeah, but yours are well above Bosco’s level, as well. But I surely wish I had them long ago, clarified quite a few things. Too bad he hasn’t read The Hobbit, and its subsequent trilogy might have turned him into a Christian.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah hell…forget reading the long winded books. I just wait til the movie comes out. Anyway, my friend has played the Hobbit movies for me, even though I didn’t want to see them. he thinks they are the greatest thing since sliced bread. man, those 4 movies are long. just fairy tales. I don’t care for them.Ill tell you what movies I like….the Predator movies. And Alien vs Preditor. those movies are cool Jack.
LikeLike
You are so funny. The Hobbit is quite a short book, but Jackson made it into 3 films. Which is shorter?
LikeLike
The movie is shorter, unless one speed reads. its easier to watch the movie and eat popcorn and drink iced tea with lemon that to read a stupid book. reading makes me sleepy..
LikeLike
No, watching 3 moves taking up about 9 hours is far longer – of course, I forget, you possibly read very slowly.
LikeLike
Cyril says that if a priest touches a dead body it contaminates him because the dead body reopersents being deal and other dreadful stuff. Cyril goes on to say that priests shouldn’t touch unmarries sisters, for some reason like that. I cant copy and paste because the site wont let me.
LikeLike
Oddly enough, people in the past held beliefs we don’t – mind you, priests not touching unmarried sisters – or little boys- might not be a bad one to bring back.
LikeLike
oh, yeah, beliefs have changed. just a few yrs ago your Holy Father apologized for jailing Galilieo for saying the earth revolved around the sun, or that the earth was round, or something. I forget. Wonder what took Christs church so long to admit error.
LikeLike
Is it because you are infallible on everything that you assume the Pope claims to be?
LikeLike
Turning about on every hand our discourse to the more dogmatical exposition, we will set it in array, according to our power, against the false doctrines of them that teach otherwise, not stretching it forth to its full extent, but even retrenching superfluity, and studying to render it not lacking fitness. The subjoined subscription of the chapters, will shew the subjects over which our discourse extends, to which we have also annexed numbers, that what is sought may be readily found by the readers.
S. CYRIL,
ARCHBISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA.
INTERPRETATION OR COMMENT ON THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO JOHN.
that’s just a snipet of the long and rambling expose, one of endless exposes. Absolutley unreadable. Its obvious he didn’t know the Lord. that doesn’t mean he didn’t get saved befor he died.
LikeLike
All of which shows what I say in my piece, that the English translation of the Greek is a bad one. You being such an expert ought to have known that.
LikeLike
That post about Cryil above of yours, the best I could do was to skim over it. It becomes unreadable after the first 3 words. Sorry to have to tell you this. but only a friend will tell you your zipper is down. If there was a conclusion in your post, I couldn’t differentiate it amongst all the verbiage.
LikeLike
It is the first of a series of posts, Bosco. I suspect it may be above your reading age of 9.
LikeLike
you guessd that rite. cant follow any train of thought. Ill wait til the movie comes out.
LikeLiked by 1 person