St. Cyril of Alexandria. On the Unity of Christ. Translated by John Anthony McGuckin. Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1995.
Translator’s Context
John Anthony McGuckin, the translator, wrote an introduction to the work of Cyril of Alexandira On the Unity of Christ. He is a patristic and Byzantine scholar who has taught at Columbia University and Oxford University. After offering a glimpse of Cyril’s biographical sketch and context, McGuckin introduced Nestorius—a Syrian Monk—who became the Archbishop of Constantinople in 428 AD. Nestorius was the main antagonist in Cyril’s work.
McGuckin notes that Cyril’s theological method involved looking back to the works of the early church fathers. Cyril noted, “We are to define the doctrine of the faith correctly and without error, and are loves of the doctrines of the truth, who follow in the track of faith of our holy fathers” (133). Moreover, the last section of McGuckin’s introduction was Cyril’s Christological doctrine, which explains the analysis of his work.
Cyril of Alexandria
Cyril of Alexandria (375/8–444 AD) was ordained as Lector of Alexandria in 403 AD and later became the Archbishop of Alexandria on October 18, 412. Alexandria was the driving force in church matters in the fourth and fifth centuries because of Athanasius, Theophilus, and Cyril. Through his works, he defended the Christological orthodoxy of hypostatic union. Still, Cyril influenced and “articulated a definitive vision of Christology” in the councils of Ephesus 431 AD, Chalcedon 451 AD, and Constantinople II 553 AD (15).
On the Unity of Christ
Cyril’s writing style in this work was dialectic. It was as if he was talking to someone in an interview or using a Socratic method of searching for the truth. This style is an effective method of reaching an answer through a series of questions and discussions.[1] By doing so, Cyril lays out the intention of his writing in the first part through an introduction of a person named Nestorius, who is also called out in this work as a “serpent” whose “tongue is drunk on venom” (51-52). The Arian-like doctrine of the ‘Two Sons’ was later famed by Nestorius. This doctrine presents that Mary does not deserve the title “Mother of God” (Theotokos) but a “Mother of Christ” (Christotokos). It further implies that Jesus “was not merely God and not merely man, but was God conjoined to man, or man conjoined to God” (18). Further, the doctrine of the Two Sons compromises the unity of the two natures of Christ in one person. Nestorius’ claim was later termed ‘Nestorianism,’ which taught about Christ being divided into two persons—one human and the other divine.[2]
For Cyril, he used the term hypostasis and the proximity of soul and body illustration to make sense of his Christological thought. McGuckin explains Cyril’s thought, “The full deity of the Word unites with a perfect human existence and from the intimacy of that spiritual and material union, the one Christ results” (38). More polemics came after arguing about the necessity of the divine logos, who became flesh. Cyril stated that Christ needed to incarnate in order to take the sins of humanity, die on the cross, and resurrect. Without his humanity, the divine logos cannot atone for sins, die, and resurrect. He further explained, “He took what was ours to be his very own so that we might have what was his” (60). It is salvific in essence.
Along the way, while Cyril argued for the unity of Christ’s hypostatic union, he was also tending to other theological orthodoxies, such as the Virgin birth of Mary, Mary as the Mother of God, and other soteriological matters. For example, the theological and logical inconsistencies of Nestorianism beg the queries of the following: If there are two persons (or Sons or conjoined) of Christ (half God and half Man), then who sits on the right hand of the throne? Who receives the worship of his disciples? Who will return in the second coming? Who died on the cross? Is it the Word, divine logos, or the Christ in human nature? (66-72) This divides Christ into two natures and two persons. Nevertheless, Cyril concluded, “For the Christ is no way divided, but is believed by all those who worship him to be the one and only true Son” (108). Cyril’s thought of the unity of Christ is tied to the economic and redemptive act of the Second Person of Christ. Christ’s ontology expresses his economic will.
Overall, Cyril’s On Unity of Christ proves relevant in today’s pluralistic and postmodern world. The ancient heresy of Nestorianism still has contemporary versions. Reading and comprehending Cyril’s work is very helpful for ministers, theologians, and apologists. His words in this specific work are full of biblical references, which are not only for citations or prooftexts but also with extensive exposition, clarification, and the help of patristic fathers’ comments. Cyril’s theological method contends a long history of early church orthodoxy.
Cyril’s Christological vision had been accomplished in the Chaceldonian Definition in 451 AD. Citing a part of it as a conclusion:
He is one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, and Only Begotten, who is made known in two natures (physeis) united unconfusedly, unchangeably, indivisibly, inseparably. The distinction between the natures (physeis) is not at all destroyed because of the union, but rather the property of each nature (physis) is preserved and concurs together into one person (prosopon) and subsistence (hypostasis). He is not separated or divided into two persons (prosopa), but he is one and the same Son, the Only Begotten, God the Logos, the Lord Jesus Christ.[3]
[1] It can be likened to a digital podcast interview or forum in today’s context.
[2] In his systematic theology, Michael Bird notes, “The problem was that this divided Jesus into two natures and two persons!” Evangelical Theology: A Biblical and Systematic Introduction, Second Edition (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2020), 541.
[3] Donald Fairbairn, “The Chalcedonian Definition,” Credo, February 18, 2021, http://www.credomag.com/2021/02/the-chalcedonian-definition/
John&Paul's Reflections 