|
HOME | GREEK LANGUAGE |
LIBRARIES |
BLOG | HELP | SEARCH | BOOKSTORE | FREEWARE |
|
|
Excerpts from books II and III, Translated by P. E. Pusey.
St Cyril of Alexandria Resources Online and in Print
|
17 Pages
Page 13
And out of the same book.
THEODORE.
"Will they now cease from their shameless contest? will they give over empty contention blushing before the proof of what has been said? for he said, Bringing many sons unto glory. Lo therefore the Apostle co-numbering in the rank of sonship with the rest the man that was assumed not for that he partakes of sonship in like manner as they, but in regard that he assumed in like manner the grace of sonship, the Godhead alone possessing sonship by Nature [5]. For it is certain that the glory of sonship is in him specially beyond others on account of the Unity that he has with Him. Whence in the very word too that means Son, he too is in like manner included. But they [6] argue with us, If ye say two things perfect, we shall surely be also saying Two sons. But lo he is called son too by himself in the divine Scripture, without the Godhead, co-numbered with the rest of men, and we do not say Two sons. But One Son there rightly is in our confession, seeing that division of natures must needs remain and union of person be kept indissoluble."
CYRIL.
Fie the madness! He knew not the manifold depth of the mystery of Christ who has trusted in words so cold and childish. But that he no wise understandeth the force of the Scripture proposed, but leaveth the right way and goes off again to the wicked aim put forth by himself, we forthwith teach. For that before all things his aim is, to want to prove that a mere man is co-seated with the Father and to be worshipped as God by every creature, himself shall come in as witness. For numbering Him with those who are sons by grace and the multitude of men, he argues that the. Godhead of the Word has alone the glory of true sonship, all but finding fault with Him Who for our sakes was pleased to suffer emptying: or haply even casting his own base madness on the disciple who says, And the Word was made flesh. We must know therefore that although he somewhere says one and not rather two sons, casting out altogether him who (as he says) is of the seed of David from being God and Son, he refers the glory of true sonship to only God the Word Who is forth of God the Father. This is nought else (as I said) than not to take on Him the measure of human nature, but utterly to destroy the Economy whereby we were both saved and have passed from death and sin and have laid down the yoke of the devil's oppression.
5. [e] Thus far is cited in the fourth collation of the Council, as from the interpretation of the Epistle to the Hebrews, t. vi. 57 Col., also by Pope Vigilius, t. v. 1341: the whole passage by Leontius of Byzantium, against the Nestorians and Eutychians, with the title, from the same [twelfth] Book, i. e. on the Incarnation. Gall. xii. 694.
6. [f] they, i. e. the Apollinarians, who accused their opponents of holding two sons, see S. Gregory's complaint of it, below p. 363; Theodore's (who was accused of it with real reason), above p. 337, note a and here. The objection itself is stated in S. Athanasius against Apollinarius, 'that two perfects cannot make one whole,' see below p. 363 note b.
Reference address : https://www.elpenor.org/cyril-alexandria/against-theodore-mopsuestia.asp?pg=13
