• Home
  • About
  • Awards
  • Dialogue with a Muslim: links
    • 1st response
    • Second response
    • Final response
  • Saturday Jess

All Along the Watchtower

~ A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you … John 13:34

All Along the Watchtower

Tag Archives: St. Cyril

Recovering a reputation: St Cyril of Alexandria

25 Tuesday Apr 2017

Posted by John Charmley in Bible, Catholic Tradition, Faith, st cyril of alexandria

≈ 30 Comments

Tags

Catholicism, Christianity, Faith, history, orthodoxy, St. Cyril

 

icon_st_cyril_alexandria

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)

 

 

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

Gospel for Pentecost, Year A

08 Sunday Jun 2014

Posted by John Charmley in Bible, Commentaries, Faith

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

Catholic Church, Christianity, orthodoxy, St Gregory, St Gregory of Nyssa, St. Cyril

Jesus risen

John 20:19-23

Chrysologus remarks on how frightened the disciples were, for they had locked the doors; their minds were darkened with grief; yet still the Lord came to them – as he will to us. St Gregory the Great comments that the one who had entered the closed womb enters now the closed room. He stands before them, St Gregory of Nyssa reminds us, as true God, with, as St Cyril comments, death banished. In his greeting he breathes on them a spirit of tranquillity and shares with them the Holy Spirit; He is the peace of God and His Spirit perfect peace. Irenaeus notes that the wounds he showed them reveal that it was a resurrection of the body, not simply the spirit; the wounds now, St Leo tells us, bring healing to our wounds; He is human and divine. The disciples are glad in him.

Jesus now commissions them, in love, to spread his message of peace and repentance; they follow not their own will, St Cyril reminds us, but that of Christ. They, like him, St Gregory comments, will suffer persecution. St Gregory of Nazianzus remarks on how He is preparing them to receive more and more of the Spirit. He gives it to his disciples now, but also at Pentecost. This, St Cyril comments, is the second breathing of the Spirit, the first, in Genesis, having been stifled by our fall; this breathing inspires the disciples to be bold and to suffer for his sake. This Spirit, which is, as St Cyril comments, the breath of God, is, St Athanasius tells us, the Son’s to give. They are given the spiritual power to remit sins; their authority is directly from God; their unity, and that of the Church that grew from them is traced back, St Cyprian writes, to the one Lord who bound them all together.

Theodore of Mopsuestia comments that forgiveness is given by the Spirit to all of Christ’s Apostles, who receive his authority. The Church is allowed to bind and loose, St Ambrose writes; heresy cannot do this. They can, Origen reminds us, forgive only that which God will forgive. The Spirit, St Cyril writes, bestows on them the transformative power of ordination and provides them with the divine strength they will need for their mission. But to those to whom is given such great power, there comes also, as St Gregory the Great wrote, tremendous responsibility.

Here Christ establishes His Church, which, through faith, is with us, as He promised it would be – to the ending of the age.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

Gospel: Divine Mercy Sunday Year A

27 Sunday Apr 2014

Posted by John Charmley in Commentaries, Easter, Faith

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Catholic Church, Christianity, Gregory Nazianzus, St Athanasius, St John, St. Cyril

dthomas-b-west

St John 20:19-31

Chrysostom records that it was evening in more than the literal sense, for the disciples’ minds were clouded by grief. Jesus now appears to them, and not even the locked doors can stop him; may it be so with the locked doors of our hearts. His appearance gives us a foretaste of what our resurrected bodies will be like. He stands among them, as Gregory of Nyssa remarks, as God, with, St Cyril tells us, death finally vanquished; His greeting breathes into them the spirit of tranquillity which is the Holy Spirit. St Cyril tells us that the peace He offers is Himself, because He is peace. Irenaeus comments that by showing them the physical marks on His body, He is showing that it really is His body which has risen. Leo the Great comments that the wounds which brought us healing, also bring it to unbelieving hearts. He is truly both human and divine.

Chrysologus comments on how Jesus sends forth the disciples in love on the great commission. They are not, St Cyril remarks, to follow their own will, but that of the Father. Gregory the Great reminds us that the disciples will face great persecution. Gregory of Nazianzus reminds us that the Lord is preparing them to receive the Spirit at Pentecost. The Spirit is the Son’s to give, and, St Athanasius reminds, He gives them the power to remit sins; the powers He gave them then inhere, St Cyprian reminds us, in His Church through the successors of the Apostles.

Gregory the Great tells us that it was our benefit that St Thomas was not present. The Divine Marcy ordained that he would play the part of so many of us and refuse to believe unless he saw for himself. He proves to the disciples and to us that He really was risen in the flesh. St Gregory Nazianzus sees Thomas as the type for all those who want to believe but need to see. St Athanasius points out that Thomas’ doubt leads to one of the most telling confessions of Christ’s divinity – ‘My Lord, my God’. So although all Thomas sees is the flesh, he confesses the divinity through faith. St Leo asks us to take comfort here, for our faith, too, rests on more than the eyes can see. St Cyril comments on the patience Jesus shows with Thomas, that same patience He shows to us all; and He offers us the comfort that those who believe and yet do not see are also blessed.

St Irenaeus comments that John does not need to write everything, but what he writes here is to combat the heresies he foresaw would arise; we are to believe as Thomas did, that He is risen in the flesh and is truly God. If we believe that, we shall come to eternal life in Him

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

How do we read Scripture?

04 Wednesday Sep 2013

Posted by John Charmley in Anti Catholic, Bible, Early Church, Faith, Marian devotion

≈ 12 Comments

Tags

Catholic Church, Christianity, Marian Devotion, orthodoxy, St. Cyril

assumptionThere is, for those who have not long ago lost interest, a discussion going on between some of us with Bosco about, in essence, how we read Scripture. Bosco insists that because Matthew 13:55-56 uses, in the English translation, ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’ this must mean that Our Lady was not a Virgin. I posted on the brothers and sisters the other day, and don’t want to go over old ground. Instead I want to reflect on something about the way we read Scripture.

St Athanasius, whose 37th Festal letter is usually taken to be the first authoritative statement of the Canon of the NT as we have it, clearly knew his Bible very well; he also spoke the language in which the Bible was written; he also recognised that Mary was a Virgin. So, here’s the thing. Athanasius knew Matthew 13:55-56, and he called the Virgin Mary a Virgin. Was he less informed on these matters than a twenty-first century American like Bosco. Bosco, he points to the verses and says that they prove Mary was not a Virgin; Athanasius saw no contradiction: whom are we to credit?

Athanasius did not make up the idea of a canon or the virginity of Our Lady. He recognised the tradition he inherited, and it saw no incongruity between the two things. That was so before Athanasius, and it has been so since then, and remains so in Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy and parts of Anglicanism and Lutheranism. They believe as the Fathers believed. Where did the Fathers get this from? We can be sure they made nothing up, because in every age there was a rejection of what was not Apostolic. Athanasius risked death many times rather than accept the Arian heresy; in doing so he was part of a long line of Christian teachers who had defended orthodoxy. So these were men always on the look out for heresy.

These same men received and accepted the tradition of the Virginity of Our Lady; they received and accepted the Gospel of Matthew, and they saw no contradiction, even as we (Catholics and Orthodox)  do not.  Then, in the sixteenth century come along some men who claim they know better. From whence did they get this secret knowledge unknown even to St Athanasius? From their own reading of the text they owed, in part of him.

This was, and I think is, a level of arrogance of large proportions. To claim, on your own authority that a text the Church has always received, is incompatible with the text which the same Church received is breathtaking in the claim being made. That claim is no more and no less than one knows, on the basis of one’s own intellect, better than the men who received Scripture, and better than the Church which has taught the Virginity of Our Lady as far back as any can record.

But arrogance does not stop there. It insists, again on no direct evidence, that men who suffered martyrdom to defend the purity of the faith, simply adopted goddess-worship? Really, men who were willing to suffer death for Christ just woke up one day and coopted Diana worship? Why and how?  St Cyril explained the importance of the Theotokos, and his hymn to the Theotokos is a beautiful expression of how the early church felt about her. It is how the Catholic and the Orthodox Church still feel. In nowhere more than this area do some Protestants show their separation from that Church.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

Who was Jesus? (Part 2)

26 Monday Aug 2013

Posted by John Charmley in Bible, Early Church, Faith, Salvation

≈ 25 Comments

Tags

Christianity, Salvation, st cyril of alexandria, St. Cyril

6_27_cyril“Our Lord Jesus Christ is, to be sure, the only begotten Son of God, his Word made man and made flesh, not to be divided into two sons, but that he was ineffably begotten from God before all time and in recent periods of time he was according to the flesh from a woman, so that his person is one also. In this way we know that the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God, because he is God and man at the same time, that he who is without change and without confusion is the only-begotten, is incarnate and made man, and moreover that he was able to suffer according to the nature of his humanity. We know that it is impossible for him to suffer according to the nature of his divinity, and that he did suffer in his own flesh according the Scriptures. …

… Accordingly we confess that the only-begotten Son of God is perfect God, consubstantial to the Father according to divinity, and that the same Son is consubstantial to us according to humanity. For there was a union of two natures. Wherefore, we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord”

[Cyril of Alexandria, Letters 51-110, letters 59, 97]

This was St Cyril’s answer to the question: ‘Who is Jesus?’

Apollinarius had tried to solve the problem of how Jesus could have been human and divine by positing the idea that the Logos had effectively been the soul of the human called Jesus. But, if Christ had not assumed human flesh, how could He have redeemed it? That was why Cyril could not accept the Appollinarian answer; but in turn he had to explain how a human and a  divine nature could co-exist; did that mean there were in effect ‘two Sons’ – one consubstantial with God, the other of whom was man?

Cyril’s enemies would accuse him of ‘Appolinarianism’ because he accepted the view that the flesh and the Logos formed ‘one natural reality’ (Mia Physis), but as he himself once commented: ‘Not everything a heretic says is necessarily heretical’. Appolinarius had not invented the idea that there was a single subject in the Incarnate Lord, that was part of the Alexandrian inheritance. The Word enfleshed divinized our flesh: as Athanasius had famously remarked: ‘He became man so that man might become God‘. For Cyril, as for Athanasius, this was central. Why had it been necessary for the Word to become man at all? The only answer was that it was necessary for the ontological reconstruction of our human nature which had fallen into existential decay as a result of its alienation from God. What had not been assumed could not have been healed.

In the case of the Incarnation, the Logos appropriates human nature, which thereby becomes the human nature of the one who is God, and is thereby raised to glory; it becomes the primary way in which the Logos has chosen to effect the regeneration of the human race; it becomes an instrument of the Divine energy. The power of the Logos heals and transforms the fallibility of our human nature which He has assumed – and we see the signs of this in the miraculous healings which Jesus performed.

There is only one personal reality in the Incarnate Lord; that is the Divine Logos who has made a human nature His own. He is now the Logos Incarnate, and whilst enfleshed subject to all the limitations of the human conditions – like unto us in all things save sin. What Christ has deified in His own flesh, he deifies in the rest of us by Grace. This restores to mankind the union with God lost at the Fall. What Christ was and did naturally, he transfers to us as an inheritance.

This, for Cyril. is why the elements of the Eucharist, which are undoubtedly material – bread and wine – become divine and and worthy of adoration during the Liturgy. The physical interchange that occurs when the communicant receives the Lord under the species of bread and wine is part of the metamorphosis, the theosis – healing and salvation are given at the eucharistic Feast.

St Cyril saw no need to try to set this out with semantic clarity and logic; quite the opposite. To attempt to do that would be to reduce the ineffable mystery of our salvation and our God to something merely human; it would be to negate the Incarnation and its purpose. For Cyril. John 1:14 is the key text – and for him the whole of Scripture is the Word speaking to us: first through the prophets and the psalms, and through the patriarchs from Abraham onwards; and then finally through the self-revelation of the Incarnation and the writings of the Apostles.

This is who Jesus is, the Enfleshed Word of God. In all of that there is a mystery, not in the sense of something obscure, but in the sense of something far beyond us. That is why the Liturgy matters, for it is in it, and in praise and worship and prayer, and above all at the Eucharistic feast that we encounter the Risen Lord.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

Gospel: 18th Sunday in OT

04 Sunday Aug 2013

Posted by John Charmley in Bible, Commentaries, Early Church, Faith

≈ 12 Comments

Tags

Catholic Church, Christianity, St Leo, St. Cyril

Luke 12:13-21

rembrandt_rich_man250x215

St Ambrose reminds us that we should be seeking an inheritance of immortality, not one of money; nor should one tempt the Lord by asking Him to arbitrate in such matters.  Augustine reminds us that Christ has come to gather, and not to divide; greed and avarice divide, charity and love unite. St Cyril tells us that here Jesus shows that covetousness is pitfall of the devil’s; it is a form of idolatry, no better than the worship of sticks and stones; it is a snare which drags our souls down to hell.

St Cyril points out that, surrounded by great riches with which he might do much good, he looks neither to the future nor to God, but to himself and his own greed; he does not think about the poor and the needy, nor does he sympathise with them and their suffering and attempt, as he could, to help them. He hoards these good things to himself, in the same way the proud Pharisees hoarded the teaching of God.  St Augustine makes a similar point, that, instead of helping the poor, he helped himself; so where will he be when the Lords says “I was hungry and you did not give me to eat”? [Matthew 25:42].

St Leo the Great [Sermon 90] says:

But because the snares of the devil are not at rest even in such a state of things, most rightly at certain seasons of the year the renewal of our vigour is provided for: and now in particular, when one who is greedy of present good might boast himself over the clemency of the weather and the fertility of the land, and having stored his crops in great barns, might say to his soul, you have much goods, eat and drink, let him take heed to the rebuke of the Divine voice, and hear it saying, You fool, this night they require your soul of you, and the things which you have prepared, whose shall they beLuke 12:19-20? This should be the wise man’s most anxious consideration, in order that, as the days of this life are short and its span uncertain, death may never come upon him unawares, and that knowing himself mortal he may meet his end fully prepared. 

Ambrose reminds us that only virtue and charity follow us after our death. St Cyril adds that the man who is rich toward God, and thus blessed, is not one who values money, but one who loves virtue; such a man’s hand is open and generous to the poor, and by his charity, such a man gathers up treasure in Heaven. It is God who gives all good things, and we should imitate him if we are fortunate enough to be endowed with riches. But riches wrongly used are a snare.

The Church Fathers are unanimous in seeing this passage in two ways: a warning to the rich; and a call to charity and generosity on their part. They did not live in a world where anyone could expect the State to pick up the bill, or where one could out-source charity; every man who had more than he needed for his daily bread was adjured to share of his substance with those less fortunate. The links to the Matthean passages where Jesus casts himself in the place of the poor, are strong with the Fathers.  Building up wealth for oneself is literally pointless; indeed, in as far as it hardens one’s heart to the poor, it is harmful to one’s soul.

C451 

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

Chalcedon

14 Sunday Apr 2013

Posted by John Charmley in Early Church, Faith, Pope

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Christianity, controversy, history, orthodoxy, St Leo, St. Cyril

1110leo24Thanks to Liverpool University Press we can read the full proceedings of the Council of Chalcedon.  The Council opened on 8 October, and its first job was to review what had happened at Ephesus in 449. It did so and it condemned Dioscorus and exiled him. At a stroke, Alexandria’s empire-building had collapsed.

The central part of the Council was the consideration of the Tome of Pope Leo. It is sometimes presented as though it were a synthesis of the Alexadrian and Antiochene views, and the Oriental Orthodox, the descendants of those who rejected Chalcedon, tend to make noises anout Leo’s Latin not being as flxible as the Greek. Both views give Leo little credit for a formula which has endured to this day.

Leo was the first Pope to be a considerable theologian, and we see a line of thinking in his Tome which reveals that. He emphasises that the Son is co-eternal with the Father (a decisive rejection of Nestorius) and that although the Son emptied Himself by condescending to take take on our humanity, He never ceased to be God.  Like Cyril, he wrote about two natures but one person in the Incarnation; the two natures retained their distinctiveness (there was no sort of hybrid monster) but acted together ‘in communion’ in the one person of Jesus Christ. The Divine nature did those things appropriate to it (such as the miracles) whilst the human nature did likewise (like dying).

The fact that there was one perosn meant that each nature could be spoken about in terms of the other in a sharing of qualities or an interchange of properties – a communicatio idiomatum (communion of idioms). Thus one could say that the Son of Man came down from heaven and took flesh from the Virgin Mary.

It is worth giving the wording:

We, then, following the holy Fathers, all with one consent, teach men to confess one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, the same perfect in Godhead and also perfect in manhood; truly God and truly man, of a reasonable soul and body; consubstantial with us according to the manhood; in all things like unto us, without sin; begotten before all ages of the Father according to the Godhead, and in these latter days, for us and for our salvation, born of the virgin Mary, the mother of God, according to the manhood; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, to be acknowledged in two natures, inconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably; the distinction of natures being by no means taken away by the union, but rather the property of each nature being preserved, and concurring in one Person and one Subsistence, not parted or divided into two persons, but one and the same Son, and only begotten, God the Word, the Lord Jesus Christ, as the prophets from the beginning have declared concerning him, and the Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the Creed of the holy Fathers has handed down to us.

The Creed is in line with the Nicene Creed, and affirms the pre-esistence of Christ and His equality with Father; it also proclaims His perfect humanity and divinity.  It is important to note that the assembled bishops pored over Leo’s Tome, but once it was clear to them that Leo agreed with Cyril, they were happy to declare ‘Peter speaks through Leo.‘

I have offered my own explanation of what Leo claimed, as has Jessica, but what matters here is that for the majority, agreement had finally been reached on the vexed question of the nature of Christ.  However, several questions remain to be answered, and it is to those we must turn now.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

The road to Chalcedon I

12 Friday Apr 2013

Posted by John Charmley in Early Church, Faith, Marian devotion

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

choices, Christianity, controversy, history, St. Cyril

6_27_cyrilIn the summer of 451, the Emperor Theodosius II fell off his horse and was fatally injured. History is always being changed by something or other, but here things shifted decisively for the early Church. His sister, the Empress Pulcheria, who had been regent before his reign, took on the role again and married a man called Marcian. She wanted the question which has arisen as part of the Council of Ephesus – that of the nature of the union in Christ – settled. She had been a great supporter of Cyril of Alexandria, vowed herself to perptual virginity (Marcian had to accept that as part of the marriage contract), Pulcheria had a deep veneration for the Theotokos and the continuign disputes within the church over Christological questions were, she thought, divisive and should be solved.

We have seen in this series that whilst previous Councils had settled some of the questions which had arisen – the fact of the Trinity and its Divine unity, the pre-existence of the Word and His equality with the Father, and the equality of the Spirit with the Father and the Son, and the fact that Christ was human and divine – the issue of how to talk about the two natures of Christ had not been pinned down.  The language of Antioch ended up making Him sound like a very special human being; some of the language coming out of Alexandria made Him sound like a demi-God.

It had taken time after Ephesus for Antioch and Alexandria to come back in to communion with each other. In 433 John of Antioch and Cyril of Alexandria had agreed on a ‘Formula of Union’:

We confess, then, our lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God perfect God and perfect man of a rational soul and a body, begotten before all ages from the Father in his godhead, the same in the last days, for us and for our salvation, born of Mary the virgin, according to his humanity, one and the same consubstantial with the Father in godhead and consubstantial with us in humanity, for a union of two natures took place. Therefore we confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. According to this understanding of the unconfused union, we confess the holy virgin to be the mother of God because God the Word took flesh and became man and from his very conception united to himself the temple he took from her. As to the evangelical and apostolic expressions about the Lord, we know that theologians treat some in common as of one person and distinguish others as of two natures, and interpret the god-befitting ones in connection with the godhead of Christ and the lowly ones with his humanity.

It affirmed ‘two natures’ but stressed union and spoke of ‘one person’, as well as Mary as Theotokos.

There are those, amongst whom I number myself, who think Cyril realised that he had, in his zeal, gone too far at Ephesus, and that whilst never regretting seeing of Nestorius, was unhappy to have alienated John of Antioch and that whole tradition. At any rate, whatever his motive, Cyril agreed to the formula and, had things remained there, there would have been no need for another Council; but they did not, and after Cyril’s death in 444, matters deteriorated in a serious way. It is to that we turn next.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

The Good Thief

03 Wednesday Apr 2013

Posted by John Charmley in Early Church, Faith

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

Christianity, sermons, St. Cyril

TheophilSome time ago I did a series on the sermon on the Good Thief delivered by Theophilus of Alexandria, the uncle and predecessor of St Cyril of Alexandria. It was the the best translation then available, which isn’t saying much. The Patristics and Copic scholar, Alain Sucui was kind enough to comment on it. I am happy to report that the new translation he was working on at that time has now appeared here. I can’t recommend it too highly, it is a piece of very high-class scholarship, and if Dr Sucui does not mind, I will just quote a small part here:

“I have seen the entire creation established and arranged in the image
(prÒswpon) of the Cross (staurÒj).”
15. The hymn of the Cross

(The Cross) is the one who makes a man young (f. 146vo) again after he grows old, signs him through the holy baptism (b£ptisma) by marking him with the oil and Christ’s seal (sfrag…j).52

The Cross (staurÒj) purifi es (kaqar…zein) the man that pursues the energies
(™nšrgeia) cast forth from it.


The Cross (staurÒj) is the holy mystery (must»rion). For (g£r) when (Ótan)
they seal (sfrag…zein) the bread and the chalice (pot»rion) on the holy
table (tr£peza) and they accomplish (™pitele‹n) them, it is not anymore
(oÙk œti) bread nor wine but (¢ll£) it is holy body (sîma) and blood.


The Cross (staurÒj) is the consolation of those who are in distress (lÚph)
because of their sins.


The Cross (staurÒj) is the straight way, not leading astray those who walk
on it when (Ótan) they are estranged.


The Cross (staurÒj) is the high tower (pÚrgoj) which receives those who
are running to it.


The Cross (staurÒj) is the ladder which raises man to the sky.


The Cross (staurÒj) is the garment which the Christians (cristianÒj) are
wearing (fore‹n).


The Cross (staurÒj) is the helper (bohqÒj) of the poor and the help (bo»qeia)
for those who are distressed.

Do go and read the whole thing, even if the scholarly apparatus is of no interest, the translation is a marvellous one and well worth reading

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...

St. Cyril, St. John and Salvation (5)

31 Tuesday Jul 2012

Posted by John Charmley in Early Church, Faith

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

St. Cyril, theosis

As we can see from this brief survey of St. Cyril’s theology, the Incarnation was at the heart of all his thinking. The Incarnate Word unites our nature with that of God as a salvific act; the power of the one heals and transforms the marred nature of the other. It was essential to this scheme that the Word suffered, albeit ‘impassibly’. There is only one personal reality in the Incarnate Lord, and that subject is the divine Word who has made a human nature His own; the Word has not simply adopted a body, He has taken on a whole human life; He is ‘the Word enfleshed.’ [McGuckin, p. 186.] The whole point of the Incarnation is that through it, our fallen nature is raised to new heights. Christ’s flesh is, indeed, ‘life-giving’. If His flesh were not divine flesh it could not heal us, but if it were not also flesh, we could not receive its healing at the Eucharistic Feast. What Christ deifies in his own flesh, he deifies through Grace in mankind.

This was the position St. Cyril enunciated against the heresies from Constantinople and Antioch, and he had found it years before in his commentary on St. John 1:11-13, where he realised that the Incarnation had three aims: to condemn sin in the flesh; to overcome death by his death; and to make us children of God by which we receive a regeneration in the Spirit. [ Farag, p. 111.] As Professor Keating so aptly remarks: ‘There is something of grandeur, and even beauty, in Cyril’s conception of our share in the life of the triune God.’ Keating, Divine Life, p. 205.]

It has long been held in parts of the Protestant tradition that patristic exegesis is, in fact, eisegesis – that is a misreading of the Bible. Despite the fact that the Fathers helped establish what was, and was not, the canon of Holy Scripture, we are asked to believe that their inspiration failed them when they came to examine the same texts. This is not the Orthodox understanding, for it separates text, meaning and action. St. Cyril was not just a theologian; he was a bishop and pastor, a great teacher who held responsibility before God for his flock. He wrote not for the academic journal, but for the salvation of souls. Everything he confessed he derived from Scripture and from the Alexandrian Holy Tradition of which it is such an important part, and in setting his own mark upon that tradition he is, indeed, ‘the Seal of the Fathers.’

St. Cyril wrote not for himself, nor for posterity, but as a pastor. He was the servant of that shepherd who had died for His sheep; he was willing to do the same. Every word he wrote was for the salvation of souls. We should be fortunate had we his like when one such is much-needed.

Peace and Edification to the people of God

I have promised Jess that I will post more from time to time, but for the moment, other matters press.

Share this:

  • Tweet

Like this:

Like Loading...
← Older posts

AATW writers

  • audremyers
    • Internet
    • Context
  • cath.anon
    • What Brought You to Faith?
    • 2021: Year of Hope
  • John Charmley
    • The Epiphany
    • The Magi
  • No Man's Land
    • Crowns of Glory and Honor
    • Monkeys and Mud: Evolution, Origins, and Ancestors (Part II)
  • Geoffrey RS Sales
    • Material world
    • Christianity and religion
  • JessicaHoff
    • How unbelievable?
    • How not to disagree
  • Neo
    • Christmas Eve Almost Friends
    • None Dare Call it Apostasy
  • Nicholas
    • 25th January: The Conversion of Saint Paul
    • Friday Thoughts
  • orthodoxgirl99
    • Veiling, a disappearing reverence
  • Patrick E. Devens
    • Vatican II…Reforming Council or Large Mistake?
    • The Origins of the Authority of the Pope (Part 2)
  • RichardM
    • Battle Lines? Yes, but remember that the battle is already won
  • Rob
    • The Road to Emmaus
    • The Idolatry of Religion
  • Snoop's Scoop
    • In the fight that matters; all are called to be part of the Greatest Generation
    • Should we fear being complicit to sin
  • Struans
    • Being Catholic
    • Merry Christmas Everyone
  • theclassicalmusicianguy
    • The war on charismatics
    • The problem with Protestantism

Categories

Recent Posts

  • 25th January: The Conversion of Saint Paul Tuesday, 25 January 2022
  • The Epiphany Thursday, 6 January 2022
  • The Magi Wednesday, 5 January 2022
  • Christmas Eve Almost Friends Friday, 24 December 2021
  • The undiscovered ends? Sunday, 1 August 2021
  • Atque et vale Friday, 30 July 2021
  • None Dare Call it Apostasy Monday, 3 May 2021
  • The ‘Good thief’ and us Saturday, 3 April 2021
  • Good? Friday Friday, 2 April 2021
  • And so, to the Garden Thursday, 1 April 2021

Top Posts & Pages

  • Raising Lazarus: the view from the Church Fathers
  • Revisiting the Trinity
  • 17 things I Learned as a Catholic Psychotherapist
  • Reflections on church history

Archives

Blogs I Follow

  • The Bell Society
  • ViaMedia.News
  • Sundry Times Too
  • grahart
  • John Ager's Home on the Web!
  • ... because God is love
  • sharedconversations
  • walkonthebeachblog
  • The Urban Monastery
  • His Light Material
  • The Authenticity of Grief
  • All Along the Watchtower
  • Classically Christian
  • Norfolk Tales, Myths & More!
  • On The Ruin Of Britain
  • The Beeton Ideal
  • KungFuPreacherMan
  • Revd Alice Watson
  • All Things Lawful And Honest
  • The Tory Socialist
  • Liturgical Poetry
  • Contemplation in the shadow of a carpark
  • Gavin Ashenden
  • Ahavaha
  • On This Rock Apologetics
  • sheisredeemedblog
  • Quodcumque - Serious Christianity
  • ignatius his conclave
  • Nick Cohen: Writing from London
  • Ratiocinativa
  • Grace sent Justice bound
  • Eccles is saved
  • Elizaphanian
  • News for Catholics
  • Annie
  • Dominus Mihi Adjutor
  • christeeleisonblog.wordpress.com/
  • Malcolm Guite
  • Bishop's Encyclopedia of Religion, Society and Philosophy
  • LIVING GOD
  • tiberjudy
  • maggi dawn
  • thoughtfullydetached
  • A Tribe Called Anglican
  • Living Eucharist
  • The Liturgical Theologian
  • Tales from the Valley
  • iconismus
  • Men Are Like Wine
  • Acts of the Apostasy

Blog Stats

  • 454,360 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 8,576 other subscribers

Meta

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Blog at WordPress.com.

The Bell Society

Justice for Bishop George Bell of Chichester - Seeking Truth, Unity and Peace

ViaMedia.News

Rediscovering the Middle Ground

Sundry Times Too

a scrap book of words and pictures

grahart

reflections, links and stories.

John Ager's Home on the Web!

reflecting my eclectic (and sometimes erratic) life

... because God is love

wondering, learning, exploring

sharedconversations

Reflecting on sexuality and gender identity in the Church of England

walkonthebeachblog

The Urban Monastery

Work and Prayer

His Light Material

Reflections, comment, explorations on faith, life, church, minstry & meaning.

The Authenticity of Grief

Mental health & loss in the Church

All Along the Watchtower

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you ... John 13:34

Classically Christian

ancient, medieval, byzantine, anglican

Norfolk Tales, Myths & More!

Stories From Norfolk and Beyond - Be They Past, Present, Fact, Fiction, Mythological, Legend or Folklore.

On The Ruin Of Britain

Miscellanies on Religion and Public life

The Beeton Ideal

Gender, Family and Religious History in the Modern Era

KungFuPreacherMan

Faith, life and kick-ass moves

Revd Alice Watson

More beautiful than the honey locust tree are the words of the Lord - Mary Oliver

All Things Lawful And Honest

A blog pertaining to the future of the Church

The Tory Socialist

Blue Labour meets Disraelite Tory meets High Church Socialist

Liturgical Poetry

Poems from life and the church year

Contemplation in the shadow of a carpark

Contmplations for beginners

Gavin Ashenden

Ahavaha

On This Rock Apologetics

The Catholic Faith Defended

sheisredeemedblog

To bring identity and power back to the voice of women

Quodcumque - Serious Christianity

“Whatever you do, do it with your whole heart.” ( Colossians 3: 23 ) - The blog of Father Richard Peers SMMS, Director of Education for the Diocese of Liverpool

ignatius his conclave

Nick Cohen: Writing from London

Journalism from London.

Ratiocinativa

Mining the collective unconscious

Grace sent Justice bound

“Love recognizes no barriers. It jumps hurdles, leaps fences, penetrates walls to arrive at its destination full of hope.” — Maya Angelou

Eccles is saved

A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you ... John 13:34

Elizaphanian

“I come not from Heaven, but from Essex.”

News for Catholics

Annie

Blessed be God forever.

Dominus Mihi Adjutor

A Monk on the Mission

christeeleisonblog.wordpress.com/

“The harvest is abundant but the laborers are few" Luke 10:2

Malcolm Guite

Blog for poet and singer-songwriter Malcolm Guite

Bishop's Encyclopedia of Religion, Society and Philosophy

The Site of James Bishop (CBC, TESOL, Psych., BTh, Hon., MA., PhD candidate)

LIVING GOD

Reflections from the Dean of Southwark

tiberjudy

Happy. Southern. Catholic.

maggi dawn

thoughtfullydetached

A Tribe Called Anglican

"...a fellowship, within the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church..."

Living Eucharist

A daily blog to deepen our participation in Mass

The Liturgical Theologian

legem credendi lex statuat supplicandi

Tales from the Valley

"Not all those who wander are lost"- J.R.R. Tolkien

iconismus

Pictures by Catherine Young

Men Are Like Wine

Acts of the Apostasy

  • Follow Following
    • All Along the Watchtower
    • Join 2,221 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • All Along the Watchtower
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

You must be logged in to post a comment.

    %d bloggers like this: