|
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 15
Yet neither do we say that God the Word Who is con-substantial with the Father, has the beginning of His Being from the flesh of the holy Virgin [9] (for with Him was He ever existent), but rather we know that He was made man as we.
Therefore rightly will the holy Virgin be called by us Mother of God rather than mother of man, since surely 'she hath borne Christ according to the flesh.'
And after more. For when this was put forth for explanation, viz. When He bringeth in the First-Begotten into the world, He saith, And let all the Angels of God worship Him,, he writes again thus,
THEODORE.
"Who then is He Who is brought in into the world and commences His reign, wherefrom it results that He is also worshipped by the Angels? For one will not madly say that God the Word was brought in Who made all things when they were not, bestowing on them through His unspeakable might that they should be."
S. CYRIL.
Callest thou it then madness, to chuse to think aright and to keep in mind the true and right and unmixed Faith? since surely one would say and that deservedly that they are words full of impiety which deny that the Only-Begotten Word of God was brought in by God the Father into the world when He was made man. For He Who by Nature and diversity is superior to all, seeing He is their Creator and is Essentially as greatly superior to them, as is the thing made less than its Maker, entered into the world when He was made a part of it [10], in that He appeared man.
And after a little. But I marvel that the opponent should have written that Jesus too would never have been accounted worthy of connection with God the Word had He not first been rendered spotless through the anointing. For first of all he is openly severing and distinguishing, saying outright Two sons: next let him say, when He was (as he terms it) made spotless and attained connection with God the Word, was it from the very womb, or when, in His thirtieth year, He came to the Jordan and sought John's baptism? If He were holy from the womb, how does he say that He was made holy and not rather that He was so? For in that He is said to be made so, it is quite necessary to understand that He was not what He was made. But if He were holy always, and was not so made in time, how does he say that the SPIRIT soared down upon Him and shewed that He was worthy of the connection and added to Him what He lacked? For this too he has put in his other books. For what was it that was at all lacking to Him unto sanctification from the very womb, yea rather and before Birth after the flesh, to Him Who is holy and spotless and sanctifieth the creature? When therefore he says that Jesus would not have been counted worthy of connection with God the Word except He had first been rendered spotless, he is indicting very many accusations against his empty talk. For first of all he unbecomingly says, been counted worthy: next he severs into another son apart Him Who is forth of the seed of David, whom he shamelessly maintains is called JESUS apart by Himself. Further, to say that He was made spotless, as if at one time He were not so, this too has very great blasphemy. For God the Word united from the very womb to His own flesh was One Son and thus also spotless, the Holy of holies, and giving of His fulness the SPIRIT not only to men but also to the rational powers above and in Heaven.
9. [i] see Nestorius urging that this would follow if the holy Virgin were to be called Mother of God, and S. Cyril's reply in Book 1 § 1 against Nestorius, above pp. 7-10.
10. [k] See above, pp. 52, 92, 189, also p. 324 note c, where S. Athanasius speaks of the great dread on the part of the Apollinarians as to the Incarnate SON being in any way "a part of the world."
Reference address : https://www.elpenor.org/cyril-alexandria/against-theodore-mopsuestia.asp?pg=15
