CYRIL
594
CYRIL
Rome, Alexandria, and Constantinople was read, and
some testimonies were read from earlier writers to
show the errors of Nestorius. The second letter of
Cyril to Nestorius was approved by all the bishops.
The reply of Nestorius was condemned. No discus-
sion took place. The letter of Cyril and the ten
anathematizations raised no comment. All was con-
cluded at one sitting. The council declared that it
was "of necessity impelled" by the canons and by
the letter of Celestine to declare Nestorius deposed
and excommunicated. The papal legates, who had
been detained by bad weather, arrived on the 10th of
July, and they solemnly confirmed the sentence by
the authority of St. Peter, for the refusal of Nestorius
to appear had made useless the permission which they
brought from the pope to grant him forgiveness if he
should repent. But meanwhile John of Antioch and
his party had arrived on the 26th or 27th of June.
They formed themselves into a rival council of forty-
three bishops, and deposed Memnon, Bishop of
Ephesus, and St. Cyril, accusing the latter of ApoUi-
narianism and even of Eunomianism. Both parties
now appealed to the emperor, who took the amazing
decision of sending a count to treat Nestorius, Cyril,
and Memnon as being all three lawfully deposed.
They were kept in close custody; but eventually the
emperor took the orthodox view, though he dissolved
the council ; Cyril was allowed to return to his diocese,
and Nestorius went into retirement at Antioch. Later
he was banished to the Great Oasis of Egypt.
Meanwhile Pope Celestine was dead. His successor, St. Sixtus III, confirmed the council and attempted to get John of Antioch to anathematize Nestorius. For some time the strongest opponent of Cyril was Theo- doret, but eventually he approved a letter of Cyril to Acacius of Berrhcea. John sent Paul, Bishop of Emesa, as his plenipotentiary to Alexandria, and he patched up a reconciliation with Cyril. Though Theodoret still refused to renounce the tlefence of Nestorius, John did so, and Cyril declared his joy in a letter to John. Isidore of Pelusium was now afraid that the impulsive Cyril might have yielded too much (Ep. i, 334). Tlie great patriarch composed many further treatises, dogmatic letters, and sermons. He died on the 9th or the 27th of June, 444, after an episcopate of nearly thirty- two years.
St. Cyril as a Theologian. — The principal fame of St. Cyril rests upon his defence of Catholic doctrine against Nestorius. That heretic was undoubtedly confused and uncertain. He wished, against Apol- linarius, to teach that Christ was perfect man, and he took the denial of a human personality in Our Lord to imply an Apollinarian incompleteness in His Human Nature. The union of the human and Divine natures was therefore to Nestorius an unspeakably close junction, but not a union in one hypostasis. St. Cyril taught the personal, or hijpostatic, union in the plainest terms; and when his writings are surveyed as a whole, it becomes certain that he always held the true view, that the one Christ has two perfect and distinct natures. Divine and human. But he would not admit two 0i/cr6is in Christ, because he took (pi<ns to imply not merely a nature but a subsistent (i. e. personal) nature. His opponents misrepresented him as teaching that the Divine natiue suffered, because he rightly taught that the Divine person suffered, in His human nature; and he wjis constantly accused of Apollinarianism. On the other hand, after his death Monophysitism was founded upon a misinterpretation of his teaching. Especially unfortunate was the formula "one nature incarnate of God the Word" (fila <t>v<n$ ToO QeoS A6701; ffeffapKu/jJfri), which he took from a treatise on the Incarnation which he believed to be by his great predecessor St. Athanasius. By this phrase he intended simply to emphasize against Nestorius the unity of Christ's Person; but the words in fact expressed equally the single Nature
taught by Eutyches and by his own successor Dios-
curus. He brings out admirably the necessity of the
full doctrine of the union of our humanity to God, to
explain the scheme of the redemption of man. He
argues that the flesh of Christ is truly the flesh of God,
in that it is life-giving in the Holy Eucharist. In the
richness and depth of his philosophical and devotional
treatment of the Incarnation we recognize the disciple
of Athanasius. But the precision of his language, and
perhaps of his thought also, is very far behind that
which St. Leo developed a few years afterCyril's death.
Cyril was a man of great courage and force of char- acter. We can often discern that his natural vehem- ence was repressed and schooled, and he listened with humility to the severe admonitions of his master and adviser, St. Isidore. As a theologian, he is one of the great writers and thinkers of early times. Yet the troubles which arose out of the Council of Ephesus were due to his impulsive action; more patience and diplomacy might possibly even have prevented the vast Nestorian sect from arising at all. In spite of his own linn grasp of the truth, the whole of his patriarchate fell away, a few years after his time, into a heresy based on his writings, and could never be regained to the Catholic Faith. But he has always been greatly venerated in the Church. His letters, especially the second letter to Nestorius, were not only ajiproved by the Council of Ephesus, but by many subsequent councils, and have frequently been appealed to as tests of orthodoxy. In the East he was always honoured as one of the greatest of the Doctors. His M;iss and Office as a Doctor of the Church were approved by Leo XIII in 1883.
His W' RiTiNGS. — The exegetical works of St. Cyril are very numerous The seventeen books " On Adora- tion in Spirit and in Truth " are an exposition of the typical and spiritual nature of the Old Law. The V\aiftvpa or "brilliant". Commentaries on the Penta- teuch are of the same nature. Long explanations of Isaias and of the minor Prophets give a mystical in- terpretation after the Alexandrine manner. Only fragments are extant of other works on the Old Testa- ment, as well as of expositions of Matthew, Luke, and some of the Epistles, but of that of St. Luke much is preserved in a Syriac version. Of St. Cyril's sermons and letters the most interesting are those which con- cern the Nestorian controversy. Of a great apolo- getic work in twenty books against Julian the Apostate ten books remain. Among his theological treatises we have two large works and one small one on the Holy Trinity, and a number of treatises and tracts be- longing to the Nestorian controversy.
The first collected edition of St. Cyril's works was by J. Aubert, 7 vols., Paris, 1638; several earlier edi- tions of some portions in Latin only are enumerated by Fabricius. Cardinal Mai atlded more material in the second and third volumes of his " Bibliotheca nova Patrum", II-III, 1852; this is incorporated, together with much matter from the Catenae published by Ghislerius (1633), Corderius, Possinus, and Cramer (1838), in Migne's reprint of Aubert's edition (P. G., LXVIII-LXXVII, Paris, 1864). Better editions of single works include P. E. Pusey, "Cyrilli Alex. Epis- tol:E tres oecumeniciE, libri V c. Ncstorium, XII capi- tum explanatio, XII capitum defensio utraque, scholia de Incarnatione Unigeniti" (Oxford, 1875) ; " De rectd fide ad Imp., de Incarnatione Unig. dialogus, derectd fide ad principi.ssas, de recta fide ad Augustas, quod unus Christus dialogus, apologeticus ad Imp." (Ox- ford, 1877); "Cyrilli Alex. in^XII Prophetas" (Ox- ford, 1868, 2 vols.); "In divi Joannis Evangelium" (Oxford, 1872, 3 vols., including the fragments on the Epistles). "Three Epi.stlrs, with revised text and English translation" (Oxford, 1872); translations in the Oxford "Library of the Fathers "; "Commentary onSt. John", I (1874), II (1885); " Five tomes against Nestorius" (1881); R. Payne Smith, "S. CyrilliAlex.
