Reunion?

Let your Reverence also know that what I have said is supported by all bishops of the East, and all are furious and outraged….

Saint Cyril of Alexandria and the Christological Controversy, John McGuckin

This post will review three writings by Cyril regarding Nestorius. The first, from which the above quote is taken, is from his letter to Pope Celestine (written in 430).

Cyril writes in this letter that he is following the longstanding custom of the churches to communicate with “your Holiness.” By this he could mean the current bishop of Rome, who has been seated for about eight years at this time, or perhaps he is writing of the custom to write to the bishop of Rome.

…[Nestorius] soon began to speak outlandish things, devoid of sense … we were not able to have communion with anyone who thought or preached such things … I exhorted him by letters to abstain from such evil opinions. It was to no avail.

A bishop by the name of Dorotheus, during the liturgy and while Nestorius was seated on the throne of the church of Constantinople, rose to his feet and said…

“If any man says that Mary was the Mother of God, let him be anathema.”

Many people then walked out, with the result that many now stay away from the liturgy.

He has anathemtised, in so far as he was able, our great and glorious Fathers who said that the holy virgin was the Mother of God, and his anathema has included us too who are still living.

Cyril sees this statement against Mary as blaspheming Christ; in such a case, what shall be done? It is fit to seek Celestine’s views on the matter, for him to make known his opinion.

Next, from the Homily given at Ephesus on St. John’s Day, in the Church of St. John (summer of 431; this at the time of the council).

Listen again as he says: ‘And the Word became flesh.’ (Jn. 1.14). He did not come in a man, but became flesh, that is became man. Yet, when the Only Begotten Word of God became man, he did not cast aside his being as God, for he remained what he was in the assumption of flesh. The nature of the Word is unchangeable and unalterable and cannot undergo even ‘the shadow of a variation’ (Jas. 1.17).

Finally (for this post), from Cyril’s Letter to John of Antioch (The Formula of Reunion, written after Ephesus, in 433)

And so, when my God-beloved brother and fellow-minister the Lord Paul arrived in Alexandria, we were filled with joy, and rightly so, that such a man should act as mediator and had chosen to engage in such burdensome labours.

Cyril comments that he was fully ready and desirous of this endeavor of mediation, as the Lord calls us to peace.

We are now fully convinced that the division between the churches came about altogether needlessly and groundlessly…

This is because Paul came with an “unimpeachable confession of faith” from John and the most religious bishops of Antioch. Here, Cyril inserts the text of this confession, word for word. In it, John states clearly that they believe just as they found in Scripture and also what they received from the Fathers regarding the virgin Mother of God and the incarnation of the Only Begotten Son of God.

We add nothing at all to the faith set out by the holy Fathers at Nicaea….

It suffices for a complete statement of faith, and also is sufficient to denounce every heresy.

And so we confess that Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Only Begotten Son of God is perfect God and perfect Man, of a rational soul and body.

He is consubstantial with the Father according to the Godhead; He is consubstantial with us, according to the manhood.

…for there was a union of the two natures, and this is why we confess One Christ, One Son, One Lord.

And for this reason, the holy virgin is the Mother of God.

There is some language that appears to attack Cyril’s fourth anathema, but McGuckin sees this as an incorrect reading. In any case, Cyril does not respond to this, so he must have also accepted this language.

But this raises an important point: this Formula of Reunion was accepted at the time because each side read it through the lens of their own understanding. In other words, just because Cyril (and McGuckin) understands it as orthodox does not mean that this is also how John (and the other bishops in Antioch) understood it.

Keep in mind the confused and confusing terms that still had not been flushed out at the time. Cyril (and McGuckin, in his view), is interpreting the terms as would work for the orthodox position. This doesn’t mean that John (or, at least, many Antiochene bishops) was using the terms in the same way

Having finished citing John’s confession, Cyril continues: let it be clear that there was no mixture or confusion or blending of God the Word with the flesh. There can be no change in the divine nature of the Word.

So let your Holiness be assured that we follow the opinions of the holy Fathers in all things, especially our blessed and all-renowned Athanasius.

Further, we will not allow one word from Nicaea to be changed. It was not the holy Fathers speaking at Nicaea, but the Spirit of God.

Conclusion

From Cyril’s letter to John:

You know that all kinds of heretics collect arguments for their own errors from the God-inspired scriptures, corrupting to their own evil opinion even the things so rightly said through the Holy Spirit, and thus calling down upon their heads the unquenchable flames.

As I have said often: every heresy has a proof-text. To sort out orthodoxy from heresy is the work of far more than one man or one generation.