THE FATHERS

OF THE CHURCH
A NEW TRANSLATION

VOLUME 76
 THE FATHERS
OF THE CHURCH
A NEW TRANSLATION

EDITORIAL BOARD
Thomas P. Halton
The Catholic University of America
Editorial Director
M. Josephine Brennan, I.H.M. Kathleen McVey
Marywood College Princeton Theological Seminary
Elizabeth Clark Daniel J. Sheerin
Duke University University of Notre Dame
Hermigild Dressler, O.F.M. Robert D. Sider
Quincy College Dickinson College
Robert B. Eno, S.S. Michael Slusser
The Catholic University of America Duquesne University
David J. McGonagle
Director
The Catholic University of America Press

FORMER EDITORIAL DIRECTORS

Ludwig Schopp, Roy J. Deferrari, Bernard M. Peebles,
Hermigild Dressler, O.F.M.

Cindy Kahn
Staff Editor
 ST. CYRIL
OF ALEXANDRIA
LETTERS 1-50

Translated by
JOHN I. McENERNEY
Villanova University
Villanova, Pennsylvania

THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA PRESS

Washington, D.C.
 Nihilobstat:
REVEREND MICHAEL SLUSSER, S.T.B., D. Phil.
Censor Deputatus

Imprimatur:
REV. MSGR. RAYMOND BOLAND
Vicar General for the Archdiocese of Washington

February 26, 1985

The nihil obstat and imprimatur are official declarations that a book or
pamphlet is free of doctrinal or moral error. No implication is contained
therein that those who have granted the nihil obstat and the imprimatur
agree with the content, opinions or statements expressed.

Copyright © 1987 by
THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSI1Y OF AMERICA PRESS, INC.
All rights reserved
First paperback reprint 2007

LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

Cyril, Saint, Patriarch of Alexandria, ca. 370-444.

St. Cyril of Alexandria: letters I-50.
(The Fathers of the Church; v. 76)
Bibliography: p.
Includes index.
I. Cyril, Saint, Patriarch of Alexandria, ca. 370-444.
2. Christian saints-Egypt-Alexandria-Correspondence.
I. McEnerney, John 1., 1913- . II. Title.
III. Title: Saint Cyril of Alexandria. IV. Series.
BR60.F3c9I7 1987 270.2'092'4 [B] 85-5692
ISBN (}-SI32-0076-S
ISHN-13 978-0-8132-1513-6 (pbk)
 TO MARY,
MOTHER OF GOD.
 CONTENTS

Acknowledgments ix
Select Bibliography xi
Abbreviations xv

Introduction

Letters
1 Cyril to monks in Egypt 13
2 To Nestorius 34
3 Nestorius to Cyril 37
4 To Nestorius 38
5 Nestorius to Cyril 43
6 and 7 To Nestorius 49
8 To certain accusers 51
9 To a devotee of Nestorius 53
10 To clerics at Constantinople 55
II To Celestine 60
l1a Memorandum to Posidonius, the deacon 65
12 Celestine to Cyril 67
13 To John of Antioch 71
14 To Acacius of Beroea 73
15 Acacius of Beroea to Cyril 75
16 To Juvenal of Jerusalem 78
17 Cyril and his synod to Nestorius 80
18 Cyril and his synod to the clergy and people of
Constantinople 93
19 Cyril and his synod to the monks in Constantinople 96
20 To the clergy and laity of Alexandria 98

VII
Vlll ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

21 To the same 100

22 John of Antioch to Cyril 102
23 To Komarius, Potamon and others 103
24 To the clergy and laity of Alexandria 107
25 To the same 108
26 To the fathers of monks 110
27 To the clergy and laity of Constantinople 112
28 To Theopemptus, Potamon and Daniel 115
29 Alypius to Cyril 117
30 Maximian to Cyril 119
31 To Maximian 121
32 To Juvenal and other legates of the Council sent to
Constantinople 126
33 To Acacius of Beroea 128
34 To Rabbula of Edessa 136
35 John of Antioch to Sixtus, Cyril and Maximian 138
36 Paul of Emesa to Cyril 140
37 To Theognostus and Charmosynus, priests; and to
Leontius, the deacon 142
38 John of Antioch to Cyril 144
39 To John of Antioch 147
40 To Acacius of Melitene 153
41 To Acacius, Bishop of Scythopolis 168
42 To Rufus of Thessalonica 18 3
43 To the same 184
44 To Eulogius, a priest 186
45 To Succensus, Bishop of Diocaesarea 190
46 To the same 198
47 John of Antioch to Cyril 20 5
48 To Dynatus of Nikopolis 20 7
49 To Maximian of Constantinople 210
50 To Valerian, Bishop of Iconium 212
General Index 229
Index of the Holy Scripture 23 2
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

In presenting this translation of the correspondence of Cyril

of Alexandria I wish to thank the libraries of The Catholic
University of America, The University of Pennsylvania, Villa-
nova University, the University of Virginia and the Krauth
Memorial Library of the Lutheran Theological Seminary for
assistance in providing or obtaining the rare books needed.
The translation of Letter 100 by R. Y. Ebied and L. R.
Wickham from Syriac into English has been reprinted by the
permission of the Editors of The Journal of Theological Studies.
The translation from Syriac into English of Letter 101 was
done by Mr. Edward Mathews. The translation from Coptic
into English of Letter 110 was done by Rev. David W. John-
son, S.J.
Gratitude is owed to the former editor of the Fathers of the
Church Rev. Hermigild Dressler, O.F.M. for his scholarly
ad vice and direction, and to Dr.1ohn J. Dillon for his assistance
and friendly advice. The same is due to the many typists who
aided in the work and to Mrs. Mary McEnerney for her en-
couragement and help on the proofs.

John I. McEnerney
Villanova University
Villanova, Penna.

IX
 SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

TEXTS OF THE LETTERS

Bickell, Gustav. Ausgewiihlte Schriften der Syrischen KirchenviUer

Aphraates, Rabulas und Isaak von Ninive. Kempte~: Kosel, 1874.
Bouriant, U. Fragments coptes relatifs au concile d'Ephese. Memoires
publies par les membres de la Mission archeologique fran.;aise au
Caire. Vol. 8. Paris, 1892.
Ebied, R. Y. and L. R. Wickham. A Collection of Unpublished Syriac
Letters of Cyril of Alexandria. CSCO 359· Louvain, 1975·
- - - . "An Unknown Letter of Cyril of Alexandria in Syriac." The
Journal of Theological Studies n.s. 22(197 1): 420-434.
Evetts, B. History of the Patriarchs of the Coptic Church of Alexandria.
Arabic text edited, translated and annotated. PO 1. Paris: Firmin-
Didot, 1907. Pp. 433-436.
Guidi, I. Atti della R. Accademia dei Lincei. Ser. 4, rendiconti 2. Roma,
1886. Pp. 545-547.
Joannou, Pericles-Pierre. Fonti: Fascicolo IX: Discipline generale antique
(IV'-IX's.). Vol. 1, pt. 2: Les canons des Synodes Particuliers. Vol. 2: Les
canons des Peres Crecs. Pontificia commissione per la redazione del
codice di diretto canonico orientale. Grottaferrata (Rome): Tipo-
grafia Italo-Orientale "S. Nilo," 1962-63.
Kraatz, Wilhelm. Koptische Akten zum ephesinischenKonzil vomJahre 43 I.
TU 11.2 n.s. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1904.
Krusch, Bruno. Studien zur christlich-mittelalterlichen Chronologie. Der 84
Jiihrige Ostercyclus und seine Quellen. Leipzig: Von Veit, 1880.
Lebon, Joseph. Scriptores Syri 46. Severi Antiocheni Liber contra impium
Crammaticum. Orationis tertiae pars prior. CSCO 94. Louvain: Dur-
becq, 1952.
Leipoldt, J. Scriptores Coptici. Series 2, vol. 4: Sinuthii archimandritae vita
et opera omnia. CSCO 42. Paris: Poussielgue, 1908.
Migne, J. P. ed. PG 76 and 77. Paris, 1863, 1859.
Overbeck J. J. S. Ephraemi Syri, Rabbulae Edesseni, Balaei Aliorumque
opera selecta. Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1865.
Pusey, P. E. Sancti Patris Nostri Cyrilli Archiepiscopi Alexandrini in
D. Joannis Evangelium. Accedunt fragmenta varia necnon tractatus ad
Tiberium Diaconum duo. Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1872.

Xl
Xll ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

Richard, M. "Deux lettres perdues de Cyrille d'Alexandrie." Studia

Patristica 7.1 (= TU 92). Ed. F. L. Cross. Pp. 274-275. Berlin:
Akademie Verlag, 1966.
Schwartz, Eduard and Straub, John et al. Acta Conciliorum Oecumeni-
corum. Berlin and Leipzig: de Gruyter, 1914-.
Schwartz, Eduard. Codex Vaticanus gr. 1431. Eine antichalkedonische
Sammlung aus der Zeit Kaiser Zenos. Abhandlungen der Bayerischen
Akademie der Wissenschaften philosophisch-philologisch und historische
Klasse. Vol. 32. Abhandlung no. 6. Munich, 1927.

OTHER WORKS

Brown, Raymond E., Fitzmyer, Joseph and Murphy, Roland E., eds.
The Jerome Biblical Commentary. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Pren-
tice Hall, 1968.
Cross, F. L. and Livingstone, E. A., eds. Oxford Dictionary of the Chris-
tian Church. 2d and revised ed. Oxford: At the Clarendon Press,
1983.
Dombart, Bernard and Kalb, Alphonsus, eds. S. Aurelii, De Civitate Dei
Libri XI-XXII. CCL 48. Turnhout: Brepols, 1955.
Du Manoir, Hubert, S. J. Dogme et spiritualite chez saint Cyrille d'Alexan-
drie. Paris: J. Vrin, 1944·
Festugiere, A. J. Ephese et Chalcedoine Actes des Conciles. Paris, 1892.
Garnier, Julian, ed., Basilii Caesareae Cappadociae archiepiscopi opera
omnia quae extant. Paris: Gaume, 1839.
Geerard, Maurice. Clavis Patrum Graecorum. 4 vols. to date. Turnhout:
Brepols, 1974-.
Grillmeier, Aloys, SJ. Christ in Christian Tradition. Vol. 1: From the
Apostolic Age to Chalcedon (45 I). 2d ed. Translated by John Bowden.
Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1975.
Hefele, Charles, J. A History of the Councils of the Church. Edinburgh:
Clark, 1883.
Hughes, Philip. The Church in Crisis. A History of the General Councils
325-I870. Garden City, N.Y.: Hanover House, 1961.
Jones, Charles, W. Bedae Opera de Temporibus. Cambridge, Mass.: The
Medieval Academy of America, 1943.
Kelly, J. N. D. Early Christian Doctrines. 5th ed. London: Adam &
Charles Black, 1977.
Lampe, G. W. H. A Patristic Greek Lexicon. Oxford: At the Clarendon
Press, 1961.
Liebaert, Jacques. La doctrine christologique de saint Cyrille d'Alexandrie
avant la querelle Nestorienne. Lille: Economat, 1951.
Lindsay, W. M., ed. Isidori Hispalensis Etymologiae. Oxford: At the
Clarendon Press, 191 1.
 SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY Xlll

Loofs, Friedrich Arnim. Nestoriana: Die Fragmente des Nestorius gesam-

melt, untersucht und herausgegeben. Halle: Niemeyer, 1905.
Morris, Rudolph, et a1., trans .... Vincent of Lerins: Commonitories etc.
FOTC 7. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University of America
Press, 1949.
Newman, Cardinal John Henry. Tracts. London: Longmans, 1924.
Orchard, Bernard et a1., eds. A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture.
New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1953.
Papadopoulos, Chrysostom. Ho Hagios Kurillos Alexandreias. Alexan-
dria: Patriarchal Press, 1933.
Quasten, Johannes. Patrology. Reprint Westminster, Md.: Christian
Classics, 1983.
Schwartz, Eduard. Christliche undJUdische Ostertafeln. Abhandlungen der
kOniglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen. Philosophisch-
Historische Klasse 8.6 n.s. Berlin: Weidmann, 1905.
Smith, William and Wace, Henry. A Dictionary of Christian Biography,
Literature, Sects and Doctrines During the First Eight Centuries. 4 vols.
London, 1877-87.
Swete, Henry Barclay. The Old Testament in Greek According to the
Septuagint. 3 vols. Cambridge: At the University Press, 1887-94.
Van den Dries, Joseph. The Formula of St. Cyril of Alexandria. Rome,
1937·
Way, Sister Agnes Clare, trans. Saint Basil the Great: Letters Volume 2
(I86-368). FOTC 28. Washington, D.C.: The Catholic University
of America Press, 1955.
Wickham, Lionel R. Cyril of Alexandria. Select Letters. Oxford: At the
Clarendon Press, 1983.
Wiles, Maurice and Santer, Mark. Documents in Early Christian Thought.
New York: Cambridge University Press, 1976.
Wilken, Robert L.Judaism and the Early Christian Mind. New Haven:
Yale University Press, 1971.
Wolfson, H. A. The Philosophy of the Church Fathers. 3d ed. Cambridge,
Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1970.
 ABBREVIATIONS

SERIES PUBLICATIONS

CCL Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina. Turnhout

1953-·
CSCO Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium.
Louvain, 1903-.
CSEL Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum.
Vienna and Leipzig, 1910.
FOTC The Fathers of the Church. New York and
Washington, D.C., 1947-.
PG Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Graeca. Ed.
J. P. Migne. Paris, 1857-1866.
PO Patrologia Orientalis. Ed. R. Graffin and F. Nau.
Paris, 1903-.
TU Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der
Altchristlichen Literatur. Berlin, 1882-.

REFERENCE WORKS AND DICTIONARIES

ACO Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum. Ed. E. Schwartz.

Berlin 1914-.
CCHS A Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture. Ed. B.
Orchard and E. Sutcliff. New York, 1953.
CPG Clavis Patrum Graecorum. Ed. M. Geerard. 4
volumes. Brepols-Turnhout, 1974-83. 3 (1979)·
CPL Clavis Patrum Latinorum. 2d edition. Ed. E. Dekkers
and E. Gaar. Steenbrugge, 1961.
JBC The Jerome Biblical Commentary. Ed. R. E. Brown,
J. A. Fitzmyer, R. E. Murphy. New Jersey, 1968.

xv
XVI ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

LXX
The Old Testament in Greek According to the Septuagint.
Ed. H. B. Swete. 3 vols. Cambridge, 1887-94.
ODCC2 The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. 2d and
revised ed. Ed. F. L. Cross and E. A. Livingstone.
Oxford, 1983.
PGL A Patristic Greek Lexicon. Ed. G. W. H. Lampe. Ox-
ford, 1961.
Quasten Johannes Quasten. Patrology 3: The Golden Age of
Greek Patristic Literature from the Council of Nicaea to
the Council of Chalcedon. Utrecht, 1960. Reprint.
Westminster, Md., 1983.
 INTRODUCTION

YRIL OF ALEXANDRIA was born during the last quarter

of the fourth century and died on June 27, 444. The
first certain date of his life is 403, when he was present,
as he himself says in Letter 75, at the so-called Synod of the
Oak near Chalcedon, at which Theophilus, Patriarch of Alex-
andria, deposed John Chrysostom from the See of Constanti-
nople. After Theophilus died on October 15, 412, Cyril, his
nephew, was elected and was elevated to his place as Patriarch
on October 17. He ruled the See of Alexandria for thirty-two
years.
(2) Most of the correspondence which has come down to us
has to do with the great Christological controversy of the first
half ofthe fifth century.l In the winter of 427 to 428 Nestorius,
a priest of the Church of Antioch and a renowned preacher,
was elevated to the See of Constantinople. In his attacks on
heresy he fell into heresy himself, for he made public state-
ments which meant that there were two persons in Christ and
that the title Theotokos, Mother of God, could not be given to
Mary. His teaching spread and reached Egypt. Some of the
monks subject to Cyril's jurisdiction asked him for direction
and his reply, the famous Letter 1, brought him into the
forefront of the coming battle.
(3) The conflict with Nestorius resulted in him being con-
demned and deposed by the Council of Ephesus in 431, at

1. On the great Christological controversy of the first half of the fifth

century. see especially A. Grillmeier. S. J.. Christ in Christian Tradition. vol. 1:
From the Apostolic Age to Chalcedon (451). 2d ed .• trans. J. Bowden (Atlanta.
1975).414-483.501-539.543-547.559-568; andJ. N. D. Kelly. Early Christ-
ian Doctrines. 5th ed. (London. 1977). 130-343·
2 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

which Cyril presided according to the instructions of Pope

Celestine. The aftermath ofthe council involved Cyril in prob-
lems which cost him personally the loss of a dear friend, John
of Antioch, the disgrace of being imprisoned, the expense of
journeys and ransom, and acrimony which took several years
to eradicate. It gave him, however, an occasion to bring into
play the great mind with which he had been gifted on a topic of
vital interest and importance to the Christian world, and he
prevailed.
(4) When the Council of Ephesus met on June 22, 431, John,
Bishop of Antioch, was not present and evidendy did not want
to be. He was a close friend through a long correspondence
with Cyril, but he and Nestorius, who had come from Antioch
and had been educated there, were compatriots. John arrived
at the city a few days after the council began and setded his
personal quandary by setting up a rival council with his own
bishops. They issued a decree of deposition and of excom-
munication against Cyril and Memnon, the Bishop of Ephesus.
Another member of the hierarchy was also absent. Acacius,
Bishop of Beroea, was a man advanced in age but famous in
the East for his learning. He did not come at all and age was the
excuse. The correspondence with these two bishops is an im-
portant part of the letters. After the council was finally over, it
was Cyril's task to reconcile the bishops who had formed the
Conciliabulum with John and to restore peace in the churches
of the East. His joy in achieving this and in regaining his
friendship with John is seen in Letter 39.
(5) Certain of the letters are famed for their doctrinal con-
tent and accuracy. Letter 4, addressed to Nestorius, has been
called the dogmatic letter and was solemnly approved by the
Council of Ephesus as maintaining the teaching of Nicaea. The
Councils of Chalcedon in 451 and of Constantinople in 553 did
the same. Letter 17, sent to Nestorius by Cyril in the name of
the synod which he held at Alexandria in late 430, has twelve
anathemas at the end. It was added to the Acts of the Council
of Ephesus, although it was not formally approved by the
council. These three, namely Letters 4, 17, and 39 have been
called ecumenical.
(6) Almost the entire collection has to do with the Council of
 INTRODUCTION 3
Ephesus. There are no personal letters on everyday topics at
all. Those which deal with the council fall into three groups.
The first of these extends from Letter 1 to Letter 32, and is
concerned with the beginning of the controversy and the re-
sults of it down to and including the council itself. The second
group extends from Letter 33 to Letter 65, and is concerned
with the question ofJohn of Antioch and his bishops after the
council, until peace was restored in the East. The third group
extends from Letter 66 to Letter 74, and deals with the exten-
sion of the heresy; for, although some of the eastern bishops
agreed to the deposition of N estorius and the anathema
against him, they began to maintain the ideas of Diodore of
Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia, the teachers of Nes-
torius.
(7) There are four administrative letters which Cyril wrote as
Patriarch of Alexandria. These are 77, 78, 79, and 85. Two
letters are prefaces to other works, namely 83 and 84. Letter 81
is against the teachings of Origen, and 82 is against the Mes-
salians or Euchites. Two are out of place in regard to time, 75
and 76, which are to be dated at about 415. They deal with
the restoration of the name of John Chrysostom to the dip-
tychs. Two of the collection deal with the exegesis of passages
in Sacred Scripture, 41, a long discussion of the word
"scapegoat," and 80, an explanation of the punishment of
Cain. This last one, however, is not Cyril's but a partial copy of
Letter 260 of St. Basil.
(8) Certain letters are important for their doctrinal and
theological content. These are 1, 4, 10, 11, 17, 39, 40 , 44, 45,
46, 50 and 55. Some of these are unusually long, almost being
small works in themselves, notably Letter 55.
(9) There is no single volume published which contains in
one place the ancient texts of all of Cyril's letters as transmitted
to us. The translation presented here is the first volume of such
a work. (The Fathers of the Church will publish the remaining
letters in the forthcoming Volume 77.) The largest collection is
in Migne, 88 letters in Greek and Latin.2 This is, for the most

2. J. P. Migne, ed., S.P.N. CyrilliAlexandriaeArchiepiscopiOpera, PG76.385-

390, 1065-1077; 77.9-390 (Paris, 1863, 1859).
4 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

part, a reprint of the Paris edition of 1638 by Joannes Aubert

with added notes. One of these letters, 80, is not by Cyril, as
stated above. Several are spurious. These are: 86 dealing with
the date of Easter, 87 on the same topic and 88, a supposed
letter from Hypatia to Cyril ending with an impossible state-
ment that she wished to become a Nestorian Christian, al-
though she was dead long before N estorius was heretical.
(10) Information regarding the texts and whereabouts of
Cyril's correspondence in Greek, Latin and other languages
increased greatly with Geerard's publication in 1979 of the
third volume of Clavis Patrum Graecorum. In this list of patristic
writings Cyril's first letter is numbered as 5301 and the sequ-
ence continues to 5388. But in this translation these are num-
bered simply as Letters 1-88.3 The notes for each letter contain
the number assigned to it by Geerard for easy cross reference
to the Clavis Patrum Graecorum. Geerard continued his
numbering from 5389 to 5411 to include in his catalogue all
the texts and fragments with their sources. In this translation
Geerard 5389-5410 will be Letters 89-110. Geerard's number
may be found in the notes for each letter. On Geerard 5411 see
below, paragraph 21.
(11) Earlier in this century Schwartz published four letters
previously unknown.4 Lampe numbered these as Letters 89 to
92. Geerard changed the numbers which Lampe assigned.5
Letters 89 and 90 were sent by Cyril to John of Antioch and
from the contents in the sequence of time should come after
Letter 39 not at the end of the collection. Likewise Letter 92
from Cyril to Acacius of Beroea, should come after Letter 32,

3. M. Geerard, ed., Clavis Patrum Graecorum, 4 vols. (Brepols-Turnhout,

1974-),3(1979): 31-55. Geerard places Letters 6 and 7 under his entry 5306
and Letter 11 (a) under his entry 5311. Consequently Letters 6 and 7, 8, 9, 10,
11, and 11(a) and the CPG number (less 5300) assigned to them by Geerard do
not agree. Before Letters 6 and 7 and from Letter 12 onward, the CPG number
(less 5300) and the number of the letter agree.
4. E. Schwartz, ed., Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum (Berlin and Leipzig,
1924-),1.1.7 pp. 140-142, 152-153, 162-163.
5. G. W. H. Lampe, ed., A Patristic Greek Lexicon (Oxford, 1961), xxi.
Geerard numbers Lampe'sep. 89 as 5392, ep. 90 as 5389, ep. 91 as 5390, and ep.
92 as 5393. See Geerard, CPG, 51-52.
 INTRODUCTION 5
and Letter 93 from Cyril to Maximian of Constantinople,
should come after Letter 49.
(12) Schwartz also published the Greek text of Letter 32,
which was previously known from the Latin version in Migne,
and the Greek text of 33, also previously known from the Latin
version in Migne, a fact not noted by Quasten.6
(13) Three letters, published by Schwartz, were inserted as
appendices by the present translator. Appendix 1, from Pope
Sixtus to Cyril, gave him instructions in handling the peace
being arranged between the churches and approved Cyril's
actions during the reign of Pope Celestine, whom Sixtus had
recently succeeded. Chronologically this should come after
Letter 32. Appendix 2, from John of Antioch to Cyril, should
follow, just as Appendix 3, also from John of Antioch should
come after Letter 35. These, although not written by Cyril,
show how intensely the Pope was interested in religious affairs
in the East and how much John of Antioch was trying to
cooperate in the attainment of peace.
(14) The strangest document in the corpus of Cyril's corre-
spondence is Letter 96, a breve or catalogue of treasures dis-
patched from Alexandria to Constantinople as bribes to influ-
ence the corrupt imperial court. It is so detailed that its genu-
ine purport can scarcely be denied. Such actions, shocking as
they are, seem to have become a custom in the reign of
Theodosius II, who succeeded his father in 408 at the age of
seven years and remained in power until 450. How this enor-
mous number of gifts was brought to the capital is an un-
answered question. The catalogue becomes more of a reality in
the light of Appendix 4, a letter by Epiphanius, archdeacon
and companion to Cyril and to Maximian, Bishop of Constan-
tinople, which should be an introduction to Letter 96. The
purpose of the bribes was to help in obtaining a decree of the
emperor against Nestorius who had been condemned at the
council.
(15) Appendix 5 is an alternate version of Letter 85, from
6. J. Quasten, Patrology 3: The Golden Age of Patristic Literature from the
Council of Nicaea to the Council of Chalcedon (Utrecht-Antwerp, 1960; reprint
Westminister, Md.: Christian Classics, 1983), 133.
6 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

Cyril to the bishops and synod at Carthage, dated before 428,

in reply to a request for a copy of the decrees of the Council of
Nicaea. Evidendy the accurate records kept at Alexandria in
Cyril's time were continuing the tradition which began with the
founding of the city and its famous library.
(16) In 1933 C. Papadopoulos in his work on CyriF gave a list
of the letters. classified according to date and time before or
after an event, such as the Council of Ephesus. There are
several corrections to be made. Letter 41 is not to Acacius of
Melitene but to Acacius of Scythopolis. Letter 73 is not to
Rabbula of Edessa but from him to Cyril, and Cyril's canonical
letter is not 46 but 78, just as it was composed not before 446
but before 444, the year of Cyril's death. Papadopoulos only
dealt with the letters composed by Cyril. Others were omitted.
It would indeed be tempting to take all the letters in the
correspondence, either by or to Cyril, and arrange them in
chronological order disregarding all previous systems of num-
bering. Papadopoulos did this with the ones written by Cyril,
but to do it to all letters and fragments would only confuse the
scholar. Consequendy, for those who would wish to read in
chronological order, the following is offered based on the
work of Papadopoulos.

DATES OF LETTERS

Before 428.
Letters 75, 76, and 85·
Between the years 428 to 43 I.
Letters 1, 110, 100, 2 to 19, 106 to 109, and 84.
During the Council of Ephesus, 4JI.
Letters 20 to 24, 95, and 25 to 30 inclusive.
After the Council from Alexandria.
94, Appendix 4,96,3 1 and 32.
7. C. Papadopoulos, Ho Hagios Kurillos Alexandreias (Alexandria, 1933),
454·
 INTRODUCTION 7
During negotiations with the eastern bishops.
Letters 92, Appendix 1 and 2, 33, 34, 35,
Appendix 3, 36, 39, 89 and 90.
After the reconciliation, 433 to 435·
Letters 37, 38,40 to 49, 93, 50 to 54,
56,57, 58, 102, 103, 104, 105.
During discussion about Theodore of Mopsuestia.
Letters 55, and 59 to 74·
At an uncertain date on different subjects.,
Letters 56, 77, 78, 79, 81, 82 and 83·
Frag;ments, after 428.
97 to 99·
Spurious.
Letters 86, 87, 88, and perhaps 91 and 101.
Incorrectly included in Cyril's corpus.
Letter 80 by Basil the Great.

(17) To aid the reader it seemed best to place the identifica-

tion of the principal persons named in the correspondence in
one place. For many of the minor characters mention in the
letters is the only item of identification known about them.
Hence it did not appear suitable to include them.
NAME EPISCOPAL SEE DATES

Acacius Beroea c. 322 to c. 433

Acacius Melitene ? to c. 438
Acacius Scythopolis
Alexander Alexandria ? to 328
Amphilochius Iconium c. 340-345 to 395
Apollinaris Laodicea c. 310 to c. 390
Athanasius Alexandria 295 to 373
Atticus Constantinople ? to 425
Aurelius Carthage ? to c. 430
8 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

Basil Caesarea in
Cappadocia c. 330 to 379
Beronicianus Tyre
Calosyrius Arsinoe
Celestine I Rome, Pope
4 22 -43 2 ? to 432
Cyril Alexandria ? to 444
Diodore Tarsus ? to c. 392
Domnus Antioch
Dorotheus Marcianopolis
(titular)
Dynatos Nikopolis in
Epiros
Epictetus Corinth
Eunomius Cyzicus ? to after 394
Eutherius Tyana in
Cappadocia
Firmus Caesarea in
Cappadocia ? to 439
Flavian Antioch 381 to 404
Flavian Philippi
Gregory Nazianzus c. 330 to c. 389
Gregory Nyssa c. 335 to 394
Helladius Tarsus
John Antioch ? to 441
John
Chrysostom Constantinople 344-354 to 40 5
Juvenal Jerusalem ? to 458
Maximian Constantinople
Memnon Ephesus
Mosaeus Antaradus in
Syria
Nectarius Constantinople ? to 397
Nestorius Constantinople c. 381 to 450
Paul Emesa
Proclus Constantinople ? to 446
Rabbula Edessa ? to 435
Rufus Thessalonica
 INTRODUCTION 9
Sixtus III Rome, Pope
43 2-440 ? to 440
Succensus Diocaesarea in
Isauria
Theodore Mopsuestia c. 350 to 428
Theodoret Cyrus c. 393 to c. 466
Theodotus Ancyra ? to 445
Theophilus Alexandria ? to 412
Valerian Iconium
(18) The Roman emperor was Theodosius II whose reign
extended from 408 to 450. He was born in 401 and died in 450.
Aristolaus was a tribune and secretary at court. Candidianus is
mentioned in Letter 23 as a count of the court. The same name
is given to a deacon in Letter 29. Another count named John is
mentioned in Letter 28.
(19) The style of the letters in keeping with the content is
serious. In them we are introduced to the superlatives of
proper address among prelates of that time. They may seem
extreme to us, but it is to be noted that they are used about
Nestorius until he was condemned and deposed. Then they
cease. The sense of dignity which they show indicates the
serious regard implicit in them and the gravity of the com-
munication.
(20) Cyril's famous formula, which was misunderstood and
employed by the Monophysites after his death, appears in
Letter 45. A statement close to it appears in Letter 40. He can
only be clearly understood, however, by a careful reading of
the context in which the expression is found. Cyril at all times
strongly maintained the traditional doctrine of the Council of
Nicaea as is seen by perusing the doctrinal letters. The height
to which he goes in thought and expression presents challeng-
ing reading for the student of theology.
(21) Geerard listed as 5411 a letter to a bishop who asked for
commentaries on Paul's letters. It evidently is preserved in a
manuscript at Mount Athos, but has been omitted here, since it
has not yet been published.
LETTERS
1-50
 LETTER 1

Cyril, to the priests and deacons, fathers of monks and to those

practicing the solitary life with you who are firm in faith in God,
beloved and most dear; greetings in the Lord.'

OME OF YOUR brethren, as it is the custom, arrived in

Alexandria. I asked and very eagerly inquired whether
you yourselves are striving to excel in true and blame-
less faith, walking in the footsteps of your fathers' gentleness,
and are distinguishing yourselves in that excellent way of life,
and whether you yourselves highly esteem the toils of your
religious training by considering it truly a joy to choose suffer-
ing nobly for the sake of the good.
(2) They reported that you are so disposed, and added that
you are competing rather zealously with the manly deeds of
your predecessors. Therefore, I rejoiced of necessity and my
spirit was diffused with contentment, claiming as my own the
good repute of my children, and very appropriately. And it is
not unheard of that gymnastic trainers exult in the strength of
the young and, if they achieve anything which redounds to the
praise of their training, they ascribe this to themselves as a
crown on their brows, and appropriate the glories of their
pupils' manliness. It would, indeed, be strange for me, your
spiritual father, not to be filled with divine gladness of heart,
no less than they, spurring you on with words to your noble
endeavor so that you might carry off the prize after you have
overcome the movements of the flesh, and by prayer have

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 pp. 10-23.
Geerard numbers this letter 5301 in CPG. See also A. J. Festugiere, tphese et
Chalcedoine Actes des Conciles (Paris, 1982), 27-44.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

avoided falling into sin and being defeated by satan's tempta-

tions.
(3) Surely, then, just as the disciple of the Savior says, "Do
you on your part strive diligently to supply your faith with
virtue, your virtue with knowledge, your knowledge with self-
control, your self-control with patience, your patience with
piety, your piety with fraternal love, your fraternal love with
charity. For if these virtues are present in you and abound in
you, they render you neither inactive nor unfruitful in the
knowledge of our LordJesus Christ."2 For I say that those who
have chosen to live the glorious and beloved way oflife devised
by Christ must first be adorned with simple and unblemished
faith, and so then add virtue to their faith. When this has been
done, they must strive to enrich their knowledge of the mys-
tery of Christ and ascend to the most complete understanding
of him. For this, I think is "to attain unto a perfect man" and to
come "unto the measure of the age of his fullness."3 With the
sobriety, therefore, proper to monks, fight manfully against
spiritual and, at the same time, physical disturbances, with
loins well girt. 4 In this way, you shall be radiant and glorious
even with the beauty of the hope prepared for the saints.
Above all, let your faith be true and sincere and completely
without reproach. For, in this way, you yourselves also, by
following the pious example of your holy fathers, shall take up
your abode in the mansions above and shall live in the heavenly
dwellings. Of these also the prophet Isaiah makes mention
saying, "Your eyes shall see Jerusalem; it is a wealthy city, and
may its tents not be shaken."5
(4) Therefore, how would it be that I do not know that your
way of life is illustrious and admirable and that your true and
sincere faith rests on a secure foundation? But I am disturbed
beyond measure because I have heard that certain trouble-
some rumors have reached you, and that certain men go about
destroying your simple faith, spewing out a multitude of use-
less pet phrases, making close inquiries, and saying that it is

2. Cf. 2 Pt 1.5-8. 4. Cf. Ex 12.11; Lk 12·35·

3. Eph 4. 1 3. 5. Cf. Is 33.20.
 LETTER 1

necessary to specify dearly whether or not the Holy Virgin

Mary is to be called the Mother of God. 6 It would be better for
you to pay no attention at all to such inquiries and not at all to
dig up difficult questions which are seen, as it were, in a mirror
and are a puzzle for keen minds and trained intellects. For the
finer distinctions of speculations transcend the comprehen-
sion of the less instructed. However, you have not remained
completely ignorant,of such discussions and it is likely that
some choose to be fond of disputing and of fixing this mischief
like a stake into those whose minds are not firmly made up.
Hence, I thought it necessary to say some few words to you
concerning these matters. I do not do this that you may have a
greater battle of words; rather, I intend that you may escape
the danger of going astray if anyone should spring up with an
attack on the truth with random words. I write that you may
assist others as brothers, besides, by the proper reasonings,
persuading them to maintain as a precious pearl in their own
souls the divine faith handed down from above by the apostles
to the churches.
(5) Therefore, I am amazed if some should question at all
whether the Holy Virgin should be called the Mother of God.
For if our Lord Jesus Christ is God, how is the Holy Virgin who
bore him not the Mother of God? The inspired disciples trans-
mitted this faith to us, even if they have not made mention of
the term. So we have been taught to think by the holy Fathers.
(6) And, in any event, our father Athanasius, of hallowed
memory, adorned the throne of the Church of Alexandria for
the whole of forty-six years and arrayed an unconquerable and
apostolic knowledge in battle against the sophistries of the
unholy heretics and greatly gladdened the world by his writ-
ings as by a most fragrant perfume and all bear witness to the
accuracy and piety of his teachings.

6. 6f:OTOKOC; in Greek, "God-bearing." The meaning of this title was an

important part of the controversy. See P. Imhof and B. Lorenz, Maria Theotolws
bei Gyrill von Alexandrien: zur Theotolws-Tradition und mrer Relevanz; eine dog-
mengeschichtliche Untersuchung zur Verwendung des Wortes Theotolws bei GyriU von
Alexandrien ~ dem Konzil von Ephesus unter Berikksichtigung von Handschriften
tIer direkten Uberlieferung (Munich, 1981).
16 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

(7) When he composed for us his work concerning the holy

and consubstantial Trinity, in the third book from the begin-
ning to the end, he called the Holy Virgin the Mother of God. I
shall, of necessity, use his own very words which are as follows:
"Therefore the mark and characteristic of Holy Scripture, as
we have often said, is this that it contains a twofold declaration
concerning the Savior, that he both always was God and that he
is the Son, being the Word and brightness and wisdom' of the
Father, and that afterwards, for our sake, by taking flesh from
the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God, he became man."B
(8) And after other matters he says again, "In truth there
have been many saints and men cleansed of all sin. For both
Jeremiah was sanctified from the womb,9 and John, as yet
unborn, leaped for joy at the voice of Mary, the Mother of
God." 10
(9) Athanasius, therefore, is a man worthy of trust and
deserving of confidence, since he did not say anything which is
not in agreement with Holy Scripture. For how would so
brilliant and celebrated a man stray from the truth, one who
was so admired by all even in that holy and great council, I
mean the one at Nicaea, which was assembled in critical times.
He did not yet hold the office of bishop, but rather belonged to
the class of clerics and yet, because of his sagacity and gentle-
ness besides, and because of his exceedingly subtle and incom-
parable mind, he was, at that time, taken as his companion by
Alexander, the bishop of happy memory. He was as close to the
old man as a son is to his father, leader in everything helpful,
and the one who showed the way right well in all things which
were to be done.
(10) Since it is likely that some think it necessary for us to
confirm our statement concerning this matter from the holy
and divinely inspired Scripture itself, and assert besides that
the holy and great council mentioned above neither said that

7. Cf. Heb 1.3 and 1 Cor. 1.31.

8. A quotation from Athanasius, Contra Arianos 3.29. (PG 26.385-388).
9. Cf. Jer 1.5·
10. Cf. Lk 1.44,45. The quotation is from Contra Arianos 3·33· (PG 26·393-
396).
 LETTER 1

the Mother of the Lord is the Mother of God, nor in truth

defined any such thing, come now, let us show as far as possible
in what way the mystery of the economy of salvation devised by
Christ has been announced to us by Holy Scripture. Then,
also, what the Fathers themselves have spoken who set forth
the standard of blameless faith, since the Holy Spirit taught
them the truth; for, according to our Savior's words, it was not
they themselves who spoke but "the Spirit of God and Father
who speaks through them." II For when it has been shown thus
that the one born of the Holy Virgin is God according to
nature, I think that, necessarily, no one at all will shrink from
thinking, and also saying, that she should be called the Mother
of God and very rightly.
(11) Thus runs the Creed of our faith. "We believe in one
God, the Father almighty, creator of all things visible and
invisible, and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the
only begotten of the Father, that is from his substance, God of
God, light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made,
consubstantial with the Father, through whom all things were
made both in heaven and on earth, who for us men and for our
salvation descended, became incarnate, was made man, suf-
fered, and rose again on the third day, ascended into heaven
and is coming to judge the living and the dead; and in the Holy
Spirit." 12
(12) Now the inventors of heresies, digging pits of perdition
for themselves and of ruin for others, have slipped to the point
of thinking and saying that the Son is recent, and was pro-
duced by God the Father just like creatures. The wretches do
not blush to circumscribe with a beginning in time him who is
before every age and time, rather who is the maker of the ages.
In their teaching they draw the Son down from the equality
and glory with God the Father. They barely concede to him
preexistence before others, and say that he has an intermedi-
ate position between God and man, neither sharing the infinite
glory nor being hemmed in by the limitations of creation.

11. Mt. 10.20.

12. This is the Nicene Creed.
18 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

(13) Who, then, is this one cast down from his divine
preeminence and removed from the limitations of creation?
The matter is completely inconceivable and there is no dis-
cernible place or manner of speaking of someone in between
creator and creation. Although they dislodged him from the
throne of divinity, they have arrived at a point in their teaching
that they call him the Son and God, and think that he is to be
adored although the law openly proclaims, "The Lord your
God shall you worship and him only shall you serve,'.'13 and
although God said to the Israelites through the voice of David,
"There shall be no new god among you, nor shall you adore a
foreign god."14
(14) But like those that left the well-trodden highway of the
truth, they hasten into holes and rocks and, as Solomon says,
"They have diverted their paths to wander from their own
vineyard and bring fruitlessness to their hands."15 But we into
whose minds the light of God has shone, having chosen to
think what is incomparably better than their nonsense, and
following the faith of the holy Fathers, say that the Son, in a
divine and ineffable manner, was truly begotten of the sub-
stance of God the Father, and that he is known in his own
person, that he is one with him who has begotten him in
identity of substance, 16 and that he is in him, and, in turn, has
the Father in him.l7 We confess that the Son is light from light,
God from God according to nature, equal in glory and equal in
operation, the image and brightness,ls being equal in every
respect whatsoever, and inferior in no manner. For thus, with
the addition of the Holy Spirit, the holy and consubstantial
Trinity is united in one divine nature.
(15) Now, the inspired Scripture says that the Word of God
was made flesh, 19 that is, that he was united to flesh which had a

13. Mt 4.10; Dt 6.13.

14. Cf. Ps 80(81 ).10. Cyril quotes the Septuagint text, as frequently
hereafter.
15. Cf. Pry 9.12b, c (LXX).
16. Cf. In 10.30. 18. Cf. Heb 1.3.
17· Cf. In 14.10. 19. Cf. In 1.14·
 LETTER 1

rational soul.2° Following the teachings ofthe Gospels, the holy

and great council said that he is begotten of the substance of
God and Father as the only begotten, "through whom and in
whom all things are,"21 for us men and for our salvation he
descended from heaven, was made flesh and became man,
suffered and rose, and that in due time he shall come as judge,
and it named the Word of God one Lord Jesus Christ. Note
well, then, how when saying that the Son was one and naming
him the Lord Jesus Christ, they say that he was begotten of God
the Father, that he is the only begotten, and God from God,
light from light, begotten not made, and consubstantial with
the Father. .
(16) And yet, someone may say, we shall find the name
Chrise2 applied not to Emmanuel alone, but also applied to
others. For God said somewhere23 about those chosen and
sanctified by the Spirit, "Touch not my anointed ones, and to
my prophets do no harm."24 Nay more, the divinely inspired
David calls Saul who had been anointed as king by God
through the hand of Samuel,25 the "Lord's anointed."26 And
why do I mention this when it is possible for those who desire to
look at the matter calmly to see that those who have been
justified by faith in Christ and have been sanctified in the Spirit
are honored by such a name? And therefore, the prophet
Habacuc has foretold the mystery of Christ and salvation
through him saying, "You went forth for the salvation of your
people, for the salvation of your anointed ones."27
(17) Consequently, the name Christ would not be applicable
exclusively and properly to Emmanuel, as I said, but also to all
the rest who may have been anointed with the grace of the

20. This stipulation is against the heresy of Apollinaris who denied that
Christ had a rational soul.
21. Cf. Col 1.16, 17.
22. It is important for this passage to remember that the word "Christ"
means "the Anointed One."
23. This sign of vagueness in quoting a text is not unusual for ancient
writers, both pagan and Christian, who often quoted from memory.
24. Ps 104(105).15. 26. 1 Sm (1 Kgs) 24.7.
25. Cf. 1 Sm (1 Kgs) 16.13. 27. Cf. Hb 3.13.
20 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

Holy Spirit. For the word is derived from the action, and the
name anointed from the fact of having been anointed. That we
ourselves, too, are very rich in a grace so illustrious and truly
precious the learned John confirms saying, "And you have an
anointing from the Holy One";28 and again, "You have no need
that anyone teach you, but his anointing teaches yoU."29 Con-
cerning Emmanuel Scripture records, "how God anointed
Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit and with power."30 The
inspired David says to him, "You have loved justice and hated
iniquity, therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the
oil of gladness above your companions."31 What, therefore,
would anyone see extraordinary in the Holy Virgin compared
with other women, even if it were said that she bore the Em-
manuel? For it would not be paradoxical even if one chose to
call the mother of each of the anointed christ-bearer.
(18) But there is a great gap separating our condition even
by immeasurable differences from the glory and preeminence
of our Savior. For we are servants, but he, by nature, is Lord
and God, even if he was among us and in our nature according
to the dispensation of the Incarnation. For this reason, the
blessed Paul called him Christ and God, speaking as follows,
"For know this and understand that no fornicator, or unclean
person, or coveteous one who is an idolater, has any inheri-
tance in the kingdom of Christ and God."32 Consequently, all
the others, as I said, may be anointed ones, and very reason-
ably, because of having been anointed, but Christ alone is true
God, the Emmanuel. And in reality, one would not err if he
chose to say that the mothers of the others were christ-bearers,
but in no way god-bearers also. The Holy Virgin alone in
contrast with them is considered and called both Mother of
Christ and Mother of God. For she has borne, not a mere man
as we are, but rather the Word of God the Father made flesh,
and become man. For we, too, were called gods 33 according to
grace, but the Son of God is not God in this way, rather he is

28. 1 In 2.20. 31. Cf. Ps 44(45}·8.

29· 1 In 2.27· 32. Cf. Eph 5.5.
30. Acts 10.38. 33. Cf. Ps 81(82}.6; In 10·34·
 LETTER 1

God according to nature and in truth, even though he was

made flesh.
(19) But perhaps you will say this, "Tell me, then, is the
Virgin the Mother of his divinity?" And in reply to this we say
that his living and subsistent Word was begotten admittedly
from the very substance of God and from the Father, and that
what was without beginning had a beginning in time, always
having existed with his begetter, in him and with him coexist-
ing and coplanning, and that upon the completion of the
appointed time when he became flesh, that is, when he was
united to flesh having a rational soul,34 that Scripture states he
was born of a woman according to the flesh also.
(20) The mystery of his Incarnation in a way is like to our
being born. For the mothers of those on earth, subject to
nature's laws regarding birth, have flesh implanted in their
wombs which little by litde grows according to certain unseen
operations of God, coming to maturity in human form. God
sends the spirit for a living being in a manner known to him.
This is according to the saying of the prophet, "for he forms
the spirit of man in him."s5 The logos of the body is one and,
likewise, that of the soul is another. Yet even if these women
are only the mothers of the bodies of those upon earth, never-
theless they bear a whole living being, one, I mean, consisting
of body and soul. They are not said to bear only a part of it. No
one would say that Elizabeth,36 for example, was the mother of
only a body and not the one who brought a soul into the world
besides. For she bore the Baptist,37 a man endowed with a soul
and as one living being consisting of both, I mean a man having
both a soul and a body.
(21) We will accept that something such as this was effected
at the birth of the Emmanuel, too. For his only begotten Word,
as I said, was begotten from the substance of God the Father.
34. Cf. n. 20.
35. Cf. Zee 12.1.
36. Nestorius also used Elizabeth and her son in argument as an example.
See F. Loofs, Nestoriana: Die Fragmente des Nestorius gesammelt, untersucht und
herausgegeben (Halle, 1905), 352.
37. Cf. Lk 1.57·
22 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

But after the Word assumed flesh and made it his own, he also
bears the name Son of man and became like us. It is in no way
absurd to say, I think, but rather necessary to confess also that
he was born according to the flesh from a woman, just as, of
course, the soul of a man is generated together with its own
body and is considered as one with it, even though in nature it
is known in comparison with the body to be different and
existing by itself according to its own logos. And if someone
wished to say that the mother of someone is the mother of a
body but not the one who brought a soul into the world, he is
thinking extremely foolishly. For a living being is born, as I
said, skillfully composed of unlike principles, from two, in-
deed, but one man results, each principle remaining that
which it is, both brought together as if into one natural unity
and so joined with each other that each communicates to the
other what is proper to itself.
(22) That the unity in Christ is very, very necessary is en-
tirely without difficulty and easy to perceive through many
other arguments. For come, if you please, let us inquire closely
into the words of blessed Paul, paying attention as meticulously
as possible. Now he said about the only begotten, "Who being
in the form of God, did not consider equality with God to be
robbery, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant,
and being made like unto men; and appearing in the form of
man, he humbled himself."38 Now who is this one "being in the
form of God and not having considered equality with God to
be robbery"? Or how has he emptied himself? How did he
descend to humiliation and in the form of a servant? Now
there are some who cut the one Lord Jesus Christ in two, that
is, into man and into the Word of God the Father. They say
that the one born of the Holy Virgin submitted to the
emptying. They differentiate the Word of God the Father
from him. Let them prove that in form and in equality he 39 is
considered and, in fact, is from the Father, in order that he
might submit to the manner of emptying himself, to which

38. PhiI2.~.
39. i.e., Mary's Son as separate from the Word.
 LETTER 1 23
very position he had not attained. But there is no creature, if
considered according to its own nature, which is equal to the
Father. How, then, is he said to have emptied himself, if, being
man by nature, he has been born like us from a woman? And
tell me the nature of the higher eminence greater than that of
human from which he descended to be man? Or how might he
be considered to have taken the form of a servant, which he did .
not have to start with, who by nature belonged to the class of
servants and lay under the yokes of servitude?
(23) But they say that he who is by nature and truly the free
Son, the Word of God the Father, God in the form of his
begetter and equal to him, dwelt in a man born of a woman,
and this is the emptying, and the issue of the humiliation and
the humbling of himself in the form of a servant.40 Moreover,
my dear friends, would indwelling alone in a man on the part
of the Word of God suffice for the emptying of himself?
(24) And is it safe to say that thus he put on the form of a
servant and that this would be the manner of his humiliation,
even though He says to the holy apostles, as I hear, "If anyone
loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him,
and we will come to him and make our abode with him"?41 Do
you hear how he said that he and God the Father will make
their abode in those who love him? Therefore, shall we con-
cede that God the Father also emptied himself, and that he
endured an emptying of himself similar to the Son's, and that
he assumed the form of a servant because he makes the holy
souls of those who love him his own abode?
(25) What of the Holy Spirit indwelling in us? Does he fulfill
the plan of the Incarnation which we say was carried out by the
Son alone for the sake of the salvation and life of all men? Away
with such extravagant and entirely senseless rashness!
(26) Therefore, the Word, though being in the form and
equality of God the Father, humbled himself when, being
made flesh as 10hn says,42 he was born of a woman, and having
a begetting from God the Father, he also endured to experi-
4 0 . Cf. Phil 2.5-'7.
41. In 14.23.
42. Cf. In 1.14.
24 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

ence a birth like ours for our sake. Otherwise, let them explain
how the Word of God the Father would be known and called
Christ by us. If he bears the name Christ from the anointing,
then whom has the Father anointed with the oil of gladness,43
that is, with the Holy Spirit? If, therefore, they say it is true that
the one anointed is the Word who is God, and properly, his
only begotten Son, they do not see how they do violence to the
nature of the only begotten and misinterpret the mystery of
the Incarnation.
(27) For if the Word, being God, has been anointed with the
Holy Spirit, they will also admit, not willingly of course, that he
was by all means in need of sanctification in the ages in which
he existed previously, during which he had not yet been
anointed, for he did not yet have a share in the gift given to him
later. But that which is bereft of sanctification is changeable by
nature and would not be thought of as entirely free from sin or
the power to err. Therefore, the Word has taken a turn for the
better, perhaps. How, then, is he the same and not changed?
And if the Word, though being God both by form and by
equality to the Father, was anointed and sanctified, someone
might say, perhaps, like a person carried off course from this
matter to foolish ideas, that perhaps somehow the Father
himself needed sanctification also, for the Son now appears
much greater than the Father, if the Son himself has been
sanctified, for the Son was equal to the Father in form before
the Son's sanctification. But the Father has remained as he
always was, and is, and shall be, having received no additional
endowment for betterment through sanctification in the same
way as the Son. And the Spirit, the one sanctifying them, is seen
to be better than both, if, as is the fact, "Beyond all contradic-
tion, that which is less is blessed by the superior."44 But this is
nonsense and claptrap and the charges of madness. For the
consubstantial Trinity is holy by nature. The Father is holy,
and the Son is substantially and equally holy, and the Spirit in
the same way. Surely, then, insofar as his own nature is con-

43. Cf. Ps 44(45).8.

44. Heb 7.7.
 LETTER 1 25
cerned, the Word of God the Father has not been sanctified
separately.
(28) But if anyone should think that the one born of the
Holy Virgin was anointed and sanctified alone45 and, for this
reason, is called Christ, let him come forward and say whether
the anointing is enough to prove that the one anointed is equal
in glory and shares the throne with God who is over all. And if
the anointing is sufficient, and they shall say that this is true, we
also have been anointed. And the inspired John will bear
witness saying, "But you have an anointing from the Holy
One."46 Therefore, perhaps somehow, even we ourselves will
be equal to God, and nothing at all, I think, prevents us from
also sitting beside him, in the same way doubtless as the Em-
manuel himself. For these words were addressed to him, "Sit at
my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool. "47 Let
the holy throng of spirits above worship us also. For Scripture
says, "When he brings the firstborn into the world, he says,
'And let all the angels of God adore him.' "48 But we, even
though we have been anointed with the Holy Spirit and are
very rich because of the grace of adoption as sons and are even
called gods,49 will not be ignorant of the due limits of our
nature. For we are from the earth and belong among the
servants. But he is not in the condition in which we are, but by
nature is truly the Son and Lord of all and from heaven.
(29) And, surely, we who have chosen to think aright do not
say that God became the Father of flesh; nor, again, that the
nature of the divinity was born of a woman with the humanity
not yet assumed. But rather, bringing together into unity the
Word begotten of God and the man perfectly born of the Holy
Virgin, we will adore one Christ and Lord, Jesus, neither
placing him outside the bounds of divinity because of his flesh,
nor bringing him down into mere humanity because of his
likeness to us. In this way, you will understand that the Word
begotten of God endured a voluntary emptying; in this way, he

45· Cf. n. 39. 48. Heb 1.6.

46. 1 In 2.20. 49· Cf. n. 33.
47. Ps 109(1l0).1.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

humbled himself by taking the form of a servant,5° he who,

according to his own nature, was free; in this way he, "assumed
descent from Abraham,"5l and the Word of God has partaken
of blood and flesh. 52 For ifhe is considered mere man as we are,
how did he assume descent from Abraham as something by
nature different from himself? How is he said to have partaken
of their flesh in order that "he should in all things be made like
unto his brethren"?53 For what is said to be made like to
something moves from dissimilarity to what it must resemble.
(30) Accordingly, the Word of God assumed descent from
Abraham and "has blood and flesh in common"54 by having
made his own the body born from a woman, in order that,
being not only God but having become man as well, he might
be known among us by this union. Accordingly, the Emmanuel
is admittedly of two entities, of divinity and humanity. There
is, however, one Lord Jesus Christ and one Son truly, God and
man at the same time; not a man made divine who is equal to
those who are made divine according to grace, but rather true
God who has appeared in human form for our sake. The
inspired Paul will confirm this for us when he says, "But when
the fullness of time came, God sent his Son, born of a woman,
born under the law, that he might redeem those who were
under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons."55
Who is the one, then, sent under the law, born ofa woman, as
he said, except him who is beyond laws as God, but, since he
was called man after his birth, was also under the law, in order
that "he should in all things be made like unto his brethren."56
And, therefore, he paid the didrachma along with Peter
according to the law of Moses. 57 But because as the Son he is
free and as God superior to the law, even if as man he was born
under the law, he instructed him saying, "From whom do the
kings of the earth receive tribute or customs; from their own
sons, or from others?" But when Peter said, "From others," he

50. Cf. Phil 2.6-8. 54. Heb 2.14·

51. Cf. Heb 2.16. 55· Cf. Gal 4·4, 5·
52. Cf. Heb 2.14. 56. Heb 2.17.
53. Cf. Heb 2.17. 57. Cf. Mt 17.26.
 LETTER 1

concluded, "The sons then are exempt."58 Consequently it is

clear that the Word begotten of God, existing outside the flesh
and separately, so to speak, would not be called the Christ.
That such a name was appropriate for him when he became
man, by taking the proofs out of Holy Scripture itself, let us
show that he is God according to nature even though his
divinity has been brought into union, I say, with flesh of his
own. Once this truth has been made clear, the Holy Virgin may
be called the Mother of God by us, and very rightly.
(31) Accordingly, the prophet Isaiah points out beforehand
the Son well-nigh incarnate and soon to come, in the words,
"You feeble hands and weak knees, be strong; you faint-
hearted in purpose, urge yourselves on; be strong, and fear
not; behold, our God is rendering judgment, and will render
it; God himself will come and save us. Then shall the eyes of the
blind be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall hear; then shall
the lame man leap like a stag, and the stammering tongue shall
be clear."59 Observe how he names him Lord60 and calls him
God, seeing that he speaks in the Spirit; note that he knew the
Emmanuel would not be simply a man bearing God nor, of a
truth, as one assumed as an agent, but knew that he was truly
God and incarnate. For then, then the eyes of the blind were
opened, and the ears of the deaf heard, and the lame man
leaped as a hart, and the tongue of the dumb became free.
Thus, the Holy Spirit bade the holy evangelists to proclaim him
saying, "Go up onto a high mountain, you that bring good
tidings to Sion; lift up your voice with strength, you that bring
good tidings to Jerusalem; lift it up, fear not. To the cities of
Juda say: behold your God; behold, the Lord comes with
strength, and his arm with authority; behold, his reward is with
him and his work is before him. He shall feed his flock like a
shepherd, he shall gather together the lambs in his arm."61 For
our Lord Jesus Christ showed himself to us having divine
strength, and his arm with authority, that is, with power and
dominion. For that very reason, He said to the leper, "I will; be

58. Cf. Mt 17.25. 26. 60. Cf. Is 35.2.

59. Cf. Is 35.3-6. 61. Cf. Is 4o.g-11.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

made clean."62 For that reason, he touched the bier and raised
up the dead son of the widow. 63
(32) And he gathered together the lambs for he is the good
shepherd who laid down his life for his sheep. For this reason,
he said, "Even as the Father knows me and I know the Father;
and I lay down my life for my sheep. And other sheep I have
that are not of this fold. Them also I must bring, and they shall
hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd."64
At the beginning of his preaching about him, the inspired John
the Baptist proclaimed him to the people throughout all
Judaea, neither as an agent of divinity nor even simply as a
man bearing God, as some say, but rather God in union with
flesh, that is, made man, saying, "Make ready the way of the
Lord, make straight the paths of our God."65 Whose ways did
he command to be made ready, except those of Christ, that is,
of the Word made manifest in the form of man? And the
inspired Paul too, in my opinion, gives sufficient evidence for
[our] faith when he bears witness in these words, "What then
shall we say? If God is for us, who is against us? He who has not
spared even his own Son, but has delivered him for us all, how
can he fail to grant us also all things with him?"66 Then, tell me,
how may the one born of the Holy Virgin be considered God's
own Son? Because just as that which has been born of man
according to nature is a man's own child, indeed, this is true of
all other living beings, so he, too, is considered to be and is
called God's own Son begotten of his substance. How, there-
fore, is Christ, who was delivered up by God the Father for the
salvation and life of all, called God's own Son? For "he was
delivered up for our sins,"67 and "he himself bore the sins of
many in his body upon the tree,"68 according to the words of
the prophet. Now this is already evident, since the fact of the
union, necessarily admitted, proves that the very Son of God is
Emmanuel who was born of the Holy Virgin. For his body was
not that of someone else like us, but rather the body born from
62. Mt 8.3. 66. Cf. Rom 8.31, 32.
63. Cf. Lk 7.12-15. 67. Cf. Rom 4·25·
64· In 10.15, 16. 68. Cf. 1 Pt 2.24; Is 53.12.
65· Cf. Mt 3.3.
 LETTER 1 29
her is the very body of the Word himself who is from the
Father.
(33) But if anyone assigns to him only the mere rendering
of service as an instrument, even though unwillingly, he will
also deprive him of being truly the Son. Come now, for the
sake of argument, let it be assumed that there is a man, who has
a son skilled with the lyre and trained to play the best composi-
tions. Will such a man classify the lyre, which is the instrument
of song, in the category of a son and identical with his son?
How is this anything but the height of folly? For the lyre was
used as an indication of his skill, but he is the son of his father
even though separated from his instrument. But if they should
then say that he who was born of a woman was used as an
instrument that wonders might be performed through him,
and to add luster to the message of the inspired evangelists, let
each of the holy prophets also be called an instrument of
divinity, and Moses, the teacher of sacred truths above all
others. He lifted up his rod and turned rivers into blood. 69 He
separated the sea itself and bade the people of Israel to pass
through the midst of it.70 He struck his rod against rocks and
made them the sources of water and showed that the flint was a
spring. 7l He was both mediator between God and men 72 and
servant of the law and led the people. Therefore, there was
nothing extraordinary in Christ, and in no way did he surpass
those born before him, ifhe himself is used in the capacity and
function of an instrument in the same way as Moses. And the
inspired David has prated utter nonsense in all likelihood,
when he states that he had such advantages, saying "Who
among the clouds will be compared to the Lord; or who will be
like unto the Lord among the sons of God?"73
(34) But the very wise Paul proves Moses functioning
among the servants, but calls Christ God and Lord, who was
born of a woman according to the divine plan, that is, Christ.
For he has written as follows, "Therefore, holy brethren, par-

69. Cf. Ex 7.19, 20. 72. Cf. 1 Tm 2.5; Gal 3.19.

70. Cf. Ex 14.21, 22. 73. Cf. Ps 88(89)·7.
71. Cf. Ex 17.6.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

takers of a heavenly calling, consider the apostle and high

priest of our confession,] esus, who is faithful to him who made
him, as was Moses also in all his house. 74 For he was deemed
worthy of greater glory than Moses, just as the builder of a
house has greater glory than the house that he built. For every
house is built by someone; but he who created all things is God.
And Moses indeed was faithful in all his house as a servant, to
testify concerning those things that were to be spoken; but
Christ is faithful as the Son over his own house, of whose house
we are."75 Note well, therefore, how Paul has preserved both
the measure of Christ's humanity and assigns to him the
preeminence of the highest glory and of divine dignity. In
calling him high priest and apostle, and affirming, moreover,
that he is faithful to him who made him, he says that he
surpasses Moses in honor as much as a builder surpasses the
fame of his building. Then, he continues, "For every house is
built by someone; but he who created all things is God." Accor-
dingly, the inspired Moses is placed among created beings and
structures, but Christ has been shown as creator of all things
even though God is said to have created everything. 76 There-
fore, he is indubitably also true God. "And Moses, indeed, was
faithful in all his house as a servant, but Christ is faithful as the
Son over his own house, of whose house we are." And moreov-
er, as God says through the voice of the prophets, "I will dwell
and move among them, and I will be their God and they shall
be my people.""
(35) Someone, perhaps, may say, "But who would know the
difference between Christ and Moses, if both were born
through a woman? How is the one a servant and faithful in the
house, but the other, as the Son, is Lord by nature over his
house, which we are?" But I think that this matter is manifest to
everyone who is good in heart and has the mind of Christ, as
blessed Paul says.7S For the one was man and under the yoke of

74. Cf. Nm 12.8.

75. Cf. Heb 3. 1- 6.
76. Cf. In 1.3·
77. 2 Cor 6.16; cf. Lv 26.11,12; also Ez 37.26, 27·
78. Cf. 1 Cor 7.40.
 LETTER 1

servitude, but the other was free by nature as God and creator
of all, and endured a willing emptying for US. 79 But this will not
banish him from his divine glory, nor keep him from his most
excellent preeminence over all; how can it be! We have been
enriched with his Spirit, for his Spirit has come to dwell in
our hearts,80 and have taken our place among the children of
God, and yet have not lost being what we are. For we are
men according to nature even though we say to God, "Abba!
Father!"BI Similarly he, God the Word, ineffably begotten of
the substance of God and the Father, in assuming his human-
ity, has- honored that nature, but has not departed from his
preeminence, but has remained God in his humanity. There-
fore, we do not say that the temple born of the Virgin was used
as an instrument. Rather, following the faith of the Holy Scrip-
ture and the words of the saints, we shall be assured that the
Word was made flesh in the ways very often previously ex-
plained by us. He also laid down his life for us. For since his
death was the salvation of the world, he endured the cross,
despising shame,B2 even though he was life according to na-
ture, as God. How, then, is life said to die? By life suffering
death in his own flesh, in order that he might be seen to be life,
by making his flesh live again.
(36) Come now, let the manner of our own death also be
closely examined. No one at all in his right mind will say that
our souls perish together with our bodies which are made of
earth. Except for man, I think that this is not doubtful of other
living beings. Except for man, death is called a natural concom-
itant. In this way, you will think also about Emmanuel himself.
For he was the Word in flesh of his own, born of a woman, and
he yielded it to death at the proper moment, suffering nothing
himself in his own nature, for he is life and life-giver. He made
his own the necessities of the flesh in order that the suffering
may be said to be his also, and being the first of all who rose
again after he had died for all, in orderthat he might pay for
the human race with his own blood, and might win over for

79. Cf. Phil 2.7· 81. Rom 8.15.

80. Cf. Eph 3.17. 82. Reb 12.2.
32 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

God the Father all those who are in the whole world. That this
is true the blessed prophet Isaiah proclaims, saying in the
Spirit, "Therefore he himself shall inherit many, and he shall
divide the spoils of the strong, because he has delivered his
soul unto death and was reputed among the wicked; and he
has borne the sins of many, and he was delivered for their
iniquities." 83
(37) One, therefore, more worthy than all others laid down
his own life for all and yielded his flesh to be constrained briefly
by death according to the divine plan. But as life, he has
destroyed death in turn, not enduring to suffer contrary to his
own nature, in order that corruption in the bodies of all might
be weakened and the power of death undone. For as we all die
in Adam, so also in Christ, we all shall be made to live. For ifhe
had not suffered as man for our sake, neither would he have
done as God the things which wrought our salvation. For it is
said that he died as man first, but that he came back to life after
that because he is God according to nature. If, therefore, he
has not suffered death in his flesh according to the Scriptures,
neither was he brought back to life in spirit, that is, he did not
come to life again. And if this is true, our faith is vain and we
are still in our sins. For we have been baptized into his death,
according to the words of blessed Paul,84 and we have obtained
remission of our sins through his blood.
(38) But if, indeed, the Christ is neither truly the Son nor
God by nature, but mere man as we are, and an instrument of
divinity, we have not been saved by God, have we, but rather,
since one like ourselves died for us and was raised up by the
powers of someone else? How, then, was death still destroyed
by Christ? And yet I hear him saying clearly concerning his
own life, "No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I
have the power to lay it down, and I have the power to take it
up again."85 For as one of us, though he knew not death, he
went down into death through his own flesh in order that we
might also go up with him to life. For he came to life again,

83. Is 53.12.
84. Rom 6,3, cf. 1 Pt 3.18, 1 Cor 15.17 and Eph 1.7·
85. In 10.18.
 LETTER 1 33
having despoiled the nether world, not as a man like us, but as
God in flesh among us and above us. Our nature was greatly
enriched with immortality in him first and death was crushed
when it assaulted the body of life as an enemy. For just as it
conquered in Adam, so it was defeated in Christ. And the
inspired Psalmist dedicated songs of victory to him ascending
on our account and in our behalf to God the Father in heaven,
so that heaven might be seen to be accessible to those on earth,
for he says, "God is ascended with jubilee, and the Lord with
the sound of trumpet. Sing praises to our God, sing you; sing
praises to our king, sing you, sing you wisely; for God has
reigned over the nations."86 And the blessed Paul spoke some-
where of him saying, "He who descended, he it is who as-
cended also above the heavens, that he might fill all things."87
(39) Because, therefore, he is truly God and king according
to nature, and because the one crucified has been called the
Lord of glory,88 how could anyone hesitate to call the Holy
Virgin the Mother of God? Adore him as one, without dividing
him into two after the union. Then, the senseless Jew shall
laugh in vain; then, in truth, he shall be the one who slew the
Lord, and he shall be convicted as the one who has sinned, not
against one of those who are like us, but against God himself,
the Savior of all. And especially, he shall hear, "Ah! sinful
nation, people full of sins! vile race! iniquitous children! you
have utterly forsaken the Lord and you have provoked to
wrath the holy one of Israel." 89 But the children of the gentiles
in no way shall ridicule the faith of the Christians. For we have
adored not a mere man, God forbid, but rather we, not igno-
rant of his glory, have adored him who is God according to
nature, and even ifhe became like us, he has remained what he
was, that is, God.
(40) Through him and with him may there be glory to God
the Father, with the holy and life-giving Spirit, unto ages of
ages. Amen.
86. Cf. Ps 46(47)6-9.
87. Cf. Eph 4.10.
88. Cf. 1 Cor 2.8.
89. Is 1.4. For Cyril"s attitude towards the Jews see R. L. Wilken,Judaism
and the Early Christian Mind (Yale University Press, 1971).54-68.
 LETTER 2

To his most pious and most God-loving fellow bishop Nestorius,

Cyril sends greetings in the Lord. 1

RABLE MEN WORTHY of belief have arrived in Alex-

andria. They reported that your reverence was both
extremely annoyed and was leaving no stone unturned
to vex me. When I wished to learn what your reverence's
vexation was, they told me that some men from Alexandria are
carrying around the letter sent to the holy monks and that this
has been the origin of your dislike and displeasure. I am
surprised if your reverence has not taken into account a well-
known fact, for there was confusion about the faith not before
the letter was written by me but before what was said, or left
unsaid, by your reverence. Besides, when documents and even
commentaries were being circulated, we were pained because
we desire to correct those who have gone astray. For some have
come close to refusing to confess any longer that Christ is God,
but rather an instrument and a tool of divinity, and a man
bearing God. What is further from the truth than such beliefs?
Therefore, our irritation was at the things which your rever-
ence had said, or had not said. For I do not greatly trust the
documents being circulated. How, therefore, is it possible to be
silent when the faith is being damaged and so many have been
misled?
(2) Or shall we not stand before the tribunal of Christ? Shall
we not defend ourselves against unseasonal silence, since we
have been appointed by him to say what ought to be said? But
what shall I do now? Since the most pious and most God-loving

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 pp. 23-25.
Geerard numbers this letter 5302 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 45-46.

34
 LETTER 2 35
Bishop of Rome, Celestine, and the most God-loving bishops
with him denounced them, I must take counsel with your
reverence concerning the documents which were brought
here, I don't know how, as to whether at any time they are
your reverence's or not. For the writers have been completely
shocked. How shall we take care of those who come from all the
churches of the East and murmur against the documents? Or
perhaps your reverence thinks that little disturbance was pro-
duced in the churches in consequence of such communica-
tions. We are all in struggles and labors, bringing back to the
truth those who have been persuaded, I do not know how, to
think the opposite. When it is your reverence that inflicted on
all the necessity of murmuring, how do you rightly censure
me? Why do you cry out against me without reason? And
might you not rather amend your utterance in order that a
worldwide scandal might stop? For even if an utterance has
escaped your lips, passing, so to speak, from mouth to mouth
among the people, yet let it be corrected by study and deign to
furnish a statement for those being scandalized, by you your-
self calling the Holy Virgin the Mother of God, in order that by
taking care of those saddened and by having sound doctrine in
the eyes of all, we may bring it to pass that the people assemble
in peace and unity of spirit.
(3) But do not let your reverence doubt that we are ready to
suffer all things for the sake of the faith in Christ, both the trial
of imprisonment and death itself. In fact, I say that, while
Atticus 2 of happy memory still lived, a book concerning the
holy and consubstantial Trinity was composed by me in which
also is a treatise about the Incarnation of the only begotten in

2. Atticus was Patriarch of Constantinople from 406 to 425. He and

another priest, Arsacius, were the chief accusers of St. John Chrysostom at the
Synod of the Oak in 403 which deposed him on false charges, with the
assistance of Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria, uncle of Cyril, who pre-
sided. Chrysostom never was reinstated. Arsacius, already an old man, was
appointed to his place without Rome's approval. When he died in 405, Atticus
was appointed. Pope Innocent I had broken off communion with the Patri-
archs of Alexandria, Antioch, and Constantinople, and this state of affairs
lasted until 407 , when Chrysostom died. Atticus reformed afterwards, and was
praised by Celestine I for fighting against the Pelagians.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

harmony with which I have now written. I read it to him, to

bishops, to clerics, and to those of the faithful who listened
eagerly. Thus far, I have given a copy to no one. It is likely that
when that treatise is published I will be accused again, because,
even before the election of your reverence, the little treatise
was composed.
 LETTER 3

To my most God-loving and most holy fellow bishop, Cyril, Nesto-

rius sends greetings in the Lord. I

OTHING IS MORE forceful than Christian forbearance.

By it now, through that most pious priest, Lampon, we
have been constrained to write this letter, for he said
much to us about your piety and heard much. In the end, he
did not yield until he exacted the letter from us and we have
been conquered by the forcefulness of the man. For I confess
that I have great respec~ for all the Christian forbearance of
every man since it possesses God indwelling in it. As far as we
are concerned, even though many things have been done by
your reverence not in keeping with fraternal love, for it is
necessary to speak rather mildly, we write with largeness of
heart and love in salutation. Experience will show what sort of
fruit there is for us of the violence from the most esteemed
priest, Lampon.
(2) We and those with us greet you with all brotherly affec-
tion.

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 p. 25. Geerard
numbers this letter 5303 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 47.

37
 LETTER 4

To his most pious and God-loving bishop, Nestorius, Cyril sends

greetings in the Lord. 1

OME MEN KEEP on chattering, as I hear, of my reply to

your reverence, and do this often, especially watching
out for the assemblies of the magistrates. Perhaps be-
cause they think they are tickling your ears, they utter ill-
advised words too. They do so even though they have not been
wronged but duly convicted: one of being unjust to the blind
and the poor, another of brandishing a sword at his mother,
another of stealing someone else's money with the help of a
maid servant. They have had an enduring reputation so bad
that one would not wish it upon his worst enemies. However,
let there be no lengthy accounts by me of such matters in order
that I may not extend the measure of my self-importance
beyond my Lord and teacher2 nor, indeed, beyond the Fathers.
For it is not possible to escape the perversities of evil men,
however one may choose to pass his life.
(2) But they, with mouth full of curses and bitterness, will
defend themselves before the judge of all. I shall now turn
myself again to what most becomes me, and I shall remind you
now, as a brother in Christ, that you should preach doctrine to
the laity and a tenet of the faith with all caution. You should
consider that scandalizing even only one of the little ones
believing in Christ3 has an unendurable punishment. If the

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 pp. 25-28 or
ACO 2.1.1 pp. 104-106. Geerard numbers this letter 5304 in CPG. See
also Festugiere, Ephese, 48-51, and L. R. Wickham, Cyril of Alexandria: Select
Letters (Oxford, 1983), 2-11.
2. Cf. In 13.13 and 2 Pt 2.1.
3. Cf. Mt 18.6.
 LETTER 4 39
number of those harmed be so great, do we not stand in need
of all skill to remove the scandals prudently and explain the
sound teaching of the faith to those seeking the truth? If we
abide by the teachings of the holy Fathers and are earnest in
considering them of great value, and test ourselves, "whether
we are in the faith"4 according to the Scripture, it will truly
come about that we most fitly will mold our thoughts to their
upright and blameless judgments.
(3) Accordingly, the holy and great council5 said that the
only begotten Son himself, begotten of God the Father accord-
ing to his nature, true God of true God, light of light, he
through whom the Father made all things, descended, was
made flesh and became man, suffered, rose on the third day
and ascended into heaven. We must follow these words and
teachings, keeping in mind what having been made flesh
means; and that it makes clear that the Logos from God be-
came man. We do not say that the nature of the Word was
altered when he became flesh. Neither do we say that the Word
was changed into a complete man of soul and body. We say
rather that the Word by having united to himselfhypostatically
flesh animated by a rational soul, inexplicably and incompre-
hensibly became man. He has been called the Son of man, not
according to desire alone or goodwill, nor by the assumption of
a person only . We say that, although the natures are different
which were brought together to a true unity, there is one Christ
and Son from both. The differences of the natures are not
destroyed through the union, but rather the divinity and
humanity formed for us one Lord Jesus Christ and one Son
through the incomprehensible and ineffable combination to a
unity.
(4) Thus, although he had existence before the ages and
was begotten of the Father, he is said to have been begotten
also according to the flesh from a woman. His divine nature
did not take a beginning of existence in the Holy Virgin, nor
did his divine nature need another begetting of necessity for its

4. Cf. 2 Cor 13.5.

5. i.e., of Nicaea.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

own sake after being begotten of the Father. For it is purpose-

less, and at the same time also stupid, to say that he who exists
before all ages and is co eternal with the Father needs a second
beginning for existence. But since for our sake and for our
salvation he united a human nature to himself hypostatically
and was born from a woman, in this manner, he is said to have
been born according to the flesh. For an ordinary man was not
born of the Holy Virgin and then the Word descended into
him, but, united with flesh in her womb, the Word is said to
have endured birth according to the flesh, so as to claim as his
own the birth of his own flesh.
(5) Thus we say that he also suffered and rose again, not
that the Word of God suffered in his own nature, or received
blows, or was pierced, or received the other wounds, for the
divine cannot suffer since it is incorporeal. But since his own
body, which had been born, suffered these things, he himself is
said to have suffered them for our sake. For he was the one,
incapable of suffering, in the body which suffered. In the same
fashion, we also think of his death. For the Word of God is
immortal by nature and incorruptible, being both life and
life-giving. But because by the grace of God his own body
tasted death for all, as Paul says,6 he himself is said to have
suffered death for our sake. As far as the nature of the Word
was concerned, he did not experience death, for it would be
madness to say or think that, but, as I said, his flesh tasted
death. This, too, when his flesh was resuscitated, it is again
called his Resurrection; not as if he fell into corruption, God
forbid, but that his body rose again.
(6) Thus we will confess one Christ and Lord, not that we
worship a man together with the Word in order that an
appearance of division may not be introduced by saying with.
But we adore one and the same Lord since his body is not
foreign to the Word, in union with which he sits by his Father's
side. 7 We do not state that two sons sit beside the Father, but
that one does through unity with his own flesh. But if we reject

6. Cf. Heb 2.9.

7. Here there is a variation in the texts printed in ACO 1.1.1 p. 28 and ACO
2.1.1 p. 106. The former reads OIint/!, while the latter reads OIinO.,. The effect of
 LETTER 4

the hypostatic unity as either unattainable or improper, we fall

into saying that there are two sons. For there is every necessity
of distinguishing and of saying that he, as a man considered
separately, was honored in a special manner by the appellation
'the Son', and again separately the Word of God in a special
manner possesses by nature both the name and the reality of
filiation. Therefore, the one Lord Jesus Christ is not to be
divided into two sons.
(7) In no way will it be profitable that the true account of the
faith mean this even if some admit the union of persons. For
the Scripture has not said that the Word united the person of a
man to himself, but that he became flesh. 8 The Word becoming
flesh is nothing else except that he partook of blood and flesh
just as we are. He made our flesh his own, and was born man
from a woman without having thrown aside his divinity and his
being begotten of God the Father, but, in the assumption of
flesh, he remained what he was. The doctrine of the precise
faith everywhere maintains this. We shall find that the holy
Fathers have thought in this way. In this way, they have not
hesitated to call the Holy Virgin the Mother of God. They do
not say that the nature of the Word or his divinity took the
beginning of being from the Holy Virgin, but that his holy
body, animated by a rational soul, was born of her, united to
which [soul and body] in actual fact the Word is said to have
been begotten according to the flesh. 9 And! write these things
now from love in Christ, exhorting you as a brother, and
calling you to witness in the presence of Christ and his chosen
angels that you think and teach these doctrines with us, in
order that the peace of the churches may be saved and the
bond of concord and love between the priests of God may
continue unbroken. 10
o.~<i! is to stress that he [Christ] sits by his Father's side, while the effect of o.~6<;
is to stress that he [Christ] sits by his Father's side.
8. Cf. In 1.14.
9. Cyril's orthodoxy was well known before the controversy with Nestorius.
See J. Liebaert, La doctrine christologique de saint Gyrille d'Alexandrie avant la
querelle Nestorienne (Lille, 1951), 197-217.
10. The text of Letter 4 in AGO 2.1.1 p. 106 ends at this point. The two
sentences that follow are only included in Schwartz's edition of Letter 4 inACO
1.1.1 p. 28.
42 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

(8) Salute the brotherhood with you. The brotherhood with

us greets you in Christ.ll

11. Letter 4 has been called the epistula dogmatica. It was approved unani-
mously at the first meeting of the Council of Ephesus,June 22, 431. Pope Leo
the Great approved it in 450 as did the Councils of Chalcedon in 451 and
Constantinople in 553. See Quasten 3.133'
 LETTER 5

To his most pious and God-loving fellow bishop, Cyril, Nestorius

sends greetings in the Lord. I

DISMISS THE OUTRAGES against me of your amazing

letters as deserving healing forbearance and of being
answered in due season through circumstances them-
selves. But as to that which does not permit of silence, since it
involves great danger if silence be kept, of this, as far as I may
be able, I shall attempt to make a concise statement without
exerting myself to wordiness, being on my guard against the
nausea of obscure and indigestible tediousness. I shall begin
from the very wise utterances of your charity, citing them in
your very words. Which, therefore, are the utterances of the
amazing teaching of your letters?
(2) The holy and great council says that he, the only begot-
ten Son, was begotten by nature of God the Father, true God of
true God, light of light, through whom the Father made all
things, that he descended, was made flesh and became man,
suffered and rose. These are the words of your reverence, and
perhaps you recognize your own.
(3) But hear also our words, a brotherly exhortation to
piety, and that which the great Paul solemnly stated to his
beloved Timothy, "Be diligent in reading, in exhortation, and
in teaching. For in so doing you will save both yourself and
those who hear yoU."2 What, pray tell, does "be diligent" im-
ply? It means that in reading the teaching of those holy Fathers
without due attention you failed to recognize a pardonable

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.1 pp. 29-32.
Geerard numbers this letter 5305 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 52-56.
2. ITm 4.13,16.

43
44 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

misconception. You thought that they had said that the Word,
who is coeternal with the Father, is able to suffer. S Look closely,
if you please, at the precise meaning of their words, and you
will find that the inspired chorus of the Fathers has not said
that the consubstantial divinity is able to suffer, nor that divin-
ity, coeternal with the Father, was begotten, nor that divinity
rose from the dead when raising his destroyed temple. If you
give ear to brotherly correction, by citing for you the very
utterances, I shall rid you of your misinterpretation of those
holy Fathers, and through them of the inspired Scriptures.
(4) I believe, therefore, in our Lord Jesus Christ, his only
begotten Son. Notice how they place first as foundations the
words, Lord, Jesus, Christ, only begotten, and Son, the words
common to divinity and humanity. Then they build upon it the
tradition of the Incarnation, the Resurrection, and the Pas-
sion. They do so once the terminology signifying what is com-
mon to both natures has been presented, so that what belongs
to filiation and lordship may not be separated, and what be-
longs to the natures be in no danger of confusion in the
oneness of filiation.
(5) For in this Paul himself has been their teacher. When
mentioning the divine Incarnation and about to go on to the
Passion, he uses first the name Christ, a name common to both
natures, as I said a short time earlier, and then he adds a
specific term. What are his words? "Have this mind in you
which was also in Christ Jesus, for though being in the form of
God, he did not consider being equal to God a thing to be clung
to, but (to omit details) became obedient to death, even to
death on a crosS."4 When he was about to mention his death, in
order that no one might assume from this that God the Word
was subject to suffering, he puts the word Christ first as a name
signifying the substance capable of suffering and of the nature
incapable of suffering in one person, so that without danger
Christ may be called incapable and capable of suffering, inca-
pable because of his divinity and capable because of the nature
3. Cyril did not say this, cf. Letter 4·
4. Phil 2.5-8.
 LETTER 5 45
of his body. I could say much about this and, as said earlier,
that the holy Fathers mentioned not a begetting according to
the 'economy', but an incarnation, but I perceive that the
promise of brevity in my exordium curbs my speech and calls
forth the second topic of your charity.
(6) In it, I praise the distinction of the natures according to
the definition of humanity and divinity, and the conjunction of
them into one person, and not saying that God the Word had
need of a second begetting from a woman, and the profession
that the divinity does not admit of suffering. In truth such
doctrines are orthodox and opposite to the infamous opinions
of all heresies concerning the natures of the Lord. But if the
rest bring on some arcane wisdom incomprehensible for your
audience to understand, it is for you to scrutinize. To me, at
least, they seem to overthrow the first, for they introduced, I
do not know how, him who was proclaimed in the first state-
ments as incapable of suffering and not capable of receiving a
second begetting, as, in turn, capable of suffering and newly
created. This is as if the properties belonging to God the Word
according to nature were destroyed by the union with his
temple; or as if it is considered of little import to men that the
temple, which is without flaw and inseparable from the divine
nature, for the sake of sinners endured both birth and death;
or as if the voice of the Lord ought not to be believed when
saying to the Jews, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I
shall raise it Up."5 He did not say, "Destroy my divinity, and in
three days I will raise it up." Although I would like to amplify
my statements, I am restrained by recalling my promise.
Nevertheless, this has to be said, though I am observing
brevity.
(7) Everywhere in Sacred Scripture whenever it makes
mention of the 'economy' of the Lord, the birth for our sake
and the Passion are ascribed, not to the divinity, but to the
humanity of Christ. So according to the most precise appella-
tion, the Holy Virgin is called the Mother of Christ, not the
Mother of God. Listen to these words of the Gospels that say,

5· In 2.19·
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

"The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David,

the son of Abraham."6 Itis plain that God the Word was not the
son of David. Accept another testimony, if you please, "Jacob
begot Joseph, the husband of Mary, and of her was born Jesus
who is called Christ."7 Notice yet another voice testifying for
us, "Now the origin of Christ was in this wise. When Mary his
mother had been betrothed to Joseph, she was found to be with
child by the Holy Spirit."8 Whoever would assume that the
divinity of the only begotten was a creation of the Holy Spirit?
What need to say, "The mother ofJesus was there"9 and again,
"with Mary the Mother of Jesus" 10 and, "that which is begotten
in her is of the Holy Spirit"ll and, "take the child and his
mother and flee into Egypt" 12 and, "concerning his Son who
was born according to the flesh of the offspring of David"? 13
And again concerning his Passion, "Since God sent his Son in
the likeness of sinful flesh, and concerning sin he has con-
demned sin in the flesh"14 and again, "Christ died for our
sins" 15 and, "since Christ suffered in the flesh" 16 and, "This is
(not my divinity, but) my body, which is broken for yoU."17 And
heed the countless other voices testifying to the human race
that they should not think that the divinity of the Son was
recent, or capable of receiving bodily suffering, but that the
flesh was, which was joined to the nature of the divinity.
Wherefore, also, Christ calls himself both David's Lord and
Son, for he says, "What do you think of the Christ? Whose son
is he?" They say to him, "David's." Jesus answered and said to
them, "How then does David in the Spirit call him Lord saying,
'The Lord said to my Lord, sit at my right hand,' "18 as he is the
Son of David by all means according to the flesh, but his Lord
according to his divinity.
(8) Therefore, it is right and worthy of the Gospel traditions

6. Mt 1.1. 13. Rom 1.3.

7. Mt 1.16. 14. Cf. Rom 8·3.
8. Mt. u8. IS. I Cor 15.3.
9. In 2.1. 16. Cf. I Pt 4.1.
10. Cf. Acts 1.14. 17. Cf. Lk 22.19 and I Cor 11.24.
II. Cf. Mt 1.20. 18. Cf. Mt 22.42-44.
12. Mt. 2.13.
 LETTER 5 47
to confess that the body is the temple of the Son's divinity and a
temple joined to the divinity according to a certain sublime and
divine union, and that his divine nature makes his own the
things of his body. But in the name of this relationship to
attribute also to his divinity the properties of the united flesh, I
mean birth, suffering, and death, is, my brother, the act of a
mind truly led astray like the pagans or diseased like the minds
of that mad Apollinaris, Arius, and the other heresies, but
rather more grievously than they. For it is necessary that such
as are dragged into error by the word relationship make the
Word God partake of the nourishment of milk through the
relationship, and have a share in growing, little by little,19 and
of fear at the time of his Passion,20 and be in need of angelic
assistance. 21 And I pass over in silence that circumcision, sac-
rificing, sweat, hunger, and thirst, which happened to his body
on account of us, are worshipfully united to the divinity. If
these are taken with reference to the divinity, and falsely, there
is a cause for just condemnation against us as slanderers.
(9) These are the teachings handed down by the holy
Fathers; these are the precepts of the Holy Scriptures. Thus
one teaches about God the actions of the divine benevolence
and majesty. "Meditate on these things, give yourself entirely
to them, that your progress may be manifest to all, and towards
all,"22 as Paul says.
(10) But you do well to cling to your anxiety for those
scandalized, and I give thanks that your spirit, anxious over
things divine, took thought of our affairs. But realize that you
have been led astray by those condemned by the holy synod 23 as
Manichean sympathizers of the clerics who perhaps share your
opinions. For the affairs of the church daily go forward, and
the numbers of the faithful are so increasing through the grace
of God that those who behold the multitudes of them repeat
19. Cf. Lk 2.52.
20. Cf. Mt 26.38-45; Mk 14.33-41; Lk 22.39-46.
21. Cf. Lk 22.43.
22. 1 Tm 4.15.
23. This is a reference to the condemnation of Philip, a presbyter of the
Church of Constantinople. Reference is again made to Philip in the Memoran-
dum sent by Cyril to Pope Celestine. See Letter 11(a).
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

the words of the prophet, "The earth will be filled with the
knowledge of the Lord, as much water would veil the seas,"24
since the teaching has shed its light upon the interests of the
emperor, and, to put it briefly, one would very joyfully find
fulfilled day by day among us the famous saying with regard to
all the ungodly heresies and the correct teaching of the church,
"The house of Saul went forth and grew weak. And the house
of David went forth and was strengthened."25 These are our
counsels, as of a brother to a brother. "But if anyone is dis-
posed to be contentious," as Paul shall cry out against such a
one through us, "we have no such custom, neither have the
churches of God."26
(11) I and those with me greet especially all the brother-
hood with you. May you continue to be vigorous in Christ and
pray for us, my most God-loving friend who is dear to me in
every way.
24. Cf. Is II.g.
25. Cf. 2 Sm (2 Kgs) 3.1. The first part indicates a protracted war between
the house of Saul and the house of David.
26. 1 Cor 11.16.
 LETTERS 6 and 7

To my brother and fellow bishop.'

DID NOT BELIEVE that what was said about you hereto-
fore was true; nor did I think that the letter, which was
delivered to me under your name, was written by you,
since in it I found the most false opinions full of blasphemy
attributed to the saints. Therefore, I advise you to desist from
such blasphemies and contentions. You do not have such
strength that you are able to fight against God, who truly was
crucified for us and died in the flesh, and lives through the
power of his divinity, "He it is who sits at the right hand of the
Father,2 and angels, principalities, and powers adore him,3 and
he is the eternal king into whose hands the Father has given all
things."4 He himself is the creator of all against whom you are
unable either to rise up or struggle.
(2) Nor is there need that I recall to your memory what

1. Geerard 5306 in CPG includes the text of two letters from Cyril to
Nestorius which Eusebe Renaudot had numbered Letters 6 and 7 in his
Historia Jacobitarum Patriarcharum Alexandrinorum (Paris, 1713)' Renaudot's
edition of Letters 6 and 7, reproduced in PG 77.57--60 is in substantial
agreement with the critical Arabic text published by B. Evetts, History of the
Patriarchs of the Coptic Church of Alexandria (Arabic text edited, translated, and
annotated) PO 1:433-436. The Arabic text adds further Scripture references:
Mk 14.61,62; 1 Tm 6.13; Lk 1.32-35; Phil 2.6-7; 1 Thes 1.10; Heb 1.4--6; and
Heb 2.5, 8-g and concludes with these words: "You now see this wisdom full of
faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. I have sent you these letters, my brother, that
you may keep them in the church. You are not without knowledge, so read the
Scriptures and learn this and more from them. I have sent brothers to you and
asked them to remain with you that you may inquire diligently for a month and
search the Scriptures and inform us of the results. Farewell." The letters are
together in Arabic.
2. Cf. Ps IOg(llO).I; Heb 1.13.
3. Cf. Heb 1.6.
4. Cf. 1 Cor 15.26.

49
50 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

happened to the jews, his enemies, since they are sufficiently

well known to you, or the things which happened to the here-
tics, Simon Magus, julian the emperor, and Arius. Behold,job
the just man says, "See my affliction, and fear and praise the
Lord."5 I declare to you that the church is not going to permit
your shamelessness against her God, and she is the very church
against whom the gates of hell have not been able to prevail. 6
You yourself know how many trials she has endured, in such a
way, however, that no one has prevailed against her because
she is as a rock in her faith. Look, therefore, at what you are
about to do, and farewell. 7
(3) If you were not a bishop, no one except your friends and
relatives would have recognized you. Now, however, because
you sit upon the episcopal throne of the Son of God, everyone
recognizes you because of the dignity of the church over which
you preside. However, you are attacking the Lord through
words of blasphemy which you are able neither to explain nor
prove. Although you may examine the Old Testament you will
not find Christ called a mere man in it, as you suppose. Fur-
ther, you seem to suppose you are able to resist God, your
creator, who redeemed you with his blood, who is God, the Son
of God the Father, as he is called in the Old and New Testa-
ments, and who, in the Gospel of john, is called, "the only
begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father."8 Matthew the
Evangelist also says that he is "Emmanuel which is interpreted
God with US,"9 as Isaiah had said in his prophesy.lo

5. Cf. In 6.21.
6. Cf. Mt 16.IB.
7. Nestorius replied arrogantly to this letter and in his answer favored
blasphemies similar to the earlier ones. Cyril answered him sharply in Letter 7.
B. In !.lB.
g. Mt 1.23.
10. Cf. Is 7.14.
 LETTER 8

A letter of Cyril against those who accused him in writing that he

did not maintain silence on hearing that the impious teaching of
Nestorius was making more menacing inroads.'

INeE YOUR PIETY has written to me that the most de-

vout Nestorius was grieved because of the letter I
wrote to the monks desiring to hold in check those who
were scandalized atthe rumor, I say this of necessity, that it
arose not so much from us as from his reverence. I expounded
the doctrine of the true faith to those scandalized by his
interpretations. He himself in the Catholic and Orthodox
Church allowed the good bishop, Dorotheus,2 openly to say,
"If anyone says that Mary is the Mother of God, let him be
anathema." And when he heard this, he was not only silent
when Dorotheus spoke, but admitted him immediately into
mystical communion and made him his fellow communicant.
(2) See, therefore, that we have been anathematized in his
very presence, not to say by him, with him presiding, for
Dorotheus would not have spoken such things in the church
against the will of Nestorius. Now both we the living, the
bishops throughout the world, and our Fathers who have gone
to God have been anathematized. What then hindered us also
from writing the opposite to his words and saying, "If anyone
does not call Mary the Mother of God, let him be anathema"?
But I have not done this so far because of him, in order that

I. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 p. 109. Geerard
numbers this letter 5307 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 163-164.
2. Dorotheus was Bishop of Marcianopolis, a see in Lower Moesia on the
right bank of the Danube, named after Trajan's sister, Marciana. At the time of
the Council of Ephesus he sided with the group around John of Antioch, and
signed the act which deposed Cyril and Memnon, Bishop of Ephesus.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

some may not say that the Bishop of Alexandria or the Egyp-
tian synod anathematized him. If the most devout bishops
throughout the East and West should learn that they were all
anathematized, (for all say and confess that holy Mary is the
Mother of God), how will they be disposed? Or how will not all
be grieved, if not for their own sakes, at all events for the holy
Fathers, in whose writings we always find the Holy Virgin Mary
named Mother of God? If the result had not seemed to be a
burdensome thing, I would have sent you many books of many
of the holy Fathers in which it is possible to find, not once, but
very often, the customary expression by which they confess the
Holy Virgin Mary to be the Mother of God.
 LETTER 9

A letter of Cyril to a certain devotee of Nestorius. 1

KNOW THE SINCERITY of your charity and I have not

been ignorant of your zeal. If I were writing to some-
one who did not know my character, I would have used
many words persuading him that I am very peaceful, and not
quarrelsome or warlike but, on the contrary, praying to love all
and be loved by all. But since I am writing to one who knows
me, I explain this concisely, that if it were possible to endure
the loss of possessions or money, and to put an end to grief for
a brother, I would gladly have done so, in order not to appear
to consider anything more honorable than love. But when it is
a matter of faith, and all the churches throughout the Roman
Empire, so to speak, have been scandalized, what are we to do?
For there is no one, from whatever city or land he may come,
who does not say, "What are these rumors" and "What kind of
new doctrine is attacking the churches?" What shall we do
against these evils, we who have been entrusted by God with
the doctrine of the mystery, against whom on the day ofjudg-
ment those who are introduced into the mysteries will certainly
testify? For they will say that they kept the faith as they were
introduced to it by us. And if we have done this rightly, we shall
both receive a reward and meet with praise, but if we do
otherwise and perversely, what kind of flames will be enough
to punish us? For we shall hear, "You destroyed my land and
you killed my people,"2 according to the Scripture. Each of
those who are laymen in rank will give an account of his own

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 p. 108. Geerard
numbers this letter 5308 in CPG. See also Festugiere, iphese, 161-162.
2. Is 14.20.

53
54 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

life. But we who have been heavily laden with the duties of the
episcopacy will give an account, not only of ourselves, but of all
those believing in Christ.
(2) For me, then, there is no consideration of pain or of
insolence or of the amount of abuse which some disreputable
men have hurled against me. But let all this depart into obliv-
ion. God will also judge those who have blabbered nonsense.
Only let the doctrines of the faith be safe and I am friendly and
affectionate, and yield to no one in the obligation of showing
greater love to the God-loving bishop, Nestorius. To speak
before God, I wish him to be of good repute in Christ, to blot
out the disgrace for what is already past, and to show that the
gossip of some people against his faith is slander and not at all
truth.
(3) But if we have been commanded by Christ to love even
those who hate us,s how is it not more reasonable to do this for
our brothers and fellow bishops? There is no doubt that, if the
faith is lost by some, we will not abandon their souls, not even if
suffering and death itself be before us. If we fear to speak the
truth for the glory of God so that we might not fall into
unpleasantness, with what countenance before the people
shall we any longer recount the praises of the holy martyrs
whom we honor because they have observed the saying, "unto
death fight for truth"?4
3. Cf. Mt 5·44·
4. Cf. Sir 4.28.
 LETTER 10

A letter' of the same.'

READ THE MEMORANDUM dispatched by you, through

which I learned that when Anastasius the priest met
you, he pretended to be seeking friendship and peace
and said, "As'he wrote to the monks; so we think." Then,
looking toward his own objective, he said about me, "He him-
self also said that the holy counciP did not mention the expres-
sion; I mean, Mother of God." But I had written that even if
the,council did not mention the expression, it had acted right-
ly, for at that time no such question had been raised. Where-
fore it was not necessary to bring forward matters which were
not being questioned, particularly if the synod recognized by
the meaning of the terms the Holy Virgin to be the Mother of
God. It said that he, the begotten of the Father, through whom
all things were made, was incarnate, was made man, suffered,
rose from the dead, ascended into heaven, and will come as
judge of the living and of the dead. The council did not in any
way say that the Word itself, begotten of God by nature, died or
was pierced in the side by a spear. For what sort of side, pray
tell, does that which is incorporeal have? Or how could life die?
But the council said that, because the Word was united to flesh,
when his flesh was suffering he appropriated the suffering to
himself since his own body was suffering. Therefore, they who
say such things are deceiving and beguiling themselves, be-

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 pp. 110-112.
Geerard numbers this letter 5309 in CPG.
2. From St. Cyril, Bishop of Alexandria, to the clergy in Constantinople.
3. Nicaea.

55
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

cause they are mistaken and have their own poison in their
hearts.
(2) It is possible to see this from the following. Two docu-
ments were dispatched to Bupha Martyr, the deacon, in whose
care are ecclesiastical matters. One document was put together
by Photius, or by someone else, against the work which I sent to
the monks. The other, in the form of a pamphlet, had an
outrageous title which read as follows: "Addressed to those
who, because of the combination, either minimize the divinity
of the only begotten or deify his humanity." The introduction
is directed against the insults of heretics as springing from
obstinacy, and then attempts to show that it was his body that
suffered and not God the Word, as if some say that the Word of
God, which is not capable of suffering, is capable of suffering.
But no one is so mad.
(3) As we often said, the holy council said that the Word
himself, through whom all things were made, suffered; but
suffered in his flesh, according to the Scriptures. For, because
his body suffered, he himself is said to have suffered, just as
also a man's soul is said to suffer because its body suffers,
although by its own nature the soul does not have pain. But
since it is their aim to say that there are two christs and two
sons, one being properly man, the other properly God, they
then make the union be of persons only and, for this reason,
they make subtle distinctions and weave "excuses in sin" as it is
written.4
(4) Therefore, when you meet them, speak as follows, "You
are wrong in inciting some to talk nonsense against your
bishop, inflaming them and applauding them, and making
them the instruments of their own wickedness. However, this
is not the pretext for the distress, nor is your bishop entirely
hostile to the bishop here. The fact that the teaching about
Christ is not correct but distorted grieves all the bishops
throughout the East and West."
(5) Sufficient proof and refutation are found in the fact that
no one in the churches ever uttered such teachings as are
 LETTER 10 57
contained in his explanations. Thus speaks Nestorius, "I judge
your affection toward me not by outcry, but by your desire to
be instructed and to be reminded of the divinity together with
the humanity ofthe Lord." And a little later, "And I take heed
that our people have much piety and the warmest reverence,
but are incapacitated by the ignorance of divine mysteries. But
this is not an accusation of the laity; rather, to speak becom-
ingly, it is because their teachers do not have the opportunity to
place before you some of the dogmas more precisely."5
(6) How could I put it properly? Did not those before him
have leisure? Is he not more eloquent than John? Is he equal to
or wiser than the blessed Atticus? What arrogance is this? But
rather, how did he not distinctly confess that he introduced a
strange and unfamiliar doctrine, and, through its absurdity,
one not known to those before him, neither in the assembly of
the faithful nor in the holy churches? There has been so far no
discussion at all on my part against him concerning the matter.
But rather it may happen that he repent and confess the true
faith, and he will answer to God for the things which he has
done to me in anger and by arousing enemies against me.
(7) It is no wonder if the offal of the city, Chaeremon,
Victor, Sophronas, and the underling of fraudulent Flavian
speak ill of me. They have already been a bad influence, both
on one another and on everyone else. But let the one who
incited them know that we fear neither death nor a defense in
court against them, if there be an opportunity for this. It
happens that the 'economy' of the Savior gathers a synod
because of small and very slight matters in order to purify his
church who keeps the true faith stainless and unconfused. Let
the wretched man not think, even though there may be many
reputable men who are likely to accuse us through regard for
him, that he will be judge of our doctrines, even if this be
introduced at court from ambition. When we have gone
thither, we will challenge him and, God help us, he will defend
his blasphemies. Hence in no way do we flee from peace, but
rather grasp it, if the true faith be confessed and they cease

5. See Loofs, Nestoriana, 282.1!t-21 and 283.2-8.

 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

saying these things; for by using their strange terminology

they are calling death upon themselves. For the pamphlet
which was sent has so many of his blasphemous distortions in it
as to defile even the reader.
(8) But since it has charged that Scripture, or rather the
holy council, has used an unaccustomed word when naming
the Holy Virgin the Mother of God, let them be asked where is
there evidence for Christotokos (Mother of Christ) or Theodochos
(receptacle of God)? In addition, not knowing what he says, he
inserted the following which is word for word, "Let us not
make the Virgin, who was the receptacle of God, equal to
God." For if she did not give birth to God, neither did she have
Christ, who is God, in her womb, and how is she still the
receptacle of God? And yet he calls God the Father God-
begetting.6 Where he reads these terms, I do not know. How-
ever, since many other matters for complaint drawn from his
statements are slurred over, they will be kept safe until the
right moment, unless some change of mind should take place.
(9) I received and read the rough draft of the petition which
was sent by you as one which ought to be delivered to the
emperor with our opinion. Since it contained much invective
against the one there, or, should I say, my brother, I have
withheld it so far, in order that he might not corne forward
against us saying, "You denounced me to the emperor as a
heretic." We suggested otherwise, with also an appeal for his
decision, stating the nature of his enmity and saying that the
action should be shifted to other authorities if they completely
resist.
(10) Accordingly, after reading the draft, deliver it, and,
should need call for it, that is, if you see that he continues
plotting and truly meddles in every way that deals with us,
write to me quickly. And I have chosen discreet and prudent
men, both bishops and monks, whom I shall send at the first
opportunity. For "I will not grant sleep to my eyes, nor slumber
to my eyelids, nor rest to my temples,"7 according to the Scrip-
6. Nestorius applied to God the Father the term eEo'T6KO~, which is nor-
mally applied to the Holy Virgin.
7. Cf. Ps 131(132).4,5. Cf. also 1 Tm 6.12 and 2 Tm 4·7·
 LETTER 10 59
ture, until I have fought the fight for the salvation of all.
Wherefore, having learned our opinions, act manfully. Pres-
ently there will be the necessary letters to the proper people.
(11) It is my aim for the faith in Christ to labor and endure
any suffering whatsoever, no matter how terrible it is deemed
to be, until I submit to death, which will be sweet to me because
of this trouble.
 LETTER 11

To his most holy and God-loving Father, Celestine, Cyril sends

greetings in the Lord. 1

F IT WERE POSSIBLE, by not writing to your reverence2

everything going on, to be silent and without blame,
and to escape appearing troublesome, especially in
matters so necessary when even the truth of the faith is being
undermined by some, I would have said to myself that silence is
good and without danger, and to be at rest is better than to be
involved in turmoil. But since God also demands of us wariness
in these matters, and the long-standing customs of the chur-
ches persuade me to communicate with your holiness, I write
of necessity revealing this, that satan is even now turning
everything topsy-turvy, and rages against the churches of God,
and tries to pervert the people everywhere who are walking
uprightly in the faith. For that thoroughly depraved beast,
productive of impiety, is not quiet.
(2) Accordingly I was silent during the time past, and I have
written absolutely nothing either to your reverence concern-
ing the one who is now in Constantinople and administers the
church, nor have I written to any other of our fellow bishops,
believing that in these matters precipitate action is not without
blame. But since we have come to a crest ofthe evil, as it were, I
thought it was absolutely necessary to loosen my tongue
hereafter and to say that everything is in turmoil.
(3) For as soon as he was mentioned in the diptychs and
consecrated it was necessary by exhortations toward good that
I. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.5 pp. 10-12.
Geerard numbers this letter 5310 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 528-
531.
2. Celestine 1, Pope, 422-432.

60
 LETTER 11

he help the people and the foreigners residing there, for these
were very many and, as it were, from every city and land. But
he made haste to say some extraordinary things quite beyond
understanding, and such as are far from the faith of the
apostles and the Gospels which the Fathers have protected
above all and transmitted to us as a precious pearl. And I have
sent to your reverence, as accurate evidence, the homilies
which he gave in the church, and that frequently, and he does
not cease to give them. I confess that, although I wished to
make it clear to him by a synodical letter that we are unable to
have dealings with one who says and thinks these things, I have
not done this. But because I thought that it is necessary to offer
a hand to those who slipped and to raise them as fallen
brethren, I advised him through letters to desist from such
false teachings. But we profited nothing. Since he has learned
that we have recoiled so much from sharing his opinions as
even to rebuke him to change his own particular novelties, for I
would not say his teachings, he has set in motion every kind of
plot, and still does not cease from causing disturbance. While
we suppose him to be mending his ways and desisting from
teachings against Christ, we learned from the following inci-
dent that we fell utterly short of our expectations.
(4) There was in Constantinople a bishop, Dorotheus3 by
name, who had the same opinions as he, a man easily flattered
and froward of mouth, as is written. 4 When the most pious
Nestorius was sitting on the throne in the assembly of the
Church of Constantinople, he arose and dared to say in a loud
voice, "If anyone says that Mary is the Mother of God, let him
be anathema." And there was a great shout from all the people
and they ran out. They did not want to associate any longer
with those who had such opinions, so that even now the people
of Constantinople keep away except from a few shallower
ones, and those who flatter him. But nearly all the monasteries
and their archimandrites, and many of the senators do not join
him. They fear lest they be injured in faith, while he and those
3. Cf. Letter 8 note 2.
4· Cf. Pry 4. 2 4, 13·3'
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

with him, whom he brought when going up from Antioch, say

everything perverted.
(5) But after his homilies were brought to Egypt, I learned
that some less sophisticated ones were misled, and then waver-
ing were saying to one another, "Is he speaking the truth
rightly? He has been led astray." Because I feared lest the
teachings of the disease might strike roots in the souls of the
more simple ones, I wrote a general letter to the monasteries in
Egypt strengthening them in the true faith. Then some took
copies to Constantinople, and they helped the readers very
much, so that very many of those in authority have written
thanking me. But this only fed his grievance against me and he
struggles as with an enemy having nothing else to censure than
just that I do not bear to share his teachings. I even strength-
ened in many the faith which we received from the Fathers,
persuading them also to consider acceptable those things
which we learned from Holy Scripture. Yet I do not consider
the things done by him against me, but consign that to God,
omniscient and almighty. I have written another letter to the
person mentioned" containing as in a summary the exposition
of the true faith, and at the same time exhorting and solemnly
protesting that he should think and speak in the same manner.
But again I profited nothing. He clings even until now to his
original errors, and does not cease saying distorted things.
(6) Let your reverence know this too, that the things I am
saying are agreeable to all the bishops of the East. All are
displeased and pained, and especially the most pious bishops
of Macedonia. Although he knows this, he thinks that he is
wiser than all, and alone knows the meaning of the divinely
inspired Scripture and the mystery of Christ. And when all the
orthodox bishops and laity throughout the whole world con-
fess that Christ is God and that the Virgin who bore him is the
Mother of God, how should he fail to be fully convinced that he
alone was straying from the faith by denying this? But he is a
supercilious man and because of his position of authority he
thinks that by plotting against all he will persuade us and all

5. That is, Letter 4. Cyril means Nestorius.

 LETTER 11

others to agree with his teachings. What, therefore, shall we

do? We neither convince him nor are able to stop him from
such homilies, and those in Constantinople have been daily
ruined, even though they are displeased and are receiving
assistance from orthodox teachers. Our statement is not about
ordinary matters, but neither is silence without risk. For if
Christ is blasphemed, how shall we be silent, especially as Paul
writes, "If I do this willingly, I have a rew~rd. But if unwill-
ingly, I am nevertheless entrustedlwith a dispensation"?6 What
shall we say on the day of judgment, we who have been en-
trusted with the stewardship of the Word and the safety of the
faith, we who were silent against these?
(7) But we do not throw off communion with him openly,
until we have communicated these matters to your reverence.
Wherefore deign to specify what seems best, and whether it is
necessary to be in communion with him sometimes, or to
forbid henceforward openly because no one is in communion
who thinks and teaches such things. It is necessary that the
intention of your reverence in these matters become clear by a
letter both to the most devout and most God-loving bishops in
Macedonia and to all those in the East. For we shall give them,
as they earnestly desire, the means of staying of one mind and
one opinion, and of contending for the true faith which is
being attacked.
(8) As far as the matter stands according to him, both our
great, admired, and well-esteemed Fathers and we who still
live were anathematized along with them because we said that
the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God. Since he did not desire to
do this with his own lips, he set up another, the aforemen-
tioned Dorotheus, and prepared this statement, while he was
sitting and listening, and, having come down from the throne,
he immediately took communion with him as he' performed
the divine mysteries.
(9) So that your holiness would know clearly what are the
things which he says and thinks, and what our blessed and

6. 1 Cor 9.17. Paul is speaking about preaching the Gospel.

7. Nestorius.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

great Fathers said and thought, I issued documents containing

excerpts from the principal statements. I caused them to be
translated 8 as far as it was possible for men in Alexandria, and I
have given to the beloved Posidonius the letters written by me,
commanding him to bring them to your holiness.

8. Translated into Latin. This passage indicates a lack of knowledge of

Greek at Rome in the early fifth century A.D. and a lack of knowledge of Latin
in Alexandria.
 LETTER 11 (a)

A Memorandum l of the most holy bishop Cyril to Posidonius in

Rome, sent by him on account of matters pertaining to Nestorius. 2

HIS IS THE TENOR of the faith of N estorius or rather his

false opinions. He says that God the Word, because he
knew beforehand that the one born of the Holy Virgin
would be holy and great, chose him for this and provided that
he be born of the Virgin without man, granted him the favor of
being called by his names, so that he is called both Son, Lord
and Christ and prepared him to die for us and raised him from
the dead. Wherefore, even if the only begotten Word of God is
said to become man, because God was always with him as with a
holy man born of the Virgin, for this reason the Word is said to
have become man. Just as God was with the prophets, so, he
says, God was with him in a closer 'co~unction'.3
(2) Because ofthis he avoids everywhere saying the 'union'/
but calls it 'conjunction', as ifthere is one from without, and as
if God might say to Jesus, ''Just as I was with Moses, so I shall be
with you."" But concealing his impiety he says that God was
with him from the womb.
(3) And according to this he does not say that he is true God,
but that he is thus named by the good pleasure of God, and

1. For the critical text of this Memorandum see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.7 pp.
171-172. Geerard numbers this Memorandum 5311 in CPG. Lampe lists it as
Letter 11 (a) in PGL, xx.
2. Letter 11 and this Memorandum sent to Rome indicate that in Cyril's day
doctrinal matters were referred to Rome for decision.
3. This term, (TUVu<!>ELa, is Nestorian. It is used along with the word
T1~IL1TAOV in reference to Christ's body. See Letter 5, and Lampe, PGL 1309,
s.v., "(TUVu<!>ELa."
4. Cyril's term, 'EvwO"v;.
5. Cf. Jos 1.5 and 3·7·
66 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

even if he was named Lord, so again he wishes him to be Lord

because the Word of God granted to him the favor of being
named thus also.
(4) And he says that when we say that the Son of God died
for us and rose from the dead, that the man died and the man
rose, and nothing of this has to do with the Word of God.
(5) And we confess that the Word of God is immortal and is
life, but we believe that he was made flesh, that is, by uniting to
himself the flesh with a rational soul, he suffered in his flesh
according to the Scriptures and that, since his body suffered,
he himself is said to have suffered, although by nature he is
impassible; and when his body arose, for his flesh did not see
corruption,s we say that he rose for our sake. But these do not
meet with his approval, but he says that the suffering is the
man's, and the Resurrection the man's, and the body set forth
in the mysteries is the man's. But we believe that the flesh of the
Word is capable of giving life, because of this, that it is the flesh
and blood of the Word, which gives life to all.
(6) Nestorius does not tolerate the saying of these things.
He caused Celestius7 to publish polemical documents against
Philip, the priest, who opposed him and was no longer willing
to be in communion with him because of his heresy. In the
pamphlets there was an accusation of Manichaeanism. Then
the man was summoned to a council. And he came ready to
defend himself because he took doctrinal formulation to be the
issue. But when Celestius had nothing to show, he absented
himself and did not return to the council.
(7) Not finding this a pretext, he turned to another. For he
said, "For what reason did you hold a rival meeting for
worship, and offer the sacrifice in a house?" And although
almost every cleric said, "Each of us does this in a crisis and in
need" he issued a decree of degradation against the man.
(8) There you have the documents containing the main
points of the blasphemies of Nestorius.

6. Cf. Acts 2.31.

7. He is believed to be the same Celestius who was a disciple of Pelagius. It
was customary for Pelagius to call Catholics Manichaeans. See ODCC' 1058,
s.v., "Pelagianism."
 LETTER 12

Celestine, to his beloved brother, Cyril.'

o us IN OUR SADNESS the documents sent through

our son Posidonius, the deacon, from your holiness
brought joy and we exchanged our sorrow for happi-
ness. As we looked at and reflected upon what the one who is
attempting to disturb the church in Constantinople with his
distorted homilies said, our soul was overwhelmed with no
little sorrow. We were tormented by the goadings of various
doubts, pondering the way to aid the preservation of the faith.
But as we turned our attention to the writings 2 of your frater-
nity, immediately there appeared to us a most ready cure
through which the pestilential disease may be completely
driven out by a wholesome remedy. I mean the outflow of the
pure spring which flows from the message of your love by
which all the slime of the turgidly flowing stream shall be
cleansed, and to all is opened up a way to the proper under-
standing of our faith.
(2) Just as therefore we brand and blame him, so in the love
of the Lord we embrace your holiness as if present in your own
writings, seeing that we think one and the same about the
Lord. And it is no wonder that the most provident bishop of
the Lord fights in behalf of the love of the faith with such valor
that he resists the extraordinary boldness of the adversaries

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 pp. 75-77.
Geerard numbers this letter 5312 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 112-
114·
2. Not all of Cyril's writings are meant, but only those mentioned at the end
of the preceding letter, including the Memorandum. Pope Celestine is not
here approving the famous formula of Cyril or the term 'EvwO'tc; <!>oo"LKf) of
Cyril's third anathema, cf. Letter 17.
68 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

and strengthens those entrusted to him with such warnings.

Just as the former are bitter to us, so the latter are sweet. Just as
they are unclean, so these are pure. We rejoice seeing that such
vigilance is in your piety that you have already surpassed the
examples of your predecessors who always were themselves
defenders of the orthodox teaching. Truly the evangelical
testimony shall fit well upon you which says, "The good
shepherd lays down his life for his own sheep."3 Just as you are
a good shepherd, so he is not even worthy of being denounced
as a bad hireling who is accused, not because he abandoned his
own sheep, but because he himself was discovered rending
them in pieces.
(3) We were about to add some details also, beloved brother,
had we not seen that your thoughts are in complete agreement
with ours, and we approve you as a most strong defender in the
confirmation of the faith. Everything which your holiness has
written concerning this matter was delivered to us in order by
our son, Posidonius, the deacon. You bared all the snares of
the treacherous preaching, and you strengthened the faith so
that the heart of those believing in Christ, our God, cannot be
drawn to the other side. This is a great triumph for our faith
to show forth our doctrines so forcefully, and thus to have
defeated the opposing doctrines through the testimony of
the divine Scriptures. What shall he accomplish henceforth?
Whither shall he turn himself, who, by becoming a lover of
impious innovation, since he desired to serve himself in his
own ideas rather than to serve Christ, was willing to injure the
people who were entrusted to him by the poison of his own
preaching? It is necessary both to understand clearly and to
remember that one must flee rather than seek foolish ques-
tions which do not promote the health of souls but proceed to
their destruction. 4
(4) Nevertheless we ought to recall, if we can, one who is
hurrying toward the very crags, or rather already lingering on
the crag itself whence he will fall, lest we shall hasten his fall by

3. Cf.Jn 10.11.
4· Cf. Ti 3·9·
 LETTER 12 69
not rescuing him. Christ, our God, about whose birth questions
are being raised, taught us 5 to take pains for one sheep, desir-
ing to recall it even on his own shoulders, lest it be exposed to
the wolf for prey. And so then, how does he, who taught us to
move so quickly for the safety of one sheep, desire us to take
pains for the shepherd of the sheep himself, who, having
forgotten the name itself and the mandate of shepherd,
turned himself into the rapacity of a wolf desiring to destroy
the flock which he himself ought to keep safe? We ought to
remove this shepherd from the fold of the lambs if we do not
correct him, as we desire. It is our wish that there still be hope
of pardon for the one being corrected, so that he may return
and live, if he would not destroy the life of those entrusted to
him.
(5) But let there be an open judgment against him if he
continues, for such a wound must be cut out, by which not one
limb is injured, but the whole body of the church is wounded.
For what is he, who differs from our faith and seems to agree
only with himself, doing in the midst of those who agree with
each other? Wherefore let them share in our communion
whom he put away from communion because they speak
against him, and let him know that he cannot share our com-
munion if he persists in this path of perversion by opposing the
apostolic teaching.
(6) Accordingly, since the authentic teaching of our see is in
harmony with you, using our apostolic authority you will carry
out this decree with accurate firmness. Within ten days, count-
ing from the day of this warning, he should either condemn his
evil teachings by a written confession, and strongly affirm that
he himself holds that belief concerning the birth of Christ, our
God, which the Church of Rome, and the church of your
holiness, and universal devotion upholds, or, if he should not
do this, your holiness, because of care for that church, should
immediately understand that he must be removed from our
body in every way who did not desire to receive the healing of
those treating him, and, as an evil pestilence, was driven

5. Cf. Lk 15·5·
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

toward his own destruction and that of all those entrusted to

him.
(7) And we wrote these same instructions to our holy
brothers and fellow bishops, John, Rufus, Juvenal, and Fla-
vian, 6 in order that our judgment concerning him, or rather
the divine judgment of Christ, may be manifest.

6. John was Bishop of Antioch, Rufus of Thessalonica, Juvenal of Jeru-

salem, and Flavian of Philippi.
 LETTER 13

To my beloved brother and fellow bishop John, Cyril sends greet-

ings in the Lord. 1

OUR REVERENCE,2 DOUBTLESS, completely and through

many persons knows of the present condition of the
holy Church of Constantinople, that it is exceedingly
upset, and many even of the very zealous and moderate people
have remained excommunicated, enduring no ordinary dis-
turbance about the faith itself from the things said in that
church by the most devout bishop, Nestorius. I also counseled
him by letters to abstain from questions so wicked and per-
verted, and to follow the faith of the Fathers.
(2) But he thought I wrote these things from ill-will. He was
so far from heeding one who had written to his piety out of love
that he thought that he could carry away an audience even in
Rome with such thoughts and words. He wrote some strange
things when he composed a long letter to my lord, the most
God-revering Bishop of the Church of Rome, Celestine. He
actually included in his letter a statement against his opponents
that they do not shrink from calling the Holy Virgin Mother of
God. Then he also sent pamphlets of his teachings, and, after
they read them and after many assemblies had been held, the
God-revering bishops in the great city of Rome cried out
against him, openly saying that he was instituting a very dan-
gerous heresy such as no previous heretic had invented.
(3) Because it was necessary for me to tell all that happened,

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 pp. 92-93.
Geerard numbers this letter 5313 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 137-
138.
2. John, Bishop of Antioch.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

since his piett wrote to Rome, and to send to him 4 copies of my

writings, the beloved deacon, Posidonius, a cleric of Alexan-
dria, had to go abroad. When his statements were read in the
assembly, and especially his letters in which there is no room
for quibbling, for they have his signature, the holy Roman
synod decreed openly and actually put in writing what those
holding fast to communion with the whole West must observe.
They have also written similar letters to Rufus, the God-loving
Bishop of Thessalonica, and to the rest of the God-revering
bishops of Macedonia, who always concur with his decisions.
They have written the same to J uvenal, the most God-revering
Bishop of Jerusalem.
(4) Accordingly it is the duty of your reverence to consider
what is advantageous. 5 For we shall follow the judgments from
him 6 fearing to slip away from the communion of so many
bishops. They have been constrained not by paltry reasons,
nor have they rendered judgment and pronounced sentence
for slight causes, but for the faith itself, and for the churches
everywhere disturbed, and for the edification of the people.
(5) Salute the brotherhood with you; the brethren with me
salute you in the Lord.

3. Nestorius.
4. Pope Celestine I.
5. John had tried to make Nestorius change his ways previously.
6. Pope Celestine I.
 LETTER 14

To my beloved lord, brother and fellow bishop Acacius, Cyril sends

greetings in the Lord. I

HOSE WHO ARE MUCH grieved and have a heart wound-

ed by anxieties have great comfort when they tell some
like-minded persons the reasons for their grief. And I
am such a one. Indeed because of this I thought it necessary to
write to your perfection2 the causes for which ,justly, as I think,
I have been grieved or rather I am grieved even still. It was not
enough for the most pious bishop, Nestorius, to say in church
things which gave scandal to the church and enfeebled the
faith in Christ, the Savior of us all, but he actually also allowed a
certain bishop, Dorotheus, to dare to say openly in church and
before the congregation, "If anyone says that Mary is the
Mother of God, let him be anathema."
(2) What shall we do in the orthodox church since we have
been anathematized with the holy Fathers? For I find the
renowned bishop, Athanasius, very often in his writings nam-
ing her the Mother of God, and our blessed father, Theophi-
Ius, and many other holy bishops also in their days did so, Basil,

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 pp. g8-gg.
Geerard numbers this letter 5314 in CPG. See also Festugiere, tphese, 146-
167.
2. Acacius, Bishop of Beroea in northern Thrace, was already an old man
at the time. He was famed for sanctity, but two episodes of his life are difficult
to explain. He worked against St.John Chrysostom at the Synod of the Oak in
403 (see Letter 2, note 2), and when his plea for leniency toward Nestorius
failed he worked against Cyril during the Council of Ephesus. His letters make
strange reading as a result. He died at the unusual age of 110 years, about 433.
See Quasten 3.482, and "Acacius I" in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart 1
(Tiibingen, 1957), col. 82.

73
74 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

and Gregory, and blessed Atticus himself.3 None of the ortho-

dox bishops, I think, feared to call her the Mother of God, if, as
is the fact, it is true that the Emmanuel is God. The holy
Fathers who are with God and all who, while following the
right teachings of the truth, confess that Christ is God, have
become anathema.
(3) But the damage as a result of the affair does not stop
here, for the minds of the people have also been perverted. I
have lamented as I heard that some have already fallen to this
point of unbelief and ignorance that they do not admit that
Christ is God and that others, even if they choose to admit that
he is God at all, have no true faith in him, but say that he bears
this name by good pleasure and grace as we do. These are
causes for lamentation and wailing.
(4) What real advantage is there to discuss publicly matters
so subtle and hidden? Why do we not rather aid the people by
discourses on moral topics, if we do not have a high degree of
dogmatic exactitude? Since we explained the true teaching of
the faith to the monks in Egypt and Alexandria, who had been
disturbed by such readings, that is to say statements, he has
proven himself the enemy and has become hostile. He gathers
together certain imposters and condemned men and prepares
certain lies against me before many persons.
(5) And perhaps justly. For if we had zeal for God, and if we
were imitators of the love for God which the Fathers had, we
would long ago have taken a stand by issuing a synodal decree
against those who dare to babble nonsense against Christ and
anathematize us the living, and the holy Fathers already with
God. By such a decree probably those whose faith had been
impaired would be healed.
(6) Salute the brotherhood with you. The brethren with me
salute you in the Lord.
3. Atticus, Patriarch of Constantinople, and Theophilus, uncle and prede-
cessor of Cyril, both were involved in the Synod of the Oak.
 LETTER 15

To my lord, Cyril, the most holy and most God-loving bishop,

Acacius sends greetings in the Lord. 1

,READ THE UNHAPPY letter of your reverence, which

was recently delivered to me, one filled with tears and
lamentations on account of the common talk in Con-
stantinople. In it the profundity of your faith in Christ prevails
and also states, as is necessary, how extraordinary it was to have
brought this matter into our midst even in the beginning. What
did it profit Apollinaris of Laodicea to be one of those fighting
in the forefront, a great combatant fighting powerfully in
behalf of the true faith against its enemies? By presuming his
own wisdom and by desiring to introduce certain paths out of
trackless places to the pure and genuine faith of Christ, did he
not bring it about that he was considered among schismatics by
the Universal Church? Has it not been said by one of the
bishops before us 2 of vigorous mind and full knowledge, be-
cause he desired to check well-disposed persons from med-
dling in matters above man, when he made the statement, "Let
the way be honored by silence in which the Father begot the
only begotten"? And as his homily progressed he recounted
how this inquiry almost escapes all the powers in heaven alike,
to say nothing of men and human comprehension.
(2) Surely the advice of the divine Scriptures is necessary

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 pp. 99-100.
Geerard numbers this letter 5315 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 148-
150. On Acacius d. Letter 14, note 2.
2. St. Basil in his homily In sanctam Christi generationem. See: Basilii Caesareae
Cappadociae Archiepiscopi OPera Omnia Quae Extant, ed. J. Garnier (Paris, 1839),
2 :848, opening sentence and final sentence of section 1,849. See also Quasten
3.219, 228-2 31.

75
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

and fitting when they explain, "Seek not the things that are too
high for you, and search not into things above your ability; but
the things that have been commanded you, think on them. For
there is no need for you of things hidden."3 But those seeking
to speak on behalf of men who endeavored to think and de-
clare these things say that they have experienced something
nearly like that which the blessed Paulinus, the bishop,
endured. 4 He refused to say openly three substances (hu-
postaseis)," although he implicitly and truly thought so and
conformed in these matters. He followed the western God-
loving bishops because of the Latin expression, 6 and its inabil-
ity to express three hupostaseis, compared to our Greek idiom.
(3) However, all of us, who can share the distress of the
Church of God, must consider it important to repress the
formula reported, so as not to give a pretext to those prepared
to tear apart and divide the Church of God. Therefore your
clear and balanced judgment must calm the disturbance, if it
was such to begin with, capable of troubling and disturbing
many pious and Christ-loving persons. As I said beforehand,
many of those coming from Constantinople to us in Antioch,
some clerics and some laity, seem to agree with the reported
statement as not having a meaning opposed to the apostolic
faith, and to the faith of the holy Fathers who assembled in
Nicaea concerning the controversy over the word consubstan-
tial, a faith coming from God and transmitted to the entire
Universal Church. Since the crisis calls for it, deem it right to
show forth the wisdom, sympathy, and perfection of your
episcopal office. If your holiness will act as arbiter for the

3. Cf. Sir 3.21,22.

4. Paulinus was Bishop of Antioch during the Arian heresy. He opposed
Meletius and was confirmed as Bishop of Antioch. His part in the trouble is
discussed in St. jerome's Letters 57 and 58 to Pope Damasus. See I. Hilberg,
ed.,SanctiEusebiiHieronymiEpistulaePars I: Epistulae I-70, CSEL54: 503-541.
5. This refers to the Arian denial that the second person of the Trinity,
God the Son, is of one essence, nature or substance with the Father. The Arians
held that hupostasis meant substance, and held that in God there are three
substances, of which only one had the plenitude of divinity. The true faith
holds that hupostasis means person, and that the three divine persons are equal.
In his earlier career Acacius had worked against such heresies at Antioch.
6. The Latin word is persona, "three divine persons."
 LETTER 15 77
meaning of the word with those who have heard it and have
been thereby divided, the result will be that you can explain
those terms and accomplish what will be possible as the Univer-
sal Church is currently tempest-tossed. You can rise to even
greater heights if you use the Lord's utterance and rebuke the
spiritual sea apparently thrown into confusion by quoting,
"Keep silence, be quiet."7
(4) I took care that the letter of your reverence be read to
the most holy bishop, John of Antioch, and, having heard it
with much perception and sympathy, his desires coincide with
ours, who are of elderly age, although he recently came to the
episcopacy.8 He thrives by the grace of God on the prizes of
contests which are wont to be attached to the episcopacy. All
the bishops of the East think highly of him and revere him. He
entreats your reverence, as is reported, that your holiness,
using proper understanding, treat the adventitious expression
as one not to be tolerated. Through the things which you say
and through the things which you do, the apostle's words, as
the occasion demands, may be proved true, "If I wish to use the
authority which God gave to us for edification and not destruc-
tion, I shall not be put to shame."9
(5) And deign to receive by your innate and characteristic
kindness the most beloved bearer of our letter. He is faithful
and Christian by ancestry, and in the things of which he may be
in need deem him worthy of your customary care. Both I and
those with me salute all the brotherhood with you. IO

7· Mk 4·39·
B. John was Patriarch of Antioch from 429 to 441.
9. Cf. 2 Cor 1O.B.
10. Cyril could not heed this wordy and somewhat subtle request for
leniency towards N estorius considering the Pope's explicit orders at the end of
Letter 12.
 LETTER 16

To my most beloved brother and fellow bishop Juvenal, Cyril sends

greetings in the Lord. I

PRAYED THAT THE most pious bishop, Nestorius,

would follow closely in the footsteps of men of good
repute and would follow the true faith. Which of those
who are well-disposed would not pray that the most esteemed
may be the ones who have been assigned to guide the flocks of
the Savior? Beyond our expectations the nature of the affair
has gone past all bounds. The one whom we thought would be
a true shepherd, we have found to be a persecutor of the true
faith. It is necessary hereafter to remember Christ, the Savior
of us all, saying, "I did not come to cast peace upon the earth,
but a sword. For I came to set a man at variance with his
father."2 Indeed even against our parents this war is both
without reproach and faultless, or, rather, even full of much
praise. When we have perceived that we contend for the glory
of Christ, there is every need for us, although weeping because
slaying a brother, to gird the zeal for God around ourselves
and almost throughout the whole world to say, "If any man be
on the Lord's side, let him join with me."3
(2) I exhorted him as a brother through a first and a second
letter, not to follow his own thoughts but the true and apostolic
faith which has been handed down to the churches, because I
thought to remove him from the perversity of his writings. But
this remedy of the situation gained nothing. The advice has
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.1 pp. 96-98.
Geerard numbers this letter 5316 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 144-
145·
2. Cf. Mt 10·34, 35.
3. Ex 3 2 . 26.
 LETTER 16 79
become unprofitable. So far was he from wishing to follow the
dogmas of the truth that he dispatched a letter to me with his
own signature in which he even reproved me as one being
harassed, and he has conceded that he said the Holy Virgin is
not the Mother of God. This is to say distinctly that the Em-
manuel, in whom we have hopes of salvation, is not God.
(3) He thought that he would be able to carry clean away the
Church of Rome and so he wrote to my lord, the most pious
and God-revering brother and fellow bishop Celestine, the
Bishop of the Church of Rome, putting in the letter the perver-
sion of his teachings. He sent many commentaries from which
he has been proved to have perverted ideas, and he has been
sternly judged as a heretic from now on. Since the aforemen-
tioned most pious and God-revering Bishop of the Church of
Rome, Celestine, has written clearly about him and has sent me
the letter, I thought it necessary to send it, and to awaken your
reverence to a holy zeal whetted originally through writing, so
that with unanimity and an intense zeal we may gird the love
for Christ about ourselves. We may thus save the people who
are in danger, and may raise up a church so illustrious, by all
having become clearly harmonious to all others, and by writing
a letter according to a defined form to him and to the people.
If, on the one hand, we should save him and set him free from
the things which he has thought against the truth, we have
gained a brother and have saved a shepherd. But if, on the
other hand, our advice should become unprofitable, since he
himself has set down in writing the result for himself, he shall
eat the fruits of his own labors.
(4) Moreover we ought to write to the Christ-loving and
most reverend emperor and to all those in authority. We
should advise them not to honor the man above their rever-
ence for Christ, but to conciliate the certainty in the world
towards the faith, and for the lambs to get rid of a wicked
shepherd, if he does not submit to the counsels of everyone.
(5) Salute the brotherhood with you; that with me salutes
you in the Lord.
 LETTER 17

Third Letter to Nestorius

To the most pious and most God-loving fellow bishop Nestorius,
Cyril and the synod assembled in Alexandria from the diocese of
Egypt send greetings in the Lord. I

INeE OUR SAVIOR distinctly says, "He who loves father

or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he
who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy
of me,"2 what shall we suffer who are demanded by your
reverence to love you more than Christ, the Savior of us all?
Who on the day ofjudgment will be able to help us? What kind
of defense shall we find, if we valued silence so long about the
blasphemies which came to be on your part against him? If you
injured only yourself by thinking and teaching such things,
our concern would be less. You have scandalized the whole
church and you have cast a leaven of strange and foreign
heresy among the people, not only among those there (i.e., at
Constantinople) but everywhere.
(2) The books of your statements were handed round.
What kind of an account will suffice for the silence of those
with us, or how is it not necessary to remember Christ saying,
"Do not think that I have come to send peace upon the earth,
but a sword. For I came to set a man at variance with his father,
and a daughter with her mother"?3 When the faith is being
injured, let reverence towards parents be dismissed as obsolete
and unstable! Let the law of warm affection towards children
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 pp. 33-42.
Geerard numbers this letter 5317 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 57--68
and Wickham, Select Letters, 12-33.
2. Mt 10.37.
3· Cf. Mt 10·34, 35·

80
 LETTER 17 81

and kinsmen be silenced! Let death hereafter be better for the

pious than life, "that they might find a better resurrection"4
according to the Scriptures!
(3) Therefore, together with the holy synod which has been
assembled in the great city of Rome with our most holy and
God-revering brother and fellow servant, Celestine the Bish-
op, presiding, we also solemnly charge you by this third let-
ter, advising you to desist from the doctrines, so wicked and
perverted, which you think and teach. Choose instead the true
faith, the one handed down to the churches from the begin-
ning through the holy apostles and evangelists, who have been
eyewitnesses and servants of the word. If your reverence does
not do this, according to the time defined and limited in the
letter of the aforementioned most holy and most God-revering
brother and fellow minister of ours, Celestine, the Bishop of
the Church of Rome, know you that you have no clerical office
among us, nor place, nor esteem among the priests of God and
the bishops.
(4) It is not possible for us to disregard churches so dis-
turbed, and people scandalized, and true faith being set aside,
and flocks being torn asunder by you who ought to preserve
them, if you were with us a lover of the true faith and following
the piety of the holy Fathers. But we are all in communion with
all those, both lay persons and clerics, who were excommuni-
cated for the faith by your reverence or deposed. It is not just,
that they who have been known to hold true doctrines be
injured by your decrees, because they, in doing the right, have
contradicted you. You have made known this very thing in
your letter, written by you to our most holy fellow bishop of the
great city of Rome, Celestine.
(5) But it shall not suffice for your reverence to confess with
us just the profession of the faith set forth in the Holy Spirit
during critical times by the holy and great synod assembled in
the city of Nicaea. You have not understood and have not in-
terpreted it rightly, but rather perversely, even if you confess
the text with your lips. But you must follow up in writing and

4. Heb 11.35·
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

under oath confess that you also anathematize, on the one

hand, your abominable and profane teachings, and, on the
other hand, you will teach and think what we, all the bishops
throughout the West and the East, teachers and leaders of the
laity, [think and teach]. The holy synod in Rome and we all
agreed that the letters to your reverence from the Church of
Alexandria were orthodox and blameless. But we subjoined to
these writings of ours what it is necessary to think and teach,
and the teachings from which it is necessary to desist.
(6) For this is the faith of the Catholic and Apostolic Church
to which all the orthodox bishops throughout the West and
East agree. We believe in one God, the Father almighty,
creator of all things both visible and invisible, and in one Lord
Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, begotten of the
Father, that is ofthe same substance as the Father, God of God,
light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made, con-
substantial with the Father, by whom all things were made both
those in heaven and those on earth, who for us men and our
salvation descended, and was incarnate, and was made man,
suffered and rose on the third day, ascended into heaven, and
is coming to judge the living and the dead; and in the Holy
Spirit.
(7) But those who say: there was a time when he was not,
and he was not before he was begotten, and that he was begot-
ten from what was not, or who say that he is of some other
hupostasis or substance,5 and say that the Son of God was mu-
table or subject to change, these the Catholic and Apostolic
Church anathematizes. 6 Following in every way the confes-
sions of the holy Fathers, which they made by the Holy Spirit
speaking in them, and following the meaning of the thoughts
in them, and, as it were, going along a royal road, we say that
he, the only begotten Word of God, begotten of the very
substance of the Father, true God of true God, light of light, by
whom all things were made both those in heaven and those on
earth, having descended for our salvation, and having come

5. i.e., another substance than the Father.

6. This is almost verbatim the Creed of the Council of Nicaea.
 LETTER 17
down to an emptying of himself, 7 was incarnate and was made
man, that is, having taken flesh from the Holy Virgin, and
having made it his own from the womb, he endured our birth,
and came forth as man from a woman, not having lost what he
was, but even though he was born in the assumption of flesh
and blood, even so he remained what he was, God manifestly in
nature and in truth.
(8) We say also that the flesh was neither turned into the
nature of the divinity, nor, indeed, that the ineffable nature of
the Word of God was altered into the nature of the flesh, for he
is immutable and absolutely unchangeable, always being the
same, according to the Scriptures. But when he was visible, and
still remained an infant in swaddling clothes, and in the bosom
of the Virgin who bore him, he filled the whole of creation as
God, and was coruler with the one who begot him. For the
divine is both without quantity and without magnitude, and
does not admit of limitation.
(9) Confessing that the Word was united to flesh substan-
tially, we adore one Son and Lord Jesus Christ. We do not set
up a division and distinguish the man and God, nor do we say
that they are conjoined to one another by dignity and author-
ity, for this is idle chatter and nothing more. Nor do we speak
of the Word of God separately as Christ, and, likewise, the one
born of woman separately as another Christ, but we acknowl-
edge only one Christ, the Word of God the Father, with his
own flesh. As man he has been the anointed among us,
although he gives the Spirit to those worthy of receiving it, 8 and
not by measure, as the blessed evangelist,John, says.9 Neither
do we say that the Word of God dwelled, as in an ordinary man,
in the one born of the Holy Virgin, in order that Christ might
not be thought to be a man bearing God. For even if the Word
both "dwelt among US,"10 and it is said that in Christ "dwells all

7. Cf. Phil 2.7, B.

B. i.e., Christ as man was anointed with the Holy Spirit, cf. Acts 1O.3B, but
God sent the Holy Spirit to guard the church, cf.Jn 14.16, 17 and Acts 2.1-4.
9· Cf. In 3·34·
10. Cf. In 1.14.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

the fullness of the Godhead bodily,"ll we do not think that,

being made flesh, the Word is said to dwell in him just as in
those who are holy, and we do not define the indwelling in him
to be the same. But united kata phusin,I2 and not changed into
flesh, the Word produced an indwelling such as the soul of
man might be said to have in its own bodyY
(10) Therefore Christ is one, both Son and Lord,I4 not by
reason of a man having simply a conjoining to God, as God, by
a unity of dignity or indeed of authority. For the equality of
honor does not unite the natures, and indeed Peter and John
were equal in honor to each other, insofar as they were both
apostles and holy disciples, except that the two were not one.
N either indeed do we think that the manner of the 'conjoining'
is according to a juxtaposition', for this is not sufficient for a
personal union,I5 nor indeed according to a nonessential par-
ticipation, as we also, who cleave to the Lord according to the
Scripture, are one spirit with him, [6 but rather we reject the
term 'conjoining' as not being sufficient to signify the union.
Neither do we speak of the Word of God the Father as the God
or Lord of the Christ, in order that we may not again openly
cut into two the one Christ, the Son and Lord, and may not fall
foul of the charge of blasphemy by making him his own God
and Lord. The Word of God united, as we already said before,

11. Col 2.9.

12. Here Cyril used the word 4nJu~c;, which can present a problem. If
translated "nature," it would be heretical, for it would imply one nature in
Christ, exactly the doctrine Cyril is at pains to refute. To Cyril 4nJu~c;,
kOIJTOl<T~C;, and 'lrPO<TIIYITOV mean the same, a concrete individual, or person,
for example his famous formula is, Christ is the one incarnate 4nJu~c; of the
Word of God, yet later in this letter (cf. note 17, infra) he used the word
Vrr6IJTa<T~C; in this formula. When speaking of the humanity of Christ, Cyril
usually used me word mJ.pE, following In 1.14, and when speaking of the
incarnate Word, he used the term 4nJu~c; ml<TOlpKoILEV"1. See Letter 40, note 22
and Quasten 3.139.
13. Cyril frequently used me comparison of me union between the soul
and body of man to illustrate the intimate union of me Word and Mary's Son,
and to show that mere is no fusion of me divine and human in Christ.
14. Cf. 1 Cor 8.6.
15. Cyril's term is 'ilV(Il<T~C; 4rua~K'" which does not mean a physical union, but
a personal union in his terminology, cf. note 12.
16. Cf. 1 Cor. 6.17.
 LETTER 17

to flesh according to hupostasis 17 is God of all and is Lord of all,

and neither is he servant of himself nor master of himself. 18 To
think and say this is absurd and rather impious as well. He said
God is his Father,19 although he is God by nature and of his
Father's substance. But we have not failed to perceive that,
while he continued to be God, he also became man under God
according to the law proper to the nature of the humanity.20
But how might he become God or master of himself? There-
fore, as man, and as far as concerns what is proper to the limits
of the emptying of himself,21 he says that he himself is under
God as we are. 22 Thus he also was "born under the la~,"23
although he proclaims the law and is the lawgiver as God.
(11) But we refuse to say of Christ, "Because of the one who
clothed him with flesh, I worship the one clothed; because of
the invisible, I adore the invisible."24 It is abhorrent to say this
also, "God, the one assumed, is associated with the one assum-
ing him."25 Whoever says these things, severs him again into
two christs, and in turn sets the humanity and divinity apart
also. Whoever says these things admittedly denies the union,
according to which one is worshipped together with the other,
not as one in another. Indeed God is not associated with
another, but one Christ Jesus is meant, the only begotten Son,
who is revered along with his flesh by one act of adoration. We
confess that he, the Son begotten of God the Father, and only
begotten God, though being incapable of suffering according
to his own nature, suffered in his own flesh for our sake,
according to the Scriptures, and that he made his own the
sufferings of his own flesh in his crucified body impassibly, for

17. Here Cyril used wO(T'TaaL<;, where earlier (cf. note 12) he used qruaL<;,
another example of their identical meaning in his mind.
18. Cf. In 13.12-16.
19. There are many citations, e.g.,Jn 20.17.
20. Christ as man was subject to the natural law.
21. Cf. Phil 2.7, 8.
22. Cf. In 8.28-30 and Heb 4.14, IS.
23· Cf. Gal 404-
24. A quotation from Nestorius. See Loofs, Nestoriana, 262.3,4, II, and 12.
25. Another quotation from Nestorius, in which the noteworthy words are
the verbs used.
86 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

by the grace of God and for the sake of all he tasted death26 by
having surrendered to it his own body although by nature he
was life, and was himself the Resurrection. 27 In order that by
his ineffable power, after having trampled upon death in his
own flesh first, he might become "the first born from the
dead"28 and "the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep"29
and in order that he might prepare the way for the rise to
immortality for the nature of man, 30 by the grace of God, as we
said just now, for the sake of all he tasted death, but on the
third day he came back to life after despoiling hell. Wherefore,
even if the resurrection of the dead may be said to be through a
man,31 still we mean that the man is the Word begotten of God,
and that the power of death has been destroyed through him,
and he will come at the right time as the one Son and Lord in
the glory of the Father to judge the world in justice, as it is
written. 32
(12) But of necessity we shall add this also. Proclaiming the
death according to the flesh 33 of the only begotten Son of God,
that is, of Jesus Christ, and confessing his Resurrection from
the dead and his Ascension into heaven, we celebrate the
unbloody sacrifice in the churches, and we thus approach the
spiritual blessings and are made holy, becoming partakers of
the holy flesh and of the precious blood of Christ, the Savior of
us all. And we do this, not as men receiving common flesh, far
from it, nor truly the flesh of a man sanctified and conjoined to
the Word according to a unity of dignity, or as one having had
a divine indwelling, but as the truly life-giving and very own
flesh of the Word himself. For, being life according to nature
as God, when he was made one with his own flesh, He pro-
claimed it life-giving. Wherefore even if he may say to us,
"Amen, I say to you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of
Man, and drink his blood,"34 we shall not conclude that his flesh

26. Cf. Heb 2.9. 29· I Cor 15.20.

27. Cf. Acts 4.2. 30. Cf. I Cor 15·53·
28. Col 1.18. 31. In 11. 25.
32. Cf. Ps 97(98).9 and cf. Acts 17.31.
33. Cf. I Cor 11.26.
34· Cf. In 6·53·
 LETTER 17
is of some one as of a man who is one of us, (for how will the
flesh of a man be life-giving according to its own nature?), but
as being truly the very flesh of the Son who was both made man
and named man for us.
(13) Moreover, we do not allocate the statements of our
Savior in the Gospels either to two hupostaseis or indeed to two
persons, for the one and only Christ is not twofold, even if he
be considered as from two entities and they different, which
had been made into an inseparable unity, just as, of course,
man also is considered to be of soul and body yet is not twofold,
but rather one from both. But, because we think rightly, we
shall maintain that the statements as man and also the state-
ments as God have been made by one person.
(14) When as God he says about himself, "he who has seen
me, has seen the Father,"35 and, "I and the Father are one,"36 we
think of his divine and ineffable nature according to which he
is one with his Father through identity of substance and is his
likeness and image and the brightness of his glory.37 But when,
not despising the full measure of his humanity, he said to the
Jews, "But now you are seeking to kill me, one who has spoken
the truth to you,"38 again nevertheless even from the full mea-
sure of his humanity we recognize the Word who is God in both
equality and likeness to his Father. If we must believe that,
although he was God by nature, he was made flesh, that is to
say, he was made man animated by a rational soul, what reason
would anyone have for being ashamed at statements by him, if
they had been made by him as man? For if he declined the
words which are proper to a man, what necessary reason was
there for him becoming man as we are? For what reason would
he, who descended for us into a voluntary emptying of him-
self,39 decline words proper to the emptying? Therefore to one
person must all the statements in the Gospels be ascribed, to
the one incarnate hupostasis of the Word, for the Lord Jesus
Christ is one, according to the Scriptures. 4o

35· In 14·9· 38. In 8.4 0 .

36. In 10.3 0 . 39· Cf. Phil 2.7, 8.
37. Cf. Heb 1.3·
40. Cf. 1 Cor 8.6. See anathema 4 at the end of this letter.
88 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

(15) But if he may be called the "apostle and high-priest of

our confession"41 as the one offering to God the Father the
confession of the faith being conveyed by us to him and
through him to God the Father, and also to the Holy Spirit,
again we say that he is by nature the only begotten Son of God.
And we do not assign to a man different from him the name
and reality of his priesthood, for he became mediator of God
and men42 and conciliator unto peace having offered himself to
God the Father for an odor of sweetnessY Wherefore he also
said, "Sacrifice and oblation you did not want: but a body you
have fitted to me. In holocausts and sin-offerings you have had
no pleasure. Then said I, 'Behold I come (in the head of the
book it is written of me) to do your will, 0 God."'44 For he has
offered his own body for an odor of sweetness for our sake
rather than his own. What oblation or sacrifice did he need for
his own sake, who, since he is God, is superior to all sin? For "if
all have sinned and have need of the glory of God"45 conse-
quently we are apt to fall and the nature of man was weakened
toward sin. But he was not so, and we are inferior to his glory
because of this. How then would there be a doubt remaining
that the true lamb has been sacrificed through us and for our
sake? The statement that he has offered himself for his own
sake and for ours in no way would escape an accusation for
impiety. He has erred in no fashion, nor did he commit sin. Of
what sacrifice, therefore, did he have need, since there existed
no sin for which, and very reasonably, a sacrifice might exist?
(16) But when he says concerning the Spirit: "He will glorify
me,"46 we, rightly, do not say that the one Chri1!t and Son of
God, because he was in need of glory from another, gained
glory from the Holy Spirit, since his Spirit is not superior to
him nor above him. But since he used the Holy Spirit as a proof
of his divinity for the performance of great works, he says that

41. Cf. Heb 3.1.

42. Cf. 1 Tm 2.5.
43. Cf. Eph 5.2.
44. Heb 10.5-7 and cf. Ps 39(40 )·7-g·
45. Cf. Rom 3.23.
46. In 16·14·
 LETTER 17 89
he was glorified by him, just as if anyone of us might say,
concerning perhaps the strength within him, or the under-
standing of some subject, "they will glorify me."
(17) For even if the Spirit exists in his own hupostasis, and
moreover is considered by himself insofar as he is the Spirit
and not the Son, yet he is not therefore alien from the Son, for
he is called the Spirit of truth and Christ is the truth, and the
Spirit proceeds from him/7 just as undoubtedly he also pro-
ceeds from God the Father. Wherefore the Spirit even
through the hand of the holy apostles worked miracles after
our Lord, 1esus Christ, ascended into heaven, and thereby
glorified him. For it is believed that he is God according to
nature, and again that he acts through his own Spirit. For this
reason he also said, "because he will receive of what is mine and
will declare it to yoU."48 And we do not in any way say that the
Spirit is wise and powerful from a participation, for he is
all-perfect and without want of any good. But since he is the
Spirit of the power and wisdom of the Father that is of the Son,
he is in very truth wisdom and power.
(18) And since the Holy Virgin brought forth as man God
united to flesh according to the hupostasis, we say that she is the
Mother of God, not because the nature of the Word had a
beginning of existence from the flesh, for, "In the beginning
was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was
God,"49 and he is the creator of the ages, coeternal with the
Father, and creator of all things. As we have stated before,
having united the human to himself according to hupostasis he
even endured birth in the flesh from the womb. He did not
require because of his own nature as God a birth in time and in
the last stages of the world. He was born in order that he might
bless the very beginning of our existence, and in order that,
because a woman bore him when he was united to the flesh, the
curse against the whole race might be stopped. This was send-
ing our bodies from the earth to death, and by him abolishing

47· Cf.Jn 16.13·

48. In 16.14·
49. Cf. In 1.1.
go ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

the saying, "in pain shall you bring forth children,"5o the words
of the prophet might be shown to be true, "strong death has
swallowed them Up,"5l and again "God has taken away every
tear from every face."52 Because of this we say that according
to the 'economy' he himself both blessed the marriage and
attended it when invited in Cana of Galilee along with his holy
apostles.
(lg) We have been taught to have these thoughts by the holy
apostles and evangelists, and by all the divinely inspired Scrip-
ture, and by the true confession of the saintly Fathers. It is
necessary that your reverence also consent to all these and
agree to everyone without deceit. What your reverence must
anathematize has been subjoined to this letter from us.

1. If anyone does not confess that the Emmanuel is God in

truth, and because of this does not confess that the Holy Virgin
is the Mother of God, (for she bore according to the flesh the
Word of God made flesh), let him be anathema.

2. If anyone does not confess that the Word of God the Father
was united to flesh substantially, and that there is one Christ
with his own flesh and that he manifestly is God, the same one
as is man, let him be anathema.

3. If anyone separates the hupostaseis in the one Christ after

the union, joining them together only by a conjunction accord-
ing to dignity, that is, by authority or power, and not rather by
a combination which is according to a real union, let him be
anathema.

4. If anyone attributes to two persons, that is to two hupostaseis,

the sayings in the Gospels and apostolic writings, either those
made by the saints in reference to Christ or those made by him
concerning himself, and ascribes some to a man considered

50. Gn 3.16.
51. This text is a quotation from the LXX. See note 2.
52. Is 25.8.
 LETTER 17
separately from the Word of God, and ascribes others, as
proper to God, only to the Word of God the Father, let him be
anathema.

5. If anyone dares to say that Christ is a God-bearing man, and

not, rather, that he is God in truth, as the one Son and by
nature, in so far as the Word was made flesh and has flesh and
blood just as we do, let him be anathema. 53

6. If anyone says that the Word of God the Father is God or

master of the Christ and does not confess rather that he is God,
the same one as is man, since the Word was made flesh, accord-
ing to the Scriptures, let him be anathema.

7. If anyone says that Jesus as man was activated by the Word

of God and that the glory of the only begotten was attributed
as if the only begotten was separate from him, let him be
anathema.

8. If anyone dares to say that the man assumed must be

adored with God, the Word, and be glorified with him, and be
called God by the same name, as if one existed in the other, (for
the word "with," which has always been added, forces this to be
the meaning), and does not rather honor the Emmanuel with
one adoration only and does not send up to him one hymn of
praise only, as the Word was made flesh, let him be anathema.

9. If anyone says that the one Lord Jesus Christ has been
glorified by the Spirit, and the Lord was using the power which
was through the Spirit as if it belonged to someone else, and
says that the Lord received from the Spirit the power to act
against unclean spirits, and to complete among men the mira-
cles, and does not rather say that the Spirit is his very own
through whom he has performed the miracles, let him be
anathema.

53· Cf. Heb 2.14.

92 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

10. The divine Scripture says that Christ is the high priest and
apostle of our confession,54 and has offered himself for us in an
odor of fragrance to God the Father. 55 If anyone therefore says
that our high priest and apostle is not the very Word of God
when he was made flesh and man as we are, but as another man
apart from him born of a woman, or if anyone says that he
offered himself as the sacrifice for his own sake also, and not
rather for us only, (for he who has not known sin would have
no need of a sacrifice), let him be anathema.

II. If anyone does not confess that the flesh of the Lord is
life-giving, and is the very own flesh of the Word from God the
Father, but says that it is the flesh of some one else other than
him joined to him according to dignity, that is as having had
only a divine indwelling, or does not rather confess that his
flesh is life-giving, as we said, because it was made the very flesh
of the Word, who is able to endow all things with life, let him be
anathema.

12. If anyone does not confess that the Word of God suffered
in the flesh, and was crucified in the flesh, and tasted death in
the flesh, and became the firstborn from the dead,56 since he is
life and life-giving as God, let him be anathema.

54. Cf. Heb 3·1.

55. Cf. Eph 5·2.
56. Cf. Col 1.18.
 LETTER 18

To his most beloved and most cherished priests and deacons and
people of Constantinople, Cyril, the bishop, and the synod which
met in Alexandria of the diocese of Egypt send greetings in the
Lord.'

INALLy2 AND WITH difficulty we have arrived at the

point at which it were better to start from the begin-
ning, we mean our concern for the salvation of all and
for the lack of need to endure disturbance in matters of faith.
We speak in defense of ourselves because of the indignities to
all of you caused by this. We spent the time just past not
without tears and were expecting that the most reverend
bishop, Nestorius, would depart from his most discordant
teachings because of ecclesiastical counsels and admonitions,
and, because of the refutations on the part of all of you, would
honor the faith with us which has been handed down to the
churches by the holy apostles, evangelists, and all the Sacred
Scriptures, sealed by the words of the holy prophets to keep it
correct. As a result of what he does not cease saying before you
in church, and as a result of his statements in writing, we find
that he has erred and to no small degree is acting impiously
toward the faith.
l. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO l.l.1 pp. 113-114.
Geerard numbers this letter 5318 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 170-
17 2 •
2. The following introduction precedes the beginning of the letter, "A
letter of the same Cyril to the clergy and the people of Constantinople, in
which he writes so that they not heed the irreverent teaching of the heretical
N estorius and not be in communion with him, if he remains a wolf instead of a
shepherd, but rather they should be manly in the Lord and preserve their
unwavering faith. Moreover, he writes that they, who were expelled by Nesto-
rius for speaking against his teaching, are in communion with him [Cyril]."
(PG 77.124)

93
94 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

(2) We have already been forced to protest solemnly to him

through a synodal letter that, if he does not refrain as quickly
as possible from his innovations, and within the fixed time
appointed by the most holy and most God-fearing Bishop of
the Church of Rome, Celestine, anathematize in writing those
things which he said in your presence and has placed in books
or at least prepared to be placed in books, and these things are
even in our hands, he has no place of communion among the
bishops of God, but will be a stranger to all.
(3) Let no one blame the delay. For we were not slumbering
while so large a flock, or rather peoples and churches every-
where were being disturbed, but we imitated those who have
medical experience who do not immediately suggest for the
infections which come into our bodies the necessities of knife
and cauterizing, but who soothe them at the beginning with
gentle drugs awaiting the moment proper for incisions.
(4) Be manly, therefore, in the Lord, and guarding con-
stantly your faith be zealous to be pleasing to Christ, the one
and only true Son of God. Remember also our holy Fathers
who rightly and with holiness exercised the function of bishops
in our midst and who when they were still going about among
you called the Holy Virgin the Mother of God. For she bore
Emmanuel, who is truly God. "And the Word was made flesh"3
and was born according to the flesh so that we might be found
to be brothers of him who is above all creation. They did not
preach to you two christs but one, the same God, Word and
man according to flesh from a woman, not a man joined to God
by a mere conjunction and as if by a mere equality of honors.
These are the cold, unprofitable and barren teachings of that
fellow.
(5) Our Fathers said that the same [Christ] suffered death in
his flesh for us, and rose divinely treading upon the power of
death, and they said that he will come as the judge of all.
Rekindling continually this faith within yourselves, keep spot-
less and blameless. Do not be in communion with that one
mentioned before, nor heed him as pupils, ifhe remains a wolf

3· In 1.14·
 LETTER 18 95
instead of a shepherd, and if after this admonition of ours
which has been made to him he should choose to hold per-
verted teachings. To those clerics and laity excommunicated or
condemned by him because of their true faith we join ourselves
in communion because we do not agree with his unjust deci-
sion, but rather praise those who endured that suffering and
say to them, "If you are upbraided in the Lord, blessed will you
be; because the power of God and the spirit of God has rested
upon yoU."4

4. Cf. 1 Pt 4.14.
 LETTER 19

To the most reverend and most God-loving fathers of the monas-

teries which are in Constantinople, Cyril and the holy synod con-
vened in Alexandria send greetings in the Lord. 1

E HAVE CLEARLY learned of the zeal of your reverences

which you have shown for Christ when he was being
blasphemed and this in a church of sound faith, and we
strongly approved your affection for Christ and your love for
his name. But we continue to weep and to call upon Christ, the
Savior of all, that he may now destroy the snare of the devil,
take the scandal away from the churches, and halt the blasphe-
mies against his glory. But since he is patient, he lavished a time
of repentance upon the most reverend bishop, Nestorius,
while all were silent about him hitherto, and awaiting what all
had in their prayers that he would depart from his new unhal-
lowed teachings and hold with us those which are true, reason-
able, and corresponding with the divinely inspired Scriptures,
and accept the faith handed down from the beginning to the
churches by the holy apostles and evangelists, who are the
genuine ministers of Christ 2 and were enjoined to minister his
Gospel to all under heaven.
(2) But since he has remained in the same errors, or
perhaps went into worse, as was to be expected, piling blasphe-
mies upon blasphemies, expounding altogether strange and
foreign teachings which the holy Catholic Church did not
recognize at all, we deemed it just that he be reminded by a
third letter, this one sent both by us and by our most holy and
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.5 pp. 12-13.
Geerard numbers this letter 5319 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 532-
533·
2. Cf. 1 Cor 4.1.

96
 LETTER 19 97
God-fearing brother and fellow bishop Celestine, the Bishop
of the great city of Rome. If he would choose to repent and, in
tears at what he had said, to anathematize in writing his dis-
torted teachings, and to confess clearly and without censure
the faith of the Universal Church, he might remain as before
by asking for pardon and learning what he must do. But if he
does not choose to do this, he would be a stranger and a
foreigner to the assembly of bishops' and to the dignity of
teaching. It is perilous to let loose upon the flocks of the Savior
a dreadful wolf in the guise of a shepherd.
(3) Be manly, thex;efore, as servants of Christ and have a
care of your own souls doing everything for the glory of Christ
in order that the faith in him may be kept true and blameless
everywhere. This will set you free from later dangers and will
prepare you to deserve crowns at the divine tribunal, when
Christ the Savior of us all will receive everyone of you because
of your love for him.
(4) "Greet one another with a holy kiss."3 All the brethren
with me greet you. I pray that you are in good health in the
Lord, my beloved and most cherished brethren.
3. Rom 16.16.
 LETTER 20

Cyril, to the most beloved and most cherished priests, deacons, and
people of Alexandria sends greetings in the Lord. I

Y THE GRACE AND benevolence of Christ, the Savior of

us all, we safely crossed the wide sea, great with soft
and gentlest winds, so that after finishing the voyage
without fear or any danger we arrived at Rhodes, glorifying
God and saying with the voice of the Psalmist, "You rule the
power of the sea, and you curb the surging of its waves."2 But
since it was necessary that we, being absent in body but present
in spirit, 3 embrace you through this letter as children, I
thought there was a need to send these words to you, and to set
down my position clearly.
(2) For I believe that God will grant the rest especially be-
cause he is being asked through the prayers of all of you.
Therefore, especially at the present time, show your prayers
on our behalf as the fruit of love, for I also do not cease to do
this, so that God, the Lord of hosts, who crushes all strifes,4 by
setting in order the opposing forces and alleviating all discord
may restore us rejoicing to you rejoicing as children. For he is
able to do all things, according to Scripture,5 and absolutely
nothing is impossible to him. Cling to the gentleness which is
bred in you and proper to you. This will show you to be
especially most worthy, who honor a noble and acceptable life,

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 p. 116. Geerard
numbers this letter 5320 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 176-177.
2. Ps 88(89).10.
3. Cf. Col 2·5·
4. Cf. Jdt 16.2(3)·
5. Cf. Lk 1.37·

98
 LETTER 20 99
when your father in the spirit is absent and when he is present.
(3) "Greet one another with a holy kiss."6 The brethren with
me greet you. I pray that you are in good health in the Lord,
my beloved and most cherished brethren.

6. Rom 16.16.
 LETTER 21

Cyril, to the beloved and most cherished priests, deacons, and

people of Alexandria sends greetings in the Lord. I

HEN I WAS THIRSTING to address your goodness again,

time and place for writing were given me. We are
accordingly in the city of Ephesus, continuing in stout
health through the prayers of all of you, and think moreover
that the time of the synod is near. We trust that Christ, the
Savior of all, will cleanse his churches of distorted concepts and
will restore most brilliantly the true faith, so that all men
everywhere, being clean and blameless, by keeping it sincere
may raise pure hands 2 in prayer, saying what was spoken
through the voice of blessed David, "May my prayer be di-
rected as incense in your sight, and the lifting of my hands an
evening sacrifice."3
(2) The wretch, that sleepless beast: goes about plotting
against the glory of Christ, but he prevails not at all, since his
mischief is fruitless, and his wickedness gains nothing. He plots
not against an ordinary person nor just against a man like us
according to the opinion of the inventors of new teachings, but
against God who can do all things. Accordingly let him hear
from everyone who loves Christ, "It is hard for you to kick
against the goad."5 For the wretch chastises himself, and will
fall into perdition along with his own children. For those who

1. For the critical text ofthis letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 p. 117. Geerard
numbers this letter 5321 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 178-179.
2. I Tm 2.8.
3. Ps 140 (14 1 ).2.
4. Cf. I Pt 5.8.
5. Cf. Acts 9·5·

100
 LETTER 21 101

pervert the true dogmas of the holy churches have a share with
him; they shall not escape the judgment of God.
(3) Pray accordingly for us, so that God, the Savior of all,
may grant that we, rejoicing, may be restored again to you in
joy. He can do all things, and nothing at all is impossible to
him.6 "Greet one another with a holy kiss."7 The brethren with
me greet you. I pray that you are in good health in the Lord,
my beloved and most cherished brethren.

6. Cf. Lk 1.37.
7. Rom 16.16.
 LETTER 22

To my lord, Cyril, the most God-loving and most holy fellow

bishop, John sends greetings in the Lord.!

N NO SMALL WAY does it vex me that I have been

delayed these few days,2 when your holiness was al-
ready present at Ephesus. The longing for your sanc-
tity caused by need pressed upon me the more to complete the
journey quickly. I am already at the gates because of the
prayers of your holiness, after having endured the great toil of
my journey. I have traveled thirty days, for such is the space of
time of the journey, not at all giving in to myself, though some
of the lords, the most God-loving bishops, were indisposed by
the roughness of the way, and many of the beasts of burden
broken down because of the strenuous trip. Pray therefore, my
lord, that we traverse these remaining five or six stages and
hasten without incident and embrace your person holy to us.
(2) Paul and Macarius who are with my lord, the God-loving
John, salute your holiness and all the brotherhood with you,
and both I and those with me greet you most of all. Farewell.
Pray for us, my most God-loving and most holy lord.
1. For the criticaltext of this letter see Schwartz, AGO} .1.1 p. 119. Geerard
numbers this letter 5322 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 184.
2. From the contents this letter from John of Antioch should be dated 431,
and the place of writing on the way to Ephesus.

102
 LETTER 23

Cyril, Archbishop of Alexandria, to the bishops Komarius and

Potamon, and to the archimandrite of the monasteries, my lord
Dalmatius, and to Timothy and Eulogius, beloved and most cher-
ished priests, dedicated in Christ, special greetings.!

E WERE EXPECTING the honorable Nestorius to come

and repent the evil words which he used after he was
consecrated, and ask the pardon of the holy council,
even if in this way it would be most dangerous to grant pardon
to him; for it is not allowed to grant pardon to a man preaching
such things, for he perverted the entire world, and enfeebled
the devoted faith of the churches. If one, daring to utter a
single reviling word against our most revered and Christian
emperors, justly endures the censures of the laws, should not
he all the more who is totally impious, who tries to distort our
holy mystery, and tries to destroy the economy which the holy
and benevolent only begotten Son of God the Father fulfilled
for our sake, deigning to become man, so that he might save us
all, and free all under heaven from sin and death?
(2) However we marveled at the hardness of heart of the
man. He did not repent nor weep at the things which he dared
to say against the glory of Christ, the Savior of us all. But even
after his arrival at Ephesus he used the same expressions and
again showed that he had distorted ideas so that, when the
glorious metropolitans and most God-revering bishops
brought argument justly against him and hemmed him in by
the divinely inspired Scripture and showed that the one begot-
ten of the Holy Virgin according to the flesh is God, using an
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.2 pp. 6~8.
Geerard numbers this letter 5323 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 258-
261.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

ungoverned tone of voice he cried out, "I do not say a two or

three months old God" and other matters besides these trying
to destroy the Incarnation of the only begotten.
(3) The appointed time for the holy council has been given
as the holy feast of Pentecost by our most God-loving emper-
ors. For the first letter by which we were called has this sum-
mons. We arrived at the city of Ephesus before the appointed
day, for it was not proper to disregard the imperial decrees.
But when we heard that the most reverend and God-loving
Bishop of Antioch, John, was coming, we awaited him for
sixteen days, even though the whole council cried out and said
that he did not desire to take part in the council, for he feared
lest the very honorable Nestorius, who had been originally
from the church under him, would suffer deposition from
office, and perhaps the matter embarrassed him. And experi-
ence showed this to be true later; for he deferred his arrival.
For some of the very revered bishops from the East with him,
having arrived beforehand, said, "Our lord, the bishop John,
commanded us to say to your reverence 'If I am late, do what
you are doing.'''
(4) Accordingly the holy council, having assembled on the
twenty-eighth day of the month Pauni,2 according to the Alex-
andrine calendar, in the great church dedicated to Mary, sum-
moned him by having sent most reverend bishops, so that he
would come and take his place and defend himself in regard to
the matters which he taught and wrote. But he, at first, made
reply saying, "I will look and see." He was summoned by a
second letter from the holy council when God-fearing bishops
were sent to him again. But he did an extraordinary thing and,
taking soldiers from the most magnificent count Candidianus,
put them before his house to hinder with clubs anyone from
approaching him. But as the most holy bishops who had been
sent stayed on saying that they did not come to tell him or to
hear anything harsh, but that the holy council was summoning
him, he used various pretexts as one who was not willing to

2. June 22, 431 in the cathedral at Ephesus dedicated to Mary, the Mother
of God, with the tide Theotokos.
 LETTER 23

come. For his conscience was rebuking him. Then we used

even a third written message and again when the bishops from
different provinces had been sent to him, again he used the
force of soldiers and did not want to come. Accordingly when
the holy council was in session, since it obeyed the laws of the
church, after reading his letters and statements and finding
them full of blasphemies, after the glorious and most reverend
metropolitan bishops had testified, "In the very city of Ephesus
when holding discourse with us he clearly stated that Jesus is
not God," the council deposed him and brought forth a just
and lawful judgment against him.
(5) But since it was necessary that your reverence after
learning these things communicate them to those who ought
especially to know them lest either he or those zealous in his
behalf may carry anyone away, I have of necessity made these
matters known. But we have also sent a letter of the most
God-revering and God-loving bishop, John, written to him s in
which John strongly objects that he was bringing in new and
impious teachings into the churches and weakening the
teaching of the holy Fathers and apostles handed down to the
churches. But since he is able to say nothing in defense of his
blasphemies, he asserts as a protection, "I appealed for a delay
of four days until the Bishop of Antioch would be present and
they did not grant it," even though John, the most holy bishop
mentioned, gave excuses for not arriving. If he desired to be
present, for what reason did he declare through the bishops
under his power, "If I am late, do what you are doing"? As I
said, he did not desire to be present, knowing that the holy
council would by all means condemn Nestorius and vote that
he be deposed as a person uttering unholy and blasphemous
words against Christ, the Savior of us all.
(6) Since, therefore, as I learned, reports have been brought
from the most magnificent count Candidianus, be wary, for I
want you to know that the memoranda involved in the depos-
ing of N estorius have not yet been completed on paper. There-
fore, we were not able either to send the report which was due

3. Nestorius.
106 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

to be sent to our reverend and victorious emperors, but with

the help of God the report along with the memoranda will
reach them, if it will be granted to us to send someone able to
deliver them. But if the arrival of the memoranda and of the
report be delayed, know you that we have not been granted
opportunity to send them. Farewell.
 LETTER 24

Cyril sends greetings to the priests, deacons, and the people of

Alexandria, most beloved and most cherished in the Lord.'

VEN THOUGH I OUGHT to make known to your rever-

ence more fully the recent happenings, yet because the
bearer of this letter is in a hurry, I write with brevity.
Accordingly, I am letting you know that the holy council met in
Ephesus on the twenty-eighth day of the month Pauni 2 in the
city's great church, dedicated to Mary, the Mother of God.
Having spent the entire day, finally we subjected the blasphe-
mous Nestorius, who did not dare to appear in the holy coun-
cil, to a sentence of deposition and removed him from the
episcopacy. We who came together in the meeting were more
than two hundred bishops. The entire populace of the city
remained from dawn until evening awaiting the judgment of
the holy council. As they heard that the wretched man was
deposed everyone with one voice began to praise the holy
council and to glorify God because the enemy of the faith had
fallen. But as we came out of the church, they preceded us with
torches as far as the inn, for the evening was near; and there
was much joy and lighting of lights in the city, so that even
women carrying censers led the way for us. Our Savior showed
to those blaspheming his glory that he can do all things.
(2) Therefore, after we complete the papers involved in
deposing him, we will be hastening finally to you. With the help
of God we all are in good spirits and health by the grace of our
Savior. I pray that you are well in the Lord, beloved and most
cherished brothers.
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.1 pp. 117-118.
Geerard numbers this letter 5324 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 180-
181.
2. June 22, 431.
 LETTER 25

Cyril sends greetings in the Lord to the beloved and most cherished
priests, deacons and people of Alexandria.'

REAT AND DISTINGUISHED successes are brought to

completion not without labors. No doubt it is necessary
that for every good thing sweat must be caused first.
And no wonder if we see that such occurs in great matters,
since common and inferior ones are full of care and come to
pass through labors. But even in labor we have learned to say,
"Be strong, and be of stout heart and wait for the Lord."2 For
we have taken heart that a glorious result attends zealous
actions aimed at virtue and we shall find that our reward from
God is the gift of spiritual courage.
(2) Accordingly, God has taken away that most unclear
heresy which was attempting to lift itself up against all under
heaven, and was "lifting a horn against the Most High and
speaking insolence against God."3 The only begotten Word of
God extinguished it as if it were a flame desiring to set fire to
the right dogmas of the church, rendering useless the inventor
and father of it, and removing him from the office of bishop by
the vote of the holy council, so that we say rejoicing, "the Lord
has done great things for us: we are joyful."4 Let there be
festivity also for the teachers and leaders of the people that the
true faith is strengthened and that in all places the Savior and
God of all is glorified, since satan is frustrated and the scandals

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.1 pp. 118-119.
Geerard numbers this letter 5325 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 182-
183.
2. Ps 26(27).14.
3· Ps 74(75)·6.
4. Ps 125( 126)·3·

108
 LETTER 25 109
caused by him have been abolished. The dogmas of truth have
prevailed over a lie, so that we all in unison with one voice may
say, "One Lord, one faith, one baptism."5
(3) I write these things even now as if to my children, narrat-
ing the marvelous deeds of the Savior, so that you may make
your prayers more assiduous, and we may be able with the will
of God to be restored in strength rejoicing in your joy. I pray
that you are well in the Lord.

5· Eph 4·5·
 LETTER 26

Cyril, to the most reverend and most religious fathers of monks and
to those practicing the solitary life with you firmly rooted in faith in
God, beloved and most dear, greetings in the Lord.'

UR LORD,JESUS CHRIST, when he endured the violence

of the unholy Jews, being reviled, and slapped, and
flogged, and in the end being nailed to the cross be-
cause of us and for our sakes, beholding all those ill-treating
him and shaking their unholy heads against him, said, "And I
looked for one that would grieve together with me, but there
was none: and for those who would comfort me, and I found
none."2 Something such as this we see has happened now also.
(2) Yet, so that I do not affront the zeal ofthe truly faithful,
he had many grieving with him at the blasphemies of Nesto-
rius, even if some of those ordained to the episcopacy refused
his request by cooperating with the heretic and by drawing
themselves up against those fighting for him. But Christ will
render useless their ignorance or rather already has done so.
His blasphemous mouth has been stopped and his most un-
clean tongue has been silenced since it no longer utters blas-
phemies against Christ with doctrinal and episcopal authority.
Those who were rather ashamed of his friendship and yet did
not take thought of the love due to Christ, have faces covered
with shame, for this was their due.
(3) But even if the enemy has been defeated, we are still in
the midst of what is left of our worry and we need your prayers

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.2,PP' 6g-70.
Geerard numbers this letter 5326 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 262-
263.
2. Cf. Ps 68(69).2 1. For Cyril's attitude toward the Jews cf. Wilken,]udaism,
54-68.

110
 LETTER 26 III

to God and it is necessary that you, as you consecrate your own

lives to God, lift up pure hands 3 and do this continually for us.
Reflect that Josue the son of Naue fought against Amelec with
the chosen of Israel and that blessed Moses by holding up his
hands sought from God that they be able to conquer their
enemies in war and battle.4 Let your service of God be strong,
therefore, in prayer. As true children should, assist your
fathers who have cut out the false doctrine of N estorius like
some pestilential disease, in order that we, by having a spotless
and blameless faith, suspected from no side, can be very pleas-
ing to Christ who endured all things for us and on account
of us.
(4) But please us also by letters. Thus we shall receive the
most adequate encouragement in deed. I pray that you are
well, my beloved and most cherished brothers.

3. Cf. 1 Tm 2.8.
4. Cf. Ex 17·g-13·
 LETTER 271

HE HOLY COUNCIL WAS disturbed very much when it

heard that our most magnificent and most esteemed
count, John, did not bring back all the news correctly,
so much so that those who were there (in Constantinople) were
making plans regarding even exile against us, as if the holy
council was accepting the uncanonical and unlawful deposi-
tion from office issuing from John and the heretics with him.2
(2) Then, 10 and behold, another report was made by the
holy council, explaining both that it was grieved by the impe-
rial letter and that we did not accept the deposition from office
of the three individuals;3 and especially it rendered null and
void the things done impiously and illegitimately by them 4 and
confirmed those done by us. For the fathers of the council
explained also by the first report that they had, in the first
place, rendered null and void the things done uncanonically by
the others, secondly, they considered us and our fellow bishops
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1. 1.3 pp. 45-46.
Geerard numbers this letter 5327 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 379-
380. There is no address given in the text, but from the first sentence it is plain
that it was addressed to the clergy at Constantinople. The emperor, Theodo-
sius II, wrote to Ephesus and imposed a sentence of deposition on Nestorius,
but he also deposed and arrested Cyril and Memnon, Bishop of Ephesus. They
were kept apart under strong guard after the council. For these details and
others in the following notes see C. J. Hefde, A History of the Councils of the
Church (Edinburgh, 1883),3:44-114; P. Hughes, The Church in Crisis: A History
of the General Councils 325-1870 (New York, 1961),58--67. Quasten 3.118 has
only a brief statement.
2. This refers to John of Antioch and the group of bishops which formed a
Conciliabulum, or synod of its own, and deposed and excommunicated Cyril, as
soon as John arrived at Ephesus. Memnon was also deposed and excommuni-
cated.
3. That is, Nestorius, Cyril, and Memnon. The council did not accept a
deposition or the sentence against the last two.
4. That is, John of Antioch and his adherents.

112
 LETTER 27

as their associates, and thirdly, that they had not changed from
this opinion.5
(3) But although the most magnificent gentleman men-
tioned above had done a thousand things so that John of
Antioch and those with him might come into association with
the holy council, they6 do not even to this day permit them-
selves to listen to such a statement. All resist, saying, that it is
impossible that we come to this point, unless what was done by
the others uncanonically has been annulled and they prostrate
themselves before the council as wrongdoers, and anathema-
tize Nestorius' teachings in writing.
(4) The entire council is in opposition to them on these
points. Having failed to gain this objective, the most magnifi-
cent gentleman, mentioned before, took thought and asked
the council to give into his hands an exposition of faith in
writing, in order that he might bring it about that the others
also would agree and sign it. Then he might go back saying, "I
have united in friendship men who have human causes for
distress between them." After considering this the holy council
even to the last man arose saying, "We do not insult ourselves.
For we have not been summoned as heretics. We came to
restore the faith that has been rejected, which we have re-
stored. It is not necessary that the emperor learn the faith now,
since he knows it and was baptized in it.
(5) Nor did this, moreover, succeed with the bishops from
the East. And you know that, although they composed an
exposition of faith, they disagreed with each other and are still
in a state of disagreement. For some of them agree to call the
Holy Virgin the Mother of God in connection with also calling
her the mother of a man,7 while others completely refuse and
say they are ready to have their hands cut off rather than

5. After the seventh session the council did not end. Both sides appealed to
the emperor. His reply is mentioned in note L The council wrote to the
emperor a second time defending Cyril and Memnon and condemning the
actions of John and his followers.
6. The bishops of the real council.
7. That is, the human being who is Christ. The Greek word used is
, OlVeplIJ1TO'TOKOV.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

subscribe to such an expression. And they utterly disgrace

themselves, because they show themselves to be heretics."
(6) Let all learn of these matters from your reverences, and
especially the God-revering and most holy archimandrites, lest
the man mentioned above, after he has returned, may tell or
relate some other report in place of this to delight the ears of
certain people. Let your reverences not be hesitant, or grow
weary of the toils on our behalf, knowing that this commends
itself both to God and to men. For here through the grace of
the Savior some of the most God-fearing bishops, although
they have not known us before, are ready to offer their lives for
us, and in tears come to us saying that they keep praying that
they be exiled and die along with us.
(7) But we are all in great tribulation both because of the
soldiers watching us and because we have them sleeping in
front of our private bedchambers, especially my own. But the
entire rest of the council is utterly weary and sick. And many
have died. Finally the remnant are selling their possessions, for
they do not have funds.
 LETTER 28

Cyril, to Theopemptus, Potamon and Daniel, beloved fellow

bishops in the Lord, greetings. I

ANY CALUMNIES HAVE come to exist there against us,

some as if a mob had followed us from the baths of
Alexandria and others as if consecrated virgins or
widows had gone forth with us, since they say that it is reported
by my calumniators that Nestorius underwent deposition ac-
cording to my intrigue and not according to the purpose of the
holy council. Blessed be our Savior since he has refuted those
who say such things. For after my lord, John, the most mag-
nificent and glorious count of the sacred imperial largesses,
came to the city of Ephesus, he condemned those prating such
things, since he found no truth in them. But he saw that the
holy council of our faith had its own initiative, and that it did
not try to please either me or anyone else, but was moved by a
divine zeal and, since it could not endure the blasphemies of
that man, it condemned him.
(2) But when the letter of the most reverend and Christ-
loving emperors was read by which the depositions of the
three2 were said to be received, we have been kept under guard
since then nor do we know the outcome. However we give
thanks to Christ because we have been deemed worthy for his
name not only to become prisoners but to endure all other
things. For the matter is not without reward. The council did
not endure to be in communion with John, but resists, saying,

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.3,PP"So-SI.
Geerard numbers this letter S328 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 390-
391. Potamon and Daniel were bishops in Constantinople.
2. The deposing of Nestorius, Cyril, and Memnon, cf. Letter 27, note 1.

115
116 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

"Behold our bodies, behold our churches, behold our cities.

You have the power. It is impossible for us to communicate
with those of the East unless the representations of their
hypocrisy against our fellow bishops be done away with, and
they confess the true faith. For they are suspected of speaking
and thinking and agreeing with the teachings of Nestorius."
Therefore their entire resistance is in these words.
(3) Let all right believers pray for us, for as the blessed
David says, "I am ready for scourges."3

3. Ps 37.18 (LXX).
 LETTER 29

Alypius, the priest of the apostles, to Cyril, the most holy and most
God-loving archbishop, greetings in the Lord.'

LESSED IS THE MAN whom God will deem worthy to be

first to see with the eyes of love your divinely favored
and holy head, bearing the martyr's crown of your
confession. For you, most holy father, have trodden the way of
the holy Fathers with watchful eye, and you have taught those
"lame in both knees"2 to walk upright toward the truth. You
have put on the outspoke ness of Elias3 and you alone have
assumed the zeal of Phineas.4 You stopped up the unholy
mouth of the venomous dragon,5 and overturned the glutton-
ous Bel6 and rendered useless and strengthless his vain hope of
becoming supreme by the means of his wealth and you ruined
the contrivance of the golden idol.6 What mouth giving forth
spiritual perfumes will be able to voice the praises of your zeal
since you have become the equal of your uncle, the blessed
Theophilus, by imitating him, and morever you have wreathed
for yourself the martyrdom of the thrice-blessed Athanasius?
(2) Just as he escaped the devices of the lawless heretics as if
they were crags in the sea by repelling them with his prayers, so
also your holiness has stilled the devices of the lawless man as if
they were weak tempests by your conscience's purity oflife. In
this manner also the blessed Athanasius, after many false de-
nunciations which arose against him from the heretics, proved
them stale and useless. He endured living in a foreign land
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz,AGO 1.1.3 p. 74. Geerard
numbers this letter 5329 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 431-432.
2. 1 Kgs (3 Kgs) 18.21. 5. Cf. Dn 14.27.
3. Cf. ibid. 7-45. 6. Cf. ibid. 14·21.
4. Cf. Nm 25.7-13.
llS ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

because of the order of exile brought against him by those who

were then in power. As much as their coarse mouths strove to
weave their lying accusations, so much the purer and more
illustrious did he show himself by his long-suffering, outshin-
ing their successes. While weaving for himself the crown of
martyrdom by these contests, he proved the consubstantiality
and trod underfoot the evil teaching of Arius and upheld
orthodoxy and raised aloft the holy throne of the evangelist,
Mark.
(3) And you, by using his words, have followed after that
saint. I pray therefore, most holy father, that I be deemed
worthy to behold with my very eyes your holy countenance and
to embrace your knees, and to enjoy the sight of a martyr
binding his crown upon his brow in a season of peace. The
beloved deacon, Candidianus, will explain to your holiness the
brevity of my letter, that is, how everything is with us, insofar as
we have been silent, being confident in your prayer and in the
prayer of the holy Fathers.
(4) I greet the entire holy council which has bound on the
crown of martyrdom with your holiness. May you be returned
to us by God in health and happy, honored in the Lord,
fighting for the truth.
 LETTER 30

Maximian, the bishop, to the most God-loving and most reverend

fellow bishop Cyril, greetings in the Lord.'

HAT YOU HAVE DESIRED, your reverence, has been ful-

filled. What you have intended for the sake of piety has
been accomplished. What you have yearned for on
behalf of piety has come to pass. You have become a spectacle
both to angels and to men2 and to all the bishops of Christ. You
not only believed in Christ but you also suffered for his sake.
You alone have been judged worthy of the sufferings of
Christ,3 you who have been deemed deserving to bear his
marks in your own body.4 You have confessed him before men,
you have been acknowledged by him before his Father in the
presence of the holy angels.5 You have crowned yourself on
behalf of religion. You can do all things in Christ who strength-
ens you.6 You have humbled satan by your patience; you have
laughed at imprisonments; you have trodden upon the wrath
of rulers; you have thought hunger as nothing. For you had
bread coming down from heaven' which gave to men life from
above.
(2) Since, therefore, we were not cut off from these happen-
ings, for we learned some things by perceiving them here, and
others by hearing of your distress against the principalities of
those opposing you, against powers, against the rulers of the
darkness of this world, and the spirits of wickedness;8 and since

1. For the critical text ofthis letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.3 p. 71. Geerard
numbers this letter 5330 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 425-426.
2. Cf. 1 Cor 4.9. 6. Cf. Phil 4.13.
3· Cf. Phil 1.2g. 7. Cf. In 6,50, 58.
4. Cf. Gal 6.17. 8. Cf. Eph 6.12.
5. Cf. Mt 10.32.

119
120 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

we have been promoted to the archepiscopate of this great

city ,9 vouchsafe, your reverence, to support us with your
prayers, and to teach us basic principles by your admonitions,
and to use all good will toward us so that there may be fulfilled
in us that saying of Scripture, "A brother that is helped by his
brother is like a strong city."l0 Truly spiritual affection is a
strong city not able to be overcome nor besieged by the devil
either by undermining or by scaling. For it does not give way to
the siege machines of satan because it is guarded by Christ, the
Lord, by Christ who conquered the world and has prepared
eternal blessings for you, by Christ who said, "He who does not
take up his cross and follow me is not worthy of me."ll
(3) Since, therefore, you have become worthy to be guarded
by Christ, the Lord, Christ who conquered the world, and
because you have taken up the cross and followed him, be not
neglectful of intercession on our behalf before Christ, the
Lord, considering our fraternal success as your own preroga-
tives. Farewell in the Lord, and pray for me, most God-loving
and most holy brother.

g. Maximian had been appointed Archbishop of Constantinople after

Nestorius had been deposed.
10. Cf. Pry 18.1g.
11. Cf. Mt 10.38.
 LETTER 31

Cyril, to his most reverend and God-loving fellow bishop, Maxi-

mian, greetings in the Lord.'

T IS FITTING, I think, even now, since your perfection

has been consecrated in the episcopal office which we
prayed much that you would receive, to say according
to the words of the prophet, "Let heaven rejoice, let the entire
earth be glad and cry out withjoy."2 For no longer does that
"mouth that spoke great things"3 exult itself against the glory
of our Savior, nor does he who was accustomed to do this lift up
his horn on high and speak wickedness against God 4 by de-
nying the Lord who redeemed us. For Jesus Christ, the one
and only, true Son of God the Father, redeemed us "not with
perishable things, with silver or gold"5 but rather by having
"laid down his life"6 for us and by having offered himself as an
immaculate sacrifice "for an odor of sweetness"7 to God and
Father, and by having given his own blood in exchange for the
life of all.s He was more worthy than all, and in particular above
all creation, since the only begotten Word of God became a
perfect man for our sake, not by having endured a change, or
an alteration, or the oft-repeated confusion,9 or a mixture or a
change into that which he was not, but rather by having re~
mained what he was even in his humanity which is like to us.
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.3 p. 72. Geerard
numbers this letter 5331 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 427-430.
2. Cf. Ps 95(96).11. 6. In 10.15.
3· Dn 7.20. 7· Eph 5.2, Ex 29.18.
4. Ps 74(75).6. 8. Cf. 1 Tim 2.6.
5. 1 Pt 1.18, 19·
9. These were the terms used by Nestorius concerning the two natures in
Christ. See Joseph van den Dries, The Formula of Saint Cyril ofAlexandria (Rome,
1937), 70-73·

121
122 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

For he is believed to be, and truly is, the living and subsistent
Word of the Father. But come now, as if with one tongue and
with one God-loving mind, let us offer to him the confession of
the true faith saying with the blessed Baruch, "This is our God,
and there shall be no other accounted in comparison to him.
He found out all the way of knowledge and gave it to Jacob his
servant, and to Israel his beloved. Afterwards he was seen
upon earth and conversed with men."10 For there was not one
Son of God the Father who existed before every age and all
time, through whom all things were brought into being, and
another one on the other hand, who in the most recent ages of
time was born according to the flesh through the Holy Virgin,
but rather he himself who "received the seed of Abraham,"
according to the saying of blessed Paul ll having partaken of
blood and flesh akin to us, "having been made in all things like
unto his brothers,"12 that is, to us, in all things except sin alone.
(2) And we profess that his body, united to him in truth, was
animated by an intelligent soul. For we do not subscribe to the
teachings of that crazy Apollinaris. But since we uphold the
truth, we anathematize Apollinaris, and Arius, and Eunomius,
and with them N estorius. For we have faith handed down to us
from above, "as a safe and sturdy anchor of the soul," accord-
ing to the Scripture!3 Accordingly we confess, as I said, the one
and only and true Son of God the Father, our Lord, Jesus
Christ, knowing that the same one is God the Word from the
Father and man from a woman; both above the law as God, and
under the law through his humanity,.4 in the dignity of the
Lord according to nature, in the form of a servant according to
the dispensation (of his Incarnation)}5
(3) Both the words of Moses and the foretellings of the
prophets provide us with this tradition, and also those very
ones who were "eyewitnesses of these things from the begin-
ning and became servants ofthe Word,"16 and indeed the holy
Fathers who were before us. Because they had the word oflife
10. Cf. Bar 3.36--38. 14· Cf. Gal 4·4. 5·
11. Heb 2.16. 15. Cf. Phil 2.7.
12. Heb 2.17. 16. Lk 1.2.
13. Heb 6.19.
 LETTER 31 12 3

they became "lights in the world,"17 and "considering the end

of their lives we imitate their faith,"lB that is, we are zealous to
think and say the same things as they did, allowing ourselves in
no way to be taken from the beaten path of piety. We remem-
ber Holy Scripture crying out, "Make straight the path for
your feet, and direct your ways."19 They who honor the straight
paths "run toward the goal to the prize of the heavenly calling
in Christ."20 But those who pay no heed to the apostolic and
evangelical tradition and honor the newer, useless and truly
ridiculous invention of their own mind, let them hear from all,
"Pass not beyond the ancient bounds which your fathers have
set."21 For the way of such is not charming but "their ways are
perverse"22 and bring them to harbor into "the snare of hell" 23
and the trap of death. And Solomon seems to me very wise in
bestowing upon an indecent woman the face of every heresy,
and then saying about her that it is necessary to repudiate and
to flee such a woman, "who is a hunter's snare, and her heart is
a net, and in her hands are bonds."24 The good man before the
face of God will be rescued from her and the sinner will be
ensnared by her.
(4) But we have been rescued from the snare of this insatia-
ble hunting man. We have been saved through Christ the
Savior of us all. Because we believe that he is also God and
profess that the Mother of God bore him according to the
flesh, we go to him saying, "You will revive us, and we shall not
depart from you, and we will proclaim your name"25 for ever
and ever. And of all these thrice-longed-for good things the
patron was the divine, mysterious and supernal decree, and
the intention of the most religious and Christian emperor, an
intention which concurred with commands from on high. For
it was fitting that his serenity should not only wrestle and
defeat visible enemies but invisible ones as well, and shiver into
pieces barbarian battlelines, bring to an end the idle peevish-

17. Phil 2.15. 22. Pry 2.15.

18. Reb 13.7. 23. Pry 9.18.
19· Pry 4.26. 24. Eccl 7.26.
20. Phil 3.14. 25. Cf. Ps 79(80).19·
21. Pry 22.28.
124 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

ness of the devil and, through your reverence, regulate the

safety of those who believe in Christ. For the man who was
uttering nonsense in the church and opening his unrestrained
mouth for blasphemies against Christ has withdrawn from the
holy and divine court and your reverence has grown up in his
place and shot up as a plant of peace, according to the
Scripture.26 And this is the brilliant function of a reverend
emperor, with a command from on high leading the way, as I
said.
(5) Accordingly we rejoice with you since you have the true
and blameless faith. For a man, whom you know, has arisen to
offer sacrifice and much time was provided for you, and ex-
perience in affairs has crowned you. He is a man who has spent
much time in good thoughts about you, for his most reverend
grey head has thus gone past its youth. For it was necessary, it
was necessary to give to the very select flocks of our Savior a
wise and experienced master, having a mind filled with pas-
toral skill, one who knows how to graze his flock in a good
meadow and a rich pasture, who has been tested in affairs as a
trustworthy and sincere administrator. Those who have been
accustomed to live thus Christ also suffers to approach him
and deems worthy of every praise, but those who are not such
he deposes from the ministry entrusted to their hands.
(6) And that this is true can be seen from Holy Scripture.
For God says in one place to the blessed prophet Isaiah, "Go
get you in to him that dwells in the priests' quarters, to Sobna
the steward, and say to him: Why are you so occupied and what
is there that interests you so? Behold the Lord of hosts will
throw out and destroy you, mortal man, and will take away
your garment and your glorious crown, and will toss you into a
large and spacious country and there you shall die, and you
shall be removed from your function and station. And it shall
come to pass in that day that I shall call my servant Eliacim, the
son of Helcia, and I shall clothe him with your robe, and I will
give your crown to him, and I will give your function into his

26. Cf. Ez 34.29.

 LETTER 31 12 5

hand, and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem,

and to the house of J uda. And I will give the glory of David to
him, and he shall rule, and there will be none to speak against
him, and I will make him ruler in a trustworthy place, and he
shall be a throne of glory to the house of his father, and every
man of glory in his father's house will trust him, from the small
to the great, and they shall depend upon him in that day. Thus,
says the Lord of hosts, the man who was fastened in a trustwor-
thy place shall be removed and he shall fall, and the glory
which was upon him will be taken away, because the Lord has
spoken it."27
(7) Therefore, the God of all truly loves the faithful man
and the sincere minister, but he who is not such a man, he turns
himself away from as unholy. But he will applaud us for
encouraging your holiness, and will gladden you with a rich
hand by graces from above, so that by teaching aright the word
of truth and following after the faith of the holy Fathers you
may persevere in high esteem through the mercy and benevo-
lence of Christ, the Savior of us all, through whom and with
whom may there be to God the Father with the Holy Spirit
glory and power for ages and ages. Amen.
(8) Salute the brotherhood with you, because the brother-
hood with us salutes you in the Lord. Farewell. Remember us, I
pray you in the Lord, most reverend and God-loving brother.
 LETTER 32

Cyril, to my lords, my most cherished and God-fearing brothers

and fellow bishops, Juvenal, Flavian, Arcadius, Projectus, Firmus,
Theodoretus, Acacius, and Philip, the priests, greetings in the
Lord.'

E HAVE BEEN FILLED with assurance again, and through

the very experience we have realized that "the truth
lives and prevails"2 according to the saying of the holy
man, and nothing at all is arrayed against her. Thus she is the
strongest, so that she rises up against every enemy and destroys
the strength of those opposing her. For behold, behold she has
stilled the lips of those who spoke falsehoods, and the darkness
of strange blasphemies has ceased.
(2) The beauty of the dogmas of the truth has shone forth,
since the most pious and most God-fearing Maximian has been
elected bishop according to the decision and choice of God
through your reverences.3 A long life has honored him, since
he is not in indulgences and luxuries but in labors for the sake
of virtue and his very great concern for affairs has fitted him, a
concern, I say, for the sake of the truth and the dogmas of
piety. Accordingly, when congratulating all the churches and
the people there, I would rightly say, "Blessed be the Lord
because he has visited and wrought redemption for his
people."4 It was not possible that the good shepherd be
slumbering, so that he also "lay down his life for his sheep,"5
but as he always knew how to save, he has driven away the

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.7 p. 137. A Latin
version is in PG 77.155-158 and in Schwartz, AGO 1.1.3 p. 180. Geerard
numbers this letter 5332 in GPG.
2. 1 Ezr 4.38 (LXX). 4. Lk 1.68.
3· October 25, 431. 5· jn 10.11.
 LETTER 32 12 7

wretched beast from his sacred and religious dwelling and

lifted up a very wise steward skilled in all virtue, whom we also
believe will be eminent in all goodness, and will restore the
people under his hand to the pure and chosen way of life.
(3) I pray to the Lord that you are in good health and
remember us, my beloved and most cherished brethren.
 LETTER 33

To my lord, my most beloved brother and fellow bishop, Acacius,

Cyril sends greetings in the Lord.'

OUR HOLINESS HAS taken upon itself even now a proper

care. For your reverence has the intention according
to the goodwill of God, the Savior of us all, that the
churches be united 2 and, so that a certain smallness of soul be
removed from their midst, that those be persuaded in truth
who ought to be of one mind. Everything which saddens them
should be removed, and those elements which have been split
apart should be bound again in the bonds of charity. But, as it
seems, some are afraid of the likelihood of seeming to be
clearly in opposition to the purpose of your holiness, but they
are either concealing it or they are zealously bringing it about
that they are hidden. To do such things and to beg off what
cannot be, what else is this than for them to cry out against
reality as if the reality of peace is something they do not wish?
(2) And I say these things after reading again the letter sent
by your holiness. Through it I learned to seek them out so that
every statement and every letter which was completed before
the time of the council ought to be rejected by us or approved
as being in agreement with the creed of the true faith which
was defined in due season by the holy Fathers in the great
Nicene Council.
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.7 pp. 147-150. A
Latin version is in PG 77.157-162. Geerard numbers this letter 5333 in CPG.
2. Cyril had returned to Alexandria. Pope Celestine had warned Theodo-
sius to procure peace for the church and he had sent Aristolaus to unite
Antioch and Alexandria by insisting on the decrees of Ephesus. John of
Antioch held a synod first at Antioch, then at Beroea before Acacius of Be roe a,
who had demanded of Cyril that, since the Nicene creed was the rule of faith,
he should take back his writings against Nestorius. Cyril does not agree.
 LETTER 33 12 9

(3) However, since that creed is sufficient for all knowledge

of good, and since there is nothing lacking in it, I certainly will
recite it and will agree to it, even if it does not seem to some
others to mean or say this. Yet I am completely amazed at this.
For against Nestorius who utters those twisted and most abom-
inable statements against Christ, the Savior of us all, and does
this before the eyes of the church, we have written what we
have written, contradicting him, to be sure, and bringing forth
the truth opposite to his polluted innovations of expressions.
(4) And, through the grace of God, after they have read the
documents, most men indeed have derived profit and honored
in their right mind what was said by us against him. But I do
not know why these, who now ought to anathematize his pol-
luted teachings and get themselves apart from his impiety by
turning their zeal to everything opposite to him, seek to sup-
press what was written against him. What reason, I ask, does
that have? Let your holiness understand what incongruity the
matter contains, if we should reject the things which we wrote
in behalf of the true faith, since they are our own, or even more
particularly, if we shall find fault with their faith. Therefore, if
what was written against N estorius is not correct, or what was
written against his perverse teachings is not correct, then he
was deposed from office without cause, even more, also, he
perhaps is, indeed, truly wise.
(5) Moreover, then, we erred by not agreeing with him, and
more than that by writing against the things which he said. And
certainly many books of Nestorius were carried around con-
fusing everything and disturbing the churches. Finally, how
shall we destroy those things which were written against him,
which perhaps happened to bring help, however brief, to some
people? Therefore, your holiness, who is filled with all wisdom,
clearly sees that they seek an impossible thing, and that they
are so far from a desire to mitigate the discord between us, that
they take the matter back to the beginning of his contention
which is incapable of being set out in detail. For why did they
not, by coming to the great city of Ephesus, bring forth one
decree with the council against him who preached such great
impious errors? If they had delayed only a short time, what
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

hindered them from approving what had been legitimately

done, after inspecting the records of the council's acts, and
from agreeing, as I said, with the correct decree of all, which
ought not to be reproached? But, on the contrary, not being
mindful of God, nor of the zeal for which they assembled, for
the discussion was not about some ordinary cause, but about
the faith through which God the Father saved the world in
Christ, to us they have shown all bile and unbrotherly hatred,
wantonly insulting us in this the holy and ecumenical council
by an excommunication,S without a trial, and, as if with the wild
right hand of savagery, forcing a sword against me and the
most reverend bishop Memnon. For we should reckon that we
are in accordance with the truth, and anything which pertains
to the rectitude of dogmas pierces us.
(6) In some other ways have we been subject to some faults
or sins? Ought we not to have been deemed worthy first of a
discussion? A conference? A complaint? And while we all, both
your holiness with us and the entire council, endured Nestor-
ius while he for a three-year period wore himself out blas-
pheming, we worked to lead him away from those blasphemies
and to change him rather to accept those dogmas which look to
rightness and truth. While, however, he persisted and erred
much more in speech against the glory of Christ even in the
very capital city of Ephesus, at the end the holy council re-
moved him from the exercise of his priesthood as a man sick
with an incurable disease.
(7) However, I want your holiness to recall something
worthwhile which pertains to the present time. For when in the
great city of Constantinople, your holy synod was gathered at
the time when John4 was accused, and later when there were
statements composed in writing by men concerning him, when
it might come about that a definition against him would be the

3. Cyril and Memnon, Bishop of Ephesus, had been excommunicated by

the false synod held by John of Antioch and his followers after he arrived at
Ephesus.
4. This was John Chrysostom, Archbishop of Constantinople, who was
deposed by the judgment of the Synod of the Oak which met in a suburb of
Chalcedon, a city across the Bosporus from Constantinople.
 LETTER 33
result, and I was one of the bystanders,5 I know that I heard
your holiness speaking in the following words to the synod, "If
I knew that, if we granted forgiveness to John, he would be
better disposed within himself and would depart from the
hardness and harshness which is in him, I would beseech you
all in his behalf." Therefore, your holiness made an admirable
judgment again in that instance, indeed one which told the
truth. What therefore ought the holy council do which uncov-
ered such an impenitent and stubborn man as Nestorius who
fought against the true faith? Because he rightly says that it is
proper to agree to the one profession of faith, or certainly to
the exposition of faith of the three hundred and eighteen,6 I
also, in addition to these words, say that it was the only inten-
tion of the holy and ecumenical council which gathered in the
capital city of Ephesus that it affirm the profession of faith
seeing that all so confess and believe and teach without any-
thing being added and with nothing taken from it. For it is not
possible to add anything to it, or possible to take anything away
from it. Because of this, the council passed a decree against
Nestorius as one who was not persuaded of the profession of
faith, but rather as one who removed or obliterated it, and in
no way indeed followed it, but had caused some other things
foreign to the dogmas of the church to be sown impiously in
the ears of the people. There was action, therefore, taken in
Ephesus about this individual petition, while the council con-
firmed the faith expounded by our holy Fathers who gathered
at Nicaea in the times of crisis, and I have sent this, so that your
holiness might well know. Since it is right and irreprehensible,
the very reading of it will clearly explain it.
(8) However, we have added also the testimonies of our holy
and blessed Fathers so that those who approach this matter
may know how our Fathers, who imbued us with its mysteries,
understood the profession of faith. Therefore, since this was
done in such a way by all at that time, why should they not

5. Cyril here states that he attended the synod which deposed John Chry-
sostom. His uncle, Theophilus, was Archbishop of Alexandria. The date was
August 403.
6. The 318 bishops at the Council of Nicaea, A.D. 325.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

agree to all the more? For if what pleased all is confirmed by all,
peace will by every means be obtained, provided that what was
agreed upon shall be contradicted by no one. Therefore, even
though many things have been done by them, and very dif-
ficult too, and every pretext contrary to humanity has been
tried, yet considering that enduring this is pleasing to God and
to the very pious emperor, a friend of Christ, and besides that,
it itself is useful for the church, and holding the accounts of
your holiness as worthy of all reverence the result is that we
yield to our brothers what they have entrusted to us. Rather we
are seeking whatever seems to be right and good for all. It is
truly pleasing also to the emperor who is most loving to God.
Let them agree to the deposing of Nestorius by anathematizing
his blasphemies and polluted teachings, and nothing else is left
to be done to remove contention from our midst, for the
churches will welcome one another with Christ bestowing on
them the reward of peace.
(9) However, let some men not simply spew out the expres-
sions of foreigners against me. They defame me as one who
has a taste for the expressions of Apollinaris or Arius or Euno-
mius, as they have written about me in Ephesus. Through the
grace of our Savior I always was orthodox and I was reared also
by an orthodox father and I never shared in those expressions
which are those of Apollinaris or Arius or Eunomius, far from
it, nor those which are of any other heretic. No, rather I
anathematize them.
(10) For I do not say that the body of Christ was without a
soul, but I confess that it was animated with a rational soul, and
I assert that no fusing together took place, nor putting
together, nor a refusion as some say, but that the Word of God
is unchangeable and immutable according to nature and insus-
ceptible of all suffering according to his own nature. For the
divine is impassible and by no means endures the overshadow-
ing of change, but rather is fixed in its own goodness and has
unchangeable continuance in essence. I say, moreover, that
one Christ and Lord, the only begotten Son of God, suffered
for us in his flesh according to the Scriptures, that is, according
 LETTER 33 133
to the words of blessed Peter? But the force of the statements
was written only against the teachings of Nestorius. For they
throw out what he said and wrote in error. Those who
anathematize and deny his evil teaching will cease to object to
the documents which have been written by us. For they see that
the meaning of the statements only goes against his blasphe-
mies. When communion has been restored and peace made
among the churches, when it shall be permitted us to write in
answer without being suspected, either for those who are there
to write to us, or for us again to reply to them, then we also will
be satisfied very easily. Some of those things which were writ-
ten by us are not at all properly understood by some, and these
will be clarified. With the help of God we will satisfy them, not
then as opponents but as brothers, because all things are going
rightly. And of what we have written attacking the teachings of
Nestorius, there is none at all which disagrees either with
Sacred Scripture or indeed with the definition of faith which
was expounded by the holy Fathers, I mean those who were
gathered in Nicaea in their own time.
(11) Our intention, therefore, is directed to peace, and to
follow what has been decreed by the most pious and most
God-loving emperor. We wish that they clearly choose to agree
to the deposition of Nestorius from office, and to anathematize
his poisoned teachings and be in communion with us and come
to concord with us with Christ helping us to this end, Christ,
who is our peace according to the Scriptures.s But none of
them will agree who say that what we have written against the
polluted teachings of Nestorius should be thrown out. Most
plainly they wish us to be silent about his blasphemies, since
they are buying the silence of everyone. Or perhaps they think
that we will be persuaded that we may agree with him, if we
deny all the things which are our own, which are correct and
stainless and stand against his novelties of speech.9 If, however,
some of those who are there, according to what seems best to
7. Cf. 1 Pt 4.1.
8. Cf. Eph 2.14.
g. Cf. 1 Tim 6.20.
134 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

them, lead others astray turning their thoughts to what is

improper, let them know that they are convicted by all the most
God-fearing bishops throughout the world when they do this.
For those bishops all agreed and they agree with what was done
by us, as being right and expressed properly, since they them-
selves are precise interpreters of the divine dogmas. May your
piety realize in addition, too, that it is fitting that peace from
God be arranged among the most loving bishops who are
throughout all the empire of the Romans, so that it may be-
come universal and we by healing the schism may not cause
many others. For they will not agree at all if something shall
have been done which may not seem consistent, and this most
of all ought to be considered. Since all in Ephesus persevered
and did not agree to communicate with those from the East,1O
for they proposed that this would not occur until they had
accepted the deposing of N estorius and had anathematized his
teachings, how, unless this shall have been done, will those
actions stand which pertain to communion? Moreover, which
of us will not cry out that we shall have damned our souls and
denied the true faith, and that we have rejected what was
pleasing to all as if it was incorrectly stated?
(12) Is it not completely proper when peace has been made,
that we send letters to those who are outstanding above other
most holy bishops everywhere, so that they also by having been
made concordant may restore communion with them? Finally
who may there be who would persuade them, if something
shall have been done other than what is pleasing to all, and in
which all have persevered, both of the necessity of considering
N estorius deposed and of anathematizing his most outrageous
teaching or rather his nonsense against Christ, the Savior of us
all? But when we were overcome with sadness unto excess and
unendurably grieved because of what was done against me by
the Eastern bishops, and far from the clergy of Alexandria and
all the most God-fearing bishops of the diocese of Egypt, my
most admirable lord, the tribune, Aristolaus, mitigated my
grief so that he created a very easy way of making peace and all

10. The followers of John of Antioch.

 LETTER 33 135
came to desire this. And I confess that I am a debtor to his
excellency, because he is cooperative with me in all things and
by his competent plans has taken away what grieved me.
(13) Salute the brotherhood which is with you. The brother-
hood which is with us greets you in the Lord.
 LETTER 34

To Rabbula, Bishop of Edessa.'

HE MOST PIOUS and Christ-loving emperor directed my

lord, the most admirable tribune and secretary, Aristo-
laus, a Christian man and one who is fighting strongly
for the true faith, to unite the churches in peace. The emperor
also wrote clearly that the Antiochene 2 ought first to subscribe
to the condemnation of Nestorius, to anathematize his wicked
teachings and then to seek communion with us. My lord, the
most religious and excellent old man, Acacius the bishop,
wrote to me a certain incongruous proposition as if composed
by the bishops ofthe East, or rather, if one should tell the truth,
by those who share the opinions of Nestorius. While it was
appropriate that they agree to what was proper and anathema-
tize the wicked teachings of N estorius, according to the inten-
tion of the most pious emperor and of all the orthodox, on the
other hand they seek to render void everything which was
written by me either in pamphlets or in books. In this way, they
say, the churches will be in communion with each other.
(2) But this is plainly to say that we ought to deny the true
faith and agree to the blasphemies of Nestorius. If we destroy
our writings which are correct and irrefutably assert the truth
and fight for the true faith, then we will approve those which
are the writings of Nestorius and we will be admirers of his
insanity. But we have indeed understood their proposal. For
they are saddened because, after Nestorius blasphemed, ser-

1. For the critical text (only the Latin is extant) of this letter see Schwartz,
AGO 1.1.4 p. 140. Geerard numbers this letter 5334 in GPG.
2. John of Antioch.
 LETTER 34 137
mons and letters were written by the orthodox against him.
But your excellency will know what kind we wrote, while you
may be reading the like of theirs. For with this in mind I sent
them to your holiness.
 LETTER 35

John and all the others who are with me send greetings in the Lord
to my most holy and most God-loving brothers and fellow bishops,
Sixtus, Cyril and Maximian.1

OTH EAGERNESS AND concern for all those who have

obtained consecration and have been entrusted with
the divine liturgy of the episcopacy by Christ, the
Savior of us all, demand that they be outstanding in the true
faith so that they may teach the people in their charge. This is
true, and during the year which has passed 2 from the time of
the decree of the most reverend and Christ-loving emperors,
the holy council of most God-loving bishops has been assem-
bled in the city of Ephesus because of the discussion concern-
ing Nestorius. There, when they were seated with the de-
fenders 3 sent by Celestine4 of happy memory, the Bishop at
that time of the holy Church of Rome, they have overthrown
the aforementioned N estorius by a vote of deposition, as one
making use of an unholy teaching, scandalizing many and not
walking upright in the faith. But when we hastened thither,
because we found that this had happened, we were grieved.
For this reason when a difference arose between us and the
holy council and between us and the many things done and

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.4 p. 33. Geerard
numbers this letter 5335 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 508-509.
2. The Council of Ephesus began on June 22,431. If the year mentioned is
understood as the following one, this letter is to be dated in 432.
3. This is the meaning of the Greek word, €KI)LKOL. In the acts of the council
those sent by Pope Celestine are called AEI'(l(TOL, a word fashioned from the
Latin legati. John'S term, however, is a good one since they were sent to defend
the sentence against Nestorius.
4. This is addressed to Pope Sixtus III, who reigned 432 to 440. Pope
Celestine died July 27, 432. Sixtus succeeded him on July 31.
 LETTER 35 139
said, we returned to our own churches and cities, since we did
not agree with the holy council at that time because of the
indictment of deposition carried out against Nestorius. 5
(2) The churches are being torn apart in disagreement and
it is fitting that all be most anxious about this situation. In order
that they may be united and every disagreement may be re-
moved from our midst, and because the most God-revering
and Christ-loving emperor6 decrees that this be brought about,
and for this reason has sent the admirable tribune and secret-
ary, Aristolaus, it has pleased us, for the removal of all strife
and for the sake of arbitrating peace for the churches of God,
to agree to the vote of the holy council carried out against
Nestorius, to hold him as deposed, and to anathematize his
infamous teachings, because the churches with us have always
kept the true and blameless faith, just as your holiness, and
always guard it and hand it on to the people.
(3) We approve also the elevation of the most holy and
God-revering Maximian to the bishopric of the holy Church of
Constantinople, and we are in communion with all the most
God-revering bishops throughout the world who have and
protect the faith.
5· No mention is made of the separate synod held at Ephesus by John
which excommunicated Cyril, Memnon and the Fathers of the true council.
6. Theodosius. What follows is the submission of John of Antioch and his
bishops to the authority of the Pope at Rome and to his doctrinal supremacy.
 LETTER 36

A petition delivered to Cyril the archbishop through Paul, the

Bishop of Emesa, sent by John, the Bishop of Antioch. To my lord,
the bishop Cyril, in all things most sacred and most holy, Paul the
bishop sends greetings in the Lord.'

UR MOST RELIGIOUS and invincible emperors manifest

the zeal and care which they have deigned to have
from the beginning concerning their subjects and es-
pecially concerning the holy churches of God and the sacred,
pure, and true faith which they received from their fathers.
They sent a message in writing through the famous tribune
and secretary, Aristolaus, to your holiness, to the most sacred
and holy bishop, John, and to our most sacred and most holy
father Acacius, Bishop of Beroea. They urge us that either by
meeting personally or by a meeting of minds we grant a de-
liverance from differences which have thrust apart the most
God-loving bishops who assembled at Ephesus and us our-
selves. We should arrange peace dear to God for the holy
churches of God and end the disturbances which happen daily
to the churches of God, and agree to the deposition of Nesto-
rius and anathematize his perverse teaching.
(2) The aforementioned holy John and the most holy
bishop Acacius received this reverend and Christ-loving docu-
ment and considered that there are many things that require a
meeting face to face with you, so that not much time might be
wasted in discussion. Hence they sent me to your holiness to
examine with you in what way matters concerning peace might

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.4 pp. 6-7.
Geerard numbers this letter 5336 in CPG.
 LETTER 36 141

safely be arranged and by the best action the necessary and

advantageous end may be gained.
(3) When I came and met your holiness I found you mild
and peaceful and, as befits archbishops, ready to arrange mat-
ters at hand. Your holiness placed in my hands a written
statement proclaiming the true and spotless faith which we
received from our Fathers. It was above all worthy of your
labor and zeal. Since concerning the condemnation of Nesto-
rius your holiness required acceptance of the document given
by you from the beginning, I, being present, have offered in
your presence this written document through which I confess
that we accept the appointment of the most holy and most
sacred bishop Maximian, and that we hold Nestorius, who
heretofore was the Bishop of the great city of Constantinople,
deposed. We anathematize what was said by him as unholy
teaching, and we welcome spotless and pure communion with
you according to the exposition given by your holiness to us in
a few words about the Incarnation of the Word of God. This
you also praised and even accepted as your own faith and a
copy of it has been inserted into this written document. And by
this pure communion we grant deliverance to all those on
either side who have been divided from us in confusion. By
the love of God we return to the former tranquillity of the
churches.
 LETTER 37

Cyril, to Theognostus and Charmosynus, priests, and to Leontius,

the deacon, greetings in the Lord. I

E WRITE TO YOU about all our affairs; then you 2 write as

if you comprehend nothing, filling us with perplex-
ities. I know certainly that I informed you by letter that
the most venerable and God-revering Acacius of Beroea, after
he had been urged by some of the most pious bishops of the
East, wrote to me through the lord, the most magnificent
Aristolaus, that it was necessary to suppress what was written in
my books and letters, and to agree only to the profession of
faith set forth in the holy Council at Nicaea. But I wrote a
lengthy letter in reply to this, which you undoubtedly received
also. The beloved presbyter Eulogius disclosed this. And now
after the most pious Paul of Emesa came to Alexandria, all
things have been complied with propitiously, peacefully, safe-
ly, and as was fitting.
(2) We have not accepted back those deposed by the God-
revering bishop Maximian, nor hold them in communion.
Neither have we released them from the sentence imposed
upon them. We would not at all grant communion to the
aforementioned Paul, unless he first brought a document con-
fessing both that the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God and that
he anathematized the teachings of Nestorius, and, having re-
ceived it, would say in church in a loud voice, "We confess that
the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God, and we anathematize

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.7 p. 154. Geerard
numbers this letter 5337 in CPG.
2. They were at Constantinople and Cyril at Alexandria.
 LETTER 37 143
those whosoever do not assert this; and the son is Christ and
Lord, not two."
(3) But since he did not come with a document stating that
John anathematizes the teachings of Nestorius and, instead,
confesses that they hold him deposed because the letters sent
from him 3 contained none of the necessary statements, I said
that I was not able to grant him communion, until he should do
these things. But since I saw that they were rather apathetic
toward this, and that the most pious bishop Paul did not think
very highly of this, as well as my lord, the most magnificent
tribune and secretary Aristolaus, in order that we might not be
thought to be declining peace by putting off the matter unto
great delays, we wrote the letters of communion. A document
was dictated also according to the judgment of the most pious
bishop Paul which the Bishop of Antioch ought to sign also,
and I sent two clerics along with the most admirable Aristolaus,
with the result that, if John should subscribe to the deposition
of Nestorius and should anathematize his teachings, they
would give him the letters of communion. If not, they should
retain them. The most admirable Aristolaus submitted under
oath that the document would not be surrendered. He said
that, if John did not wish to sign, "I would sail straight to
Constantinople and instruct our most reverend emperor that
nothing stands in the way with regard to the Church of Alexan-
dria, but the Bishop of the Church of Antioch is the one who
does not love peace."
(4) Wherefore do not give way to being despondent. For we
have not been so foolish as to anathematize our own writings.
We abide by what we have written and what we think. Our
beliefs are correct and blameless, and in accord with the Holy
Scriptures and the faith set forth by our holy Fathers.
3. John of Antioch.
 LETTER 38

To the most holy and most God-loving bishop, Cyril, John [of
Antioch] sends greetings in the Lord.'

LONG AGO AS a result of the decree of our most pious

emperors a council of the most God-loving bishops was
summoned to convene at the city of Ephesus on
account of ecclesiastical matters and the true faith. But we
found what the situation was at our arrival in the city already
mentioned and returned without a meeting with each other. It
is superfluous now in a time of peace to mention the causes of
disagreement. 2 The churches were being torn apart in dis-
agreement in this fashion. It was necessary that all take
thought particularly about this, since they might be joined
together with all disagreement removed from their midst. The
most pious and Christ-loving emperors decreed that this very
thing come to be, namely, the uniting of the churches of Christ.
For this very reason they have sent my lord, the most admi-
rable and remarkable tribune and secretary, Aristolaus, bear-
ing their pious letter bidding us thereupon to meet directly
and take away the scandals from our midst and put to rest all
disturbance and all distress.
(2) Yielding to this pious letter, immediately and straight-
away we sent my lord, in all things the most God-loving bishop,
Paul. Thus I also pleased the most holy and most God-loving
bishop, our father, Acacius, and the most God-loving bishops
with us. We have done this for the sake of more conciseness,

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.4 pp. 7-9.
Geerard numbers this letter 5338 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 474-
47 6 .
2. This glosses over the rival council John held at Ephesus and the condem-
nation against Cyril and Memnon.
 LETTER 38 145
because we are not able to meet face to face to bring to comple-
tion what was decreed by our most pious emperors. We have
commanded him that both in our stead and for our sake and in
our name, he should give form to what concerns peace, which
is the leading matter, and to put in the hands of your reverence
the statement, which is in harmony with us, concerning the
Incarnation of our Lord, Jesus Christ, which statement we sent
to your reverence through the aforesaid most God-loving
man. It is as follows:
Adding nothing whatsoever to the faith of the holy
Fathers set forth at Nicaea we shall speak in a few words,
which are necessarily not an addition but in the fullness of
conviction, as we have received the faith both from the
beginning from the divine Scriptures and from the tradition
of the holy Fathers, as to how we think and speak concerning
the Virgin Mary, the Mother of God and concerning the
manner of the Incarnation of the only begotten Son of God.
As we have said before, the faith set forth at Nicaea is
sufficient for all knowledge of piety, and for public proc-
lamation against all heretical evil teaching. We will speak
without making a bold bid for things unattainable, yet in the
admission of our own weakness excluding those wishing to
intrude into matters in which we examine what is above man.
Therefore 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, begotten before ages from the
Father according to his divinity and that in recent ages he
himself for us and for our salvation was born from the
Virgin Mary according to his humanity, consubstantial to
the Father himself according to divinity and consubstantial
to us according to his humanity, for a union was made of his
two natures.3 Accordingly we confess one Christ, one Son,
one Lord. With this understanding of a union without fu-
sion we confess that the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God,
because God the Word was made flesh and was made man,
and from his very conception he united to himself a temple
taken from her. And we know that theologians regard some

3. For a comparison of Antioch and Alexandria on this point cf. Wilken,

Judaism, 184.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

of the evangelical and apostolic sayings regarding the Lord

as common, that is, as pertaining to one person, and that
theologians divide others of the sayings as pertaining to two
natures, and refer those proper to God to the divinity of
Christ, but the lowly ones to his humanity.4
(3) Since this confession of faith has been accepted, it has
pleased us, for the removal of all contention, and to direct the
universal peace in the churches of God, and to remove the
scandals which have grown up, to hold Nestorius, who for-
merly was the Bishop of Constantinople, as deposed. We
anathematize his worthless and "profane novelties"5 because
the holy churches of God with us have kept the right and
healing faith and guard it and hand it on to the people,just as
your holiness does also. We join as well in approving the
appointment of the most holy and God-loving Maximian as
Bishop of the holy Church of God at Constantinople, and we
are in communion with all the God-revering bishops through-
out the world who hold and preach the true and blameless
faith.
(4) Farewell, and may you continue praying for us, my most
God-loving and most holy lord, and most noble brother of all
to me.6

4. See Quasten 3. 1 38- 1 4°.

5. 1 Tm 6.20.
6. In the formal language a note of affection is perceptible.
 LETTER 39

To my lord, my beloved brother and fellow bishop, John, Cyril

sends greetings in the Lord.'

,ET THE HEAVENS be glad and the earth rejoice."2 "The

. intervening wall of the enclosure"3 has been broken
down and grief has ceased, and every manner of dis-
agreement has been removed, since Christ, the Savior of us all,
has granted peace to his churches. The most pious and most
God-loving emperors have summoned us to this, who have
become excellent emulators of their ancestral piety and guard
safe and unshaken the true faith in their souls. They have
taken special care of the holy churches, so that they may
forever have their glory spread abroad and show forth their
reign as most noble. To them, Christ, the Lord of hosts, with a
rich hand apportions good things and grants them to over-
power their adversaries and yields them the victory. For he
does not lie when he says, "I live, says the Lord: whosoever
shall glorify me, him will 1 glorify."4
(2) Accordingly, since my lord, the most God-beloved 5 fel-
low bishop and brother, Paul, has arrived at Alexandria, we
have been filled with gladness of heart and very justly. Such a
man is acting as a mediator, and chooses to be engaged in
labors beyond his strength, so that he may conquer the hatred
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.4 pp. 15-20.
Geerard numbers this letter 5339 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 486-
491.
2. Ps 95.11. This expresses Cyril's joy at the reunion with John of Antioch.
The date of reconciliation is 433.
3. Eph 2.14·
4. Cf. 1 Sm (1 Kgs) 2.30.
5. InACO 1.1.4 Schwartz reads "most religious" and inACO 2.1.1, he reads
"most God-beloved.".

147
14 8 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

of the devil, and unite what was separated by taking away

completely the disjointed scandals between us, and crown the
churches with us and those with you by harmony and peace. In
what manner they are being removed, it is superfluous to say. I
assume that it is good to think and to say what is necessary for
the season of peace. Hence we were pleased by meeting with
the most God-revering man mentioned before, who perhaps
in some way suspected that he would even have no small
struggles persuading us that we must bring the churches to
peace and suppress the laughter of the heterodox and blunt as
well the devil's goad of peevishness. But he found us thus
holding ourselves ready for this, that he endured no labor at
all. For we are mindful of the Savior saying, "My peace I give to
you, my peace I leave with yoU."6 And we have learned also to
say in our prayers, "0 Lord, our God, grant us your peace, for
you have given us every thing," 7 so that if anyone becomes
partaker of the peace furnished by God, he will not be lacking
any good thing.
(3) But we have been fully assured, now especially, that the
disagreement of our churches happened completely super-
fluously and not opportunely. My lord, the most reverend
bishop, Paul, brought forward a document containing an irre-
prehensible confession of the faith and verified that this was
composed by your holiness and by the most God-loving
bishops there. The document is as follows, and is inserted in
this letter of mine in the exact words:
Adding nothing whatsoever to the faith of the holy
Fathers set forth at Nicaea, we shall speak in a few words,
which are necessarily not a statement but in the fullness of
conviction, as we have received the faith both from the
beginning from the divine Scriptures and from the tradition
of the holy Fathers, as to how we think and speak concerning
the Virgin Mother of God, and concerning the manner of
the Incarnation of the only begotten Son of God. As we have
said before, the faith set forth at Nicaea is sufficient for all
6. Cf. In 14.27. Cyril has the two phrases in reverse, probably by fault of
memory.
7. Is 26.12.
 LETTER 39 149
knowledge of piety, and for public proclamation against all
heretical evil teaching. We will speak without making a bold
bid for things unattainable, yet, in the admission of our own
weakness, excluding those wishing to intrude into matters in
which we examine what is above man.
Therefore 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, begotten before ages from the
Father according to his divinity, and that, in recent days, he
himself for us and for our salvation was born from the
Virgin Mary according to his humanity, consubstantial to
the Father himself according to divinity and consubstantial
to us according to his humanity, for a union was made of his
two natures. We confess one Christ, one Son, one Lord. With
this understanding of a union without fusion we confess that
the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God, because God the
Word was made flesh and was made man, and from his very
conception he united to himself a temple taken from her.
And we know that theologians regard some of the evangeli-
cal and apostolic sayings regarding the Lord as common,
that is, as pertaining to one person, and that theologians
divide others of the sayings as pertaining to two natures, and
refer those proper to God to the divinity of Christ, but the
lowly ones to his humanity.B
(4) Having read these holy words of yours and finding that
we thought thus also, for there is "one Lord, one faith, one
baptism"9 we glorified God, the Savior of all, congratulating
one another because the churches with us and those with you
have the faith corresponding to the divinely inspired Scrip-
tures and the tradition of our holy Fathers. But when I learned
that some of those accustomed to find fault and to buzz around
justice like wild wasps, were disgorging villainous words
against me, as if I was saying that the holy body of Christ had
been brought down from heaven and not from the Holy Vir-
gin, I thought it necessary to say to them a few things about this
matter. 0 you foolish men who only know how to accuse

8. Another translation of this paragraph, entitled Formula of Reunion, was

published as section 5 of this Letter in Wickham, Select Letters, 222.
g. Cf. Eph. 4.5.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

falsely, how have you been carried past the truth into this
opinion, and how have you thought such absurdity? For it was
necessary, it was clearly necessary, to think that almost the
entire struggle in behalf of the faith has been waged by us
because we thoroughly maintained that the Holy Virgin is the
Mother of God. If we say that the holy body of Christ, the
Savior of us all, was born of heaven and not of her, how would
she still be considered the Mother of God? For whom has she
borne at all, if it is not true that she has given birth to Em-
manuel according to the flesh?
(5) Let those prattling these nonsensical trifles about me be
derided. For the blessed prophet Isaiah did not lie saying,
"Behold, the virgin will have in her womb and will give birth to
a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which is inter-
preted: With us is God"l0 and the holy Gabriel was entirely
stating the truth, saying to the Holy Virgin, "Do not be afraid,
Mary, for you have found grace with God. And behold you
shall conceive in your womb, and shall bring forth a son; and
you shall call his name Jesus"; II "he shall save his people from
their sins."12 But when we say that our LordJesus Christ is from
heaven and from above, we do not say such things as his holy
body was brought down from heaven, but rather follow the
divinely inspired Paul, who clearly has cried out, "The first
man was of the earth, earthy: the second man is from heaven,
heavenly."13 And we also recall the Savior himself saying, "And
no one has ascended into heaven except him who has de-
scended from heaven: the Son of Man."14
(6) Although he was born according to the flesh, as I said
just now, from the Holy Virgin, and seeing that he is from
above and that God the Word came down from heaven and
"emptied himself taking the form of a servant,"15 and has been
called the Son of Man after remaining what he was, this is God,
immutable and inalterable according to nature, and, consid-
ered one with his own flesh, he is said to come down from
heaven. But he is named a man from heaven also because the
10. cf. Is 7.14 and Mt 1.23-24. 13. Cf. 1 Cor 15-47·
11. Lk 1.30-31. 14· In 3. 13.
12. Mt 1.21. 15. Phil 2·7·
 LETTER 39
one who is perfect in divinity is also the same one who is perfect
in humanity and is known in one person. For the Lord Jesus
Christ is one, even if the difference of the natures, from which
we state the ineffable union has been made is not ignored. Let
your holiness deign to control the mouths of those saying that a
mixture or confusion or blending of God the Word with the
flesh took place, for it is likely that some are babbling these
ideas also about me, as if I have thought or said them. But so
far am I from thinking any such thing, that I consider that they
are mad who imagine that a shadow of change is able to occur
with regard to the divine nature of the Word. For he remains
what he is always, and he is not changed, but instead never
would be changed and will not be capable of alteration. Every-
one of us confesses that the Word of God is, moreover, im-
passible, even though he himself is seen arranging the dis-
pensation of the mystery all-wisely by assigning to himself the
sufferings that happened to his own body. And in this way,
also, the all-wise Peter speaks, "since Christ has suffered in the
flesh"16 and not in the nature of his ineffable divinity. For in
order that he might be believed to be the Savior of all, accord-
ing to incarnational appropriation, he assumes, as I said, the
sufferings of his own flesh, as is foretold through the voice of
the prophet about him, "I gave my back to lashes, my cheeks to
those who plucked my beard; I did not turn away my face from
the disgrace of their spittings."17
(7) That we follow the doctrines of the holy Fathers in all
ways, and especially of our blessed and all-glorious father,
Athanasius, praying earnestly not to depart from him in any-
thing at all, let your holiness be persuaded, and let none of the
others be in doubt. I would have added also many cited pas-
sages from them to produce belief in my own words from
theirs, if I had not feared that somehow through this the
length of my letter would become tedious. And in no manner
do we permit the defined faith to be shaken by anyone, or the
creed of the faith, defined by our holy Fathers who assembled
16. Cf. 1 Pt 4.1. See Lampe, PGL 938, 7a, s.v., "otKELW(JL~," "appropriation
of human flesh by Logos ... and of its sufferings."
17. Cf. Is 50.6.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

at Nicaea in critical times. Nor, indeed, do we allow, either by

us or by others, either a word to be changed in it or a single
syllable to be omitted, remembering the one who said, "Re-
move not the ancient landmarks which your fathers set Up."18
For they were not speaking, but the very Spirit of God the
Father 19 which proceeds from him and is not someone else's
than the Son's by reason of his substance. And in addition to
this the words of the holy teacher of the mysteries strengthen
our faith. For in the Acts of the Apostles, it is written, "And
when they came to Mysia, they tried to get into Bithynia, but
the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them."20 And the divinely
inspired Paul writes, "And they who are in the flesh cannot
please God, but you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if the
Spirit of God dwells in you. But if one does not have the Spirit
of Christ, he does not belong to him."21
(8) But when some of those accustomed "to pervert what is
right"22 turn my words aside into what seems best to them, let
your holiness not wonder at this, knowing that those involved
in every heresy collect from the divinely inspired Scripture as
pretexts of their own deviation whatever was spoken truly
through the Holy Spirit, corrupting it by their own evil ideas,
and pouring unquenchable fire 23 upon their very own heads.
But since we have learned that some have published a corrupt
text of the letter of our all-glorious father, Athanasius, to the
blessed Epictetus, a letter which is itself orthodox, so that many
are done harm from it,24 thinking that for this reason it would
be something useful and necessary for our brothers, we have
sent to your holiness copies of it made from the ancient copy
which is with us and is genuine.

18. Pry 22.28. 21. Rom 8.8, g.

Ig. Cf. Mt 10.20. 22. Cf. Mi 3.9.
20. Acts 16.7. 23. Cf. Homer, Il. 16.123.
24. The falsification of this letter was done by Nestorius. See Quasten
3.59-60.
 LETTER 40

A letter of the same to Acacius, Bishop of Melitene.

To my lord, my beloved brother and fellow bishop, Acacius, Cyril
sends greetings in the Lord.!

DDRESSING ONE ANOTHER 2 is a sweet thing for brothers

and admirable and deserving of all consideration
among those of truly sound thinking, and I say that it is
necessary that those of one faith and of one soul unceasingly
should hasten to do this, since nothing is in the way nor indeed
does anything rebuff the warm desire and eagerness towards
it. But there are times when the length of the distances be-
tween, or the scarcity of those who might carry a letter, be-
witches us even against our will. Yet when time offers the
ability to address one another, it is fitting to consider the matter
a godsend and to grasp readily the chance to communicate
with those thrice-loved. Delighted, therefore, exceedingly at
the letter from your excellency and having marveled at your
disposition towards me, I thought it proper to make known to
you the way in which peace came about for the churches and to
indicate how everything happened.
(2) The most pious and Christ-loving emperor having the
greatest possible and necessary care for the holy churches did
not consider the disagreement between them bearable. After
summoning, therefore, the most reverend and most God-

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.4 pp. 20-31.
Geerard numbers this letter 5340 in CPG. See also R. Y. Ebied and L. R.
Wickham, A Collection of Unpublished Syriac Letters of Cyril of Alexandria, CSCO
359: 20-31.
2. Acacius, Bishop of Melitene in Cappadocia, died about 438. See H.
Rahner, "Akakios, Bisch. v. Melitene," Lexikon fur Theologie und Kirche, 2d ed.
(Freiburg, 1957-65), 1 (1957): 235.

153
154 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

fearing Bishop of the holy Church of Constantinople, Max-

imian 3 and very many other bishops of those who happened to
be there, he considered how the disagreement between the
churches might be removed from our midst and the sacred
ministers of the holy mysteries might be called to peace. But
they said that this would never come about in any other way,
nor would they, concerning whom the discussion was being
held, come to unity of mind towards each other, except by a
bond of unity of faith rising before them and, as it were,
rescuing them. They said that John, the Bishop of Antioch, a
bishop full of reverence for God, must anathematize the
teachings of N estorius and in writing approve his deposition.
And as to what refers to personal sorrows, the Bishop of
Alexandria will forget for the sake of love and will consider as
next to nothing the insulting treatment he received at Ephesus,
although it was exceedingly harsh and difficult to endure.
(3) Since, therefore, the most reverend emperor consented
and was greatly pleased at these words, my lord, the most
admirable tribune and secretary, Aristolaus, was sent to ac-
complish this very thing. But when the imperial decree was
shown to the bishops in the East and it was explained that it was
in accordance with the opinion of the bishops who were pres-
ent in the great city of Constantine, intending I do not know
what, they met with the most holy and most God-revering
Bishop of Beroea, Acacius, and took care to write to me that, in
the manner of the agreement or of the peace of the holy
churches, it was fitting that this be effected in no other way
than it seemed best to them. This was a burdensome and harsh
request. For they wished to undo everything written by me in
letters, volumes and documents, and only would agree to the
faith defined at Nicaea by our holy Fathers. I wrote in answer
to this that we all follow the exposition of the faith defined by
the holy Fathers in the city of Nicaea, perverting absolutely
nothing of the things determined there, for everything in it is

3. Maximian became Bishop of Constantinople after Nestorius was de-

posed. See Letter 30, note 9·
 LETTER 40 155
correct and untouchable, and, after the definition, it was not
safe to meddle still.
(4) As to things we have written correctly against the blas-
phemies of Nestorius, no argument would persuade us to say
that they were not done rightly. Rather it was necessary that
they, according to what seemed best to the most pious and
Christ-loving emperor, and to the holy council assembled in
the city of Ephesus, make a public renunciation of him who
fought against the glory of the Savior, anathematize his unholy
blasphemies, agree to his deposition and approve the con-
secration of the most holy and most God-fearing bishop Maxi-
mian. Accordingly, when these letters were delivered to them,
they sent to Alexandria the most reverend and God-loving
bishop Paul, the Bishop of Emesa, with whom I had a great
many long talks about the things said and done coarsely and
improperly at Ephesus. Putting these out of my mind, since it
was fitting rather to follow more necessary pursuits, I asked if
he was carrying letters from the most God-fearing bishop,
John. He then produced a letter to me which did not contain
the things that it should contain, but which had been dictated
in a manner in which it should not, for it had the force of
provocation not of encouragement. And I did not accept this
letter. And although it was fitting that they charm away my
sorrow by apologies for the things which preceded and for the
things which were done at Ephesus, they even took the oppor-
tunity to say that they were provoked against me through their
zeal for the holy teachings. But I heard that neither had divine
zeal moved them nor were they ranged against me because
they were fighting for the teachings of the truth, but because
they were yielding to the flatteries of men and because they
were snatching for their own sakes at the friendship of those in
power at that time.
(5) Nevertheless when the most God-fearing bishop Paul
said that he was ready to anathematize the blasphemies of
Nestorius and to agree in writing to his deposition, and to do
this on behalf of all and in the presence of all the God-fearing
bishops of the East, I was opposed saying that a letter concern-
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

ing this produced by him would be enough by itself alone for

the needed achievement of communion with us all. I main-
tained strongly in every way and by all means that it was proper
that the most pious and most God-fearing Bishop of Antioch,
John, should set forth a written profession of faith concerning
these matters. This has been done, and the barrier and the
separation from one another, misleading the churches, has
come to an end. But there was no doubt anywhere that the
peace of the holy churches was on the point of dispersing the
protagonists of the blasphemies of Nestorius.
(6) And to me they seem to have an experience similar to
those who suddenly slide off a ship without knowing how to
swim. When the wretches are choking, thrashing their hands
and feet to and fro, they lay hold of whatever comes along in
their love for life. Is it not true to say that they are violently
upset since they have fallen away and are isolated from and are
outside of the churches which they thought would be a protec-
tion for them? Or are they not vexed, and this unbearably,
when they see those whom they beguiled turning away from
them, and those whom they had intoxicated, so to speak, with
"profane novelties."4 now becoming sober in truth? And yet
one might say to them, and very appropriately, what was said
by the voice of the prophet, "Be gathered and bound together,
uninstructed people, before you become like the flower that
passes away."5 For why in short have they become the eaters of
someone else's vomit, not being ashamed while defiling their
own hearts with another's filth? "You who are deaf, listen; you
who are blind, look and see."6 "Think of the truth of the Lord,
and seek him in simplicity of heart." 7 For what need have you
of tangled inventions and distorted reasonings? Why do you,
wantonly insulting the path straight forward, make your own
ways crooked?8 "Break up anew your fallow ground and sow
not upon thorns."9 For being distraught, as I said, at the peace
of the holy churches they ridicule those who have not endured

4. Cf. 1 Tm 6.20. 7. Cf. Wis 1.1.

5. Cf. Zeph 2.1, 2. 8. Cf. Pry 4.25-27.
6. Is 42.18. g. Jer 4.3.
 LETTER 40 157
sharing their wickedness and bitterly denounce the defense of
the holy bishops, I mean those from the East, and then, by
twisting it around to what is pleasing and dear to themselves
and thinking unorthodoxly, they say it is not discordant with
the foolish talking of Nestorius.
(7) And they even joined in censuring us, as if we thought
the opposite to the things which we have already written. But I
learn that they say this also, namely, that recently we have
accepted a doctrinal statement, or a new creed, perhaps, I
suppose, because we lightly esteem the ancient and august one.
"The fool will say foolish things, and his heart will think
nonsense."IO However, we say this, that no individuals have
demanded an explanation from us, nor have we accepted one
newly coined by others. For the divinely inspired Scripture and
the vigilance of our holy Fathers and the creed formulated by
those who are in every way orthodox are sufficient for us.
When the most holy bishops throughout the East disagreed
with us at Ephesus and have become suspect of being caught in
the snares of the blasphemies of N estorius, because of this and
rather sensibly, in order that they might set themselves free of
the fault involved in this and because they are eager to satisfy
fully the lovers of the blameless faith because they know how to
have no share in his shameless conduct, they made an apology.
The matter is far removed from all censure and reproach. For
in truth, if even N estorius himself, at the time when the need of
condemning his own teachings and of choosing the truth in-
stead was pointed out, had made a written confession in these
matters, would anyone say that he devised a new profession of
faith? Why, then, do they uselessly revile the definition of the
profession of faith, by naming the agreement of the God-
fearing bishops of Phoenicia a new explanation? This agree-
ment they have made both advantageously and necessarily by
speaking in their own defense and conciliating those who had
thought that they were following the novel expressions of
Nestorius. For the holy and ecumenical council which assem-
bled in the city of Ephesus knew beforehand of necessity that

10. Cf. Is 32.6.

 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

there was no need of admitting another explanation for the

churches of God besides the one that exists which the thrice-
blessed Fathers ordained speaking in the Holy Spirit.
(8) Those who once disagreed with the council, I do not
know how, after they came under suspicions of not choosing to
think correctly and of not following the apostolic and evan-
gelical teachings, would they by their silence be free of dis-
honor for this, or rather by answering and clarifying the mean-
ing of their opinion? And indeed the divinely inspired disciple
has written, "Be ready always with an answer to everyone who
asks a reason for the hope that is in you."!! He who chooses to
do this does nothing new and neither is he seen to be fashion-
ing a new explanation, but rather is making clear to those
asking him the faith which he has concerning Christ.
(9) But, in addition to these matters, I learned that the
enemies of truth, because they have immeasureably gloomy
faces at the unanimity of the most God-fearing bishops, are
jumbling everything together topsy-turvy, and say that the
meaning of the profession made by the bishops agrees with
their unholy inventions, a profession which the bishops
fashioned in the true faith, innovating, as I said, or adding
nothing whatsoever to what was defined long ago, but rather
following the faultless teachings of the holy Fathers. But, in
order that we may prove them to be speaking falsely, come, let
us parade in public the nonsense of N estorius and the state-
ments of the bishops. For the test would show the truth in this
way and in no other.
(10) Accordingly, Nestorius is found to have completely
taken away the birth according to the flesh of the only begotten
Son of God, for he denies that he was born of a woman,
according to the Scriptures. For he speaks thus, "I was taught
from the divine Scripture that God came forth from the Vir-
gin, the Mother of Christ, but I was nowhere taught that God
was born of her."!2 Again, in another explanation, he says,

11. 1 Pt 3.15.
12. The Greek word is XPLUTOTOKOC;. See Loofs, Nestoriana, 277.25 and
278.5-7.
 LETTER 40 159
"Nowhere does the divine Scripture say that God was born of
the Virgin, the Mother of Christ, but instead that Jesus Christ,
the Son and Lord, was born."13 Since he all but dearly shouts it,
how would anyone doubt that, by saying these things, he di-
vides the one Son into two sons, and one of them, taken
separately, he says is Son and Christ and Lord, the Word
begotten of God the Father; but the other, in turn taken
separately, he says is Son and Christ and Lord, who was born of
the Holy Virgin? But those who call the Holy Virgin Mother of
God say that there is one Son and Christ and Lord, perfect in
divinity, perfect in humanity, seeing that his flesh was ani-
mated by a rational soul. For, that they [the bishops of the East]
do not say that there is one Son, the Word of God the Father,
and another again who was born of the Holy Virgin, as Nesto-
rius teaches, but rather one and the same Son, would become
dear, and quite easily, from the following. They add, signify-
ing who he might be, that he is perfect as God and perfect as
man, who was begotten before ages from the Father according
to divinity and "in recent days"14 for us and for our salvation
was begotten of Mary, the Holy Virgin, according to his
humanity, that the same one is consubstantial with the Father
according to his divinity and consubstantial with us according
to his humanity.
(11) Therefore, by no means do they divide the one Son and
Christ and Lord Jesus in two, but say that he is the same before
ages and "in recent days," and dearly that he is from God the
Father as God, and from a woman according to the flesh as
man. For how might he be thought to be consubstantial with us
according to his humanity and yet begotten of the Father
according to his divinity, I say, unless the same one is thought
to be and said to be God and man as well?
(12) But to Nestorius these things do not seem to be so, but
rather his aim has turned to the complete opposite. In truth, he
said, when preaching in church, "For this reason also Christ is
named God the Word, because he has an uninterrupted con-
13· Ibid., 278.5-7.
14. Cf. Reb 1.2.
160 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

joining to the Christ."'5 And again, "Accordingly, let us safe-

guard the unconfused conjoining of natures, for let us admit
God in man and because of the divine conjoining let us rever-
ence the man worshiped together with almighty God."'6
(13) You see, therefore, how discordant his reasoning is, for
he is filled to the brim with irreverence. He says that the Word
of God is named Christ separately and has an uninterrupted
conjoining with the Christ. Therefore, does he not say most
dearly that there are two christs? Does he not confess that he
reveres a man, I do not know how, who is adored along with
God? These do not appear related to the statements of the
bishops of the East, do they? Is not the meaning of his thoughts
contradictory? For he dearly says that there are two, but they
confess that they worship one Christ and Son and God and
Lord, the same one begotten of the Father according to divin-
ity and of the Holy Virgin according to humanity. For they say
that there was a union of two natures, but dearly they confess
one Christ, one Son, and one Lord. For "the Word was made
flesh,"'7 according to the Scriptures, and we say that an inef-
fable coming together in the Incarnation was truly made of
unlike things into an inseparable union.
(14) For we shall not understand, as some of the more
ancient heretics, that the Word of God, by having taken his
own nature, that is, the divine, prepared a body for himself;
but, following in every way the divinely inspired Scriptures, we
strongly maintain that He took his flesh from the Holy Virgin.
Wherefore, we say that the two natures were united, from
which there is the one and only Son and Lord,jesus Christ, as
we accept in our thoughts; but after the union, since the
distinction into two is now done away with, we believe that
there is one phusis 18 of the Son, as one, however, one who
became man and was made flesh. But if being God the Word he
is said to be incarnate and to be made man, let the suspicion of

15. See Loofs. Nestoriana, 275.9-11.

16. Ibid., 249.1-4.
17· Jn 1.14·
18. Cf. Letter 17, note 12, and note 17. Cf. also Cardinal John Henry
Newman, Tracts (London, 1924), 329-382 on St. Cyril's Formula.
 LETTER 40 161

a change be cast somewhere far away, for he has remained

what he was, and let the entirely unconfused union be con-
fessed on our part. But perhaps those on the opposite side
might say:
Behold, those who fashion the confession of the true faith
clearly name two natures, but maintain that the expressions
of those inspired by God l9 are divided according to the
difference of the two natures. Then, how are these asser-
tions not opposite to yours? For you do not allow the attrib-
uting of expressions to two persons, that is, to two hupostaseis.
But, my dear friends, I would say, I have written in the prop-
ositions: 20
If anyone attributes to two persons, that is, to two hupostaseis,
the sayings 21 and ascribes some to a man considered sepa-
rately from the Word of God, and ascribes others, as proper
to God, only to the Word of God the Father, let him be
condemned.
(15) But in no way have we removed the distinctions be-
tween the sayings, even if we have made a worthless thing of
separating them as attributed to the Son considered apart as
the Word of God the Father, and to the Son again considered
apart as a man from a woman. For confessedly there is one
nature of the Word 22 but we know that he has been made flesh
and was made man, as I already said. If anyone would thor-
oughly inquire as to the manner in which he was made flesh
19. The writers of the sacred books of the New Testament.
20. Letter 17, anathema 4.
21. In the Gospels and apostolic writings.
22. This is the closest statement so far in the letters to Cyril's famous
formula, which appears in Letter 45 (Schwartz, ACO 1.1.6 pp. 153-154). Cf.
Letter 44, notes 2 and 5, and Letter 45, note 11. A discussion of the use of the
word qn,(n~ in Cyril is found in Hubert Du Manoir, S. J., Dogme et spiritualite chez
saint Cyrille d'Alexandrie (Paris, 1944), 124-143. See also Quasten 3.140. What-
ever objections there may be to the formula itself, we should not anachronize
and expect Cyril to know of the definitions of the Council of Chalcedon of 451.
Cyril died in 444. If the whole letter is read, in each instance in which the
phrase appears, it is clear that Cyril is totally orthodox, since the context in
which it is embedded shows what the phrase meant to him, and how it is to be
understood. Cf. notes 25 and 30 of this letter. Read also Letter 46 entire.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

and was made man, let him ponder on the Word, God of God,
"having taken the form of a servant, and being made in the
likeness of men,"23 as it is written. And according to this and
only this is the difference of natures, that is, of hupostaseis, to be
understood, for divinity and humanity are doubtless not the
same in natural quality. Otherwise how has the Word, being
God, emptied himself having lowered himself in lesser things,
that is, to our condition? Accordingly, whenever the manner of
the Incarnation is closely considered, the human mind doubt-
less sees the two ineffably and unconfusedly joined to each
other in a union; but the mind in no wise divides them after
they have been united, but believes and admits strongly that
the one from both is God and Son and Christ and Lord.
(16) But the heresy of Nestorius is completely different
from this. For he pretends to confess that the Word, while
being God, was incarnate and became man; but, not having
known the meaning of the Incarnation, he names two natures
but separates them from one another, putting God apart and
likewise man in turn, conjoined to God by an external rela-
tionship only according to the equality of honor or at least
sovereign power. For he says as follows, "God is inseparable
from the one who is visible; because of this, I do not separate
the honor of the one not separated; I separate the natures; but
I unite the adoration."24
(17) But the brethren at Antioch, understanding in simple
thoughts only those from which Christ is understood to be,
have maintained a difference of natures, because, as I said,
divinity and humanity are not the same in natural quality, but
proclaimed one Son and Christ and Lord as being truly one;
they say his person 25 is one, and in no manner do they separate
what has been united. Neither do they admit the natural divi-
sion as the author of the wretched inventions was pleased to
think, but they strongly maintain that only the sayings con-

23. Cf. Phil 2.6-9.

24. See Loofs, Nestoriana, 262.4-6.
25. The terminology of Antioch was clearer, and Cyril accepts it, showing
that the meaning is the same as his own thought. Compare this sentence and
the one at the end of the last paragraph. Cf. note 30.
 LETTER 40
cerning the Lord 26 are separated, not that they say that some of
them separately are proper to the Son, the Word of God the
Father, and others are proper to another son again, the one
from a woman, but they say that some are proper to his divinity
and others again are proper to his humanity . For the same one
is God and man. But they say that there are others which have
been made common in a certain way and, as it were, look
toward both, 1 mean both the divinity and the humanity.
(18) What 1 am saying is the same as this. On the one hand,
some of the sayings are very especially proper to his divinity.
Others again are proper to his humanity. But others very
specially pertain to a certain middle position, because they
reveal the Son as God and man, both at the same time and in
him. For when he says to Philip, "I am with you so long, and
you have not known me, Philip? Do you not believe that 1 am in
the Father and the Father in me? He, who has seen me, has
seen the Father."27 "I and the Father are one."28 We firmly
maintain that this saying is most proper to his divinity. But
when he rebukes the Jewish people, saying this, "If you were
the children of Abraham, you would be doing the works of
Abraham. But as it is, you are seeking to kill me, one who has
spoken the truth to you. This Abraham did not dO,"29 we say
that such words were spoken as proper to his humanity. Yet we
say that those proper to his divinity and those proper to his
humanity are the sayings of the one Son. For, being God, he
became man, yet having become man he did not put off his
being God by the assumption of flesh and blood. But since he is
one Christ, both Son and Lord, we say that his person30 also is
one, both we and they say it.31
(19) But we strongly maintain that there are other sayings
of a middle position, such as when the blessed Paul writes,

26. Cf. notes 19 and 20.

27. In 14.9. 10. Cyril has the last two sentences in the reverse order.
28. In 10.30.
29· Cf. In 8·39. 40.
30. Cyril accepts the word 'll'poO'W'II'ov. To him. this word and cI>OOL<; mean
the same in the formula. Cf. letter 42. note 2.
31. The bishops with John of Antioch.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

"Jesus Christ yesterday and today; the same also forever."32

And again:
For even if there are many gods and lords in heaven and on
earth, yet for us there is only one God, the Father from
whom are all things, and we from him; and one Lord,Jesus
Christ, through whom are all things, and we through him. 33
And again:
For I could wish to be anathema myself from Christ for the
sake of my brethren, who are my kinsmen according to the
flesh, who are Israelites, who have the adoption of sons, and
the legislation and the covenant and glory; of whom are the
fathers and of whom is the Christ according to the flesh, who
is over all things, God blessed forever, Amen. 34
For 10 and behold, having mentioned ChristJesus, he says that
he is the same yesterday and today and for eternity, and that
through him all things are; and the one, who is from the Jews
according to the flesh, he names God over all things, and
besides he says that he is blessed forever.
(20) Do not, therefore, divide in these instances the expres-
sions about the Lord, for they have in the same person what is
proper to God and what is proper to his humanity; but rather
apply them to the one Son, that is, to God the Word made flesh.
Accordingly, it is one thing to separate the natures and this
after the union, and to say that man is conjoined to God only
according to equality of honor, and likewise, it is another thing
to know the difference between the expressions. How, there-
fore, do the things which they [from the East] say concur with
the foolish statements of N estorius? For it is not surprising if to
some also the combination of expressions and the utterance of
words seem to fall short of fine precision, for such matters are
exceedingly hard to express. In this matter, even the divinely
inspired Paul asked God for speech to open his mouth.35
(21) Therefore, is it not clear to all that they [of the East] do
not separate into two the one Lord Jesus Christ, when they say

32. Reb 13.8. 34· Cf. Rom 9·3-5.

33. Cf. 1 Cor 8.5, 6. 35. Cf. Eph 6.19.
 LETTER 40
that it is necessary to apply the sayings proper to God to his
divinity, and again the human ones to his humanity? They
affirm, as I said, that he is the Word of God the Father,
begotten before ages, and was born "in recent days"36 accord-
ing to the flesh from the Holy Virgin. They add that he was
begotten according to the flesh through the ineffable and
unconfused union, and they believe that the Holy Virgin is the
Mother of God and clearly confess one Son and Christ and
Lord. It is completely incredible that they intend to say that he
is one and yet divide the one into two. They have not come to
such a state of insanity that they themselves would reinstate the
transgressors by imprudently rebuilding what they rightly had
torn down. If they agree with the opinions of Nestorius, how
do they anathematize them as profane and loathsome?
(22) But I think it is necessary to tell the reasons why those
[of the East] came to such a degree of subtlety. For the support-
ers of the impiety of Arius, wickedly adulterating the meaning
of the truth, say that the Word of God became man but that he
availed himself of a body without a soul, and they do this out of
a love of maliciousness in order that, by assigning to him the
human sayings, they might show to those being led astray by
them that he is in a lesser position than the excellence of the
Father and declare him to be of a different nature from the
Father. Because of this the bishops of the East, fearing that the
glory and the nature of God the Word might be belittled on
account of the things said about him humanly through the
Incarnation, separate the sayings, not cutting into two persons,
as I said, the one Son and Lord, but applying some sayings to
his divinity and again others to his humanity; yet entirely all to
one.
(23) But I learned that the most pious and God-fearing
bishop, John, wrote to some of his associates as if I clearly
taught and in a clear voice confessed the difference of the
natures, but divided the sayings in correspondence to the
natures, and for this very reason, some were scandalized. It
was necessary, therefore, that we speak about this. Your excel-

36. Cf. Heb 1.2.

166 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

lency has not been ignorant that those, who pour down on my
letters the censure of the opinion of Apollinaris, thought that I
say that the holy body of Christ is without a soul, and that a
mixture or a confusion or a blending or a change of God the
Word was made into flesh, or a passing over of the flesh into
the nature of divinity, so that nothing is preserved pure or is
what it is. And they thought that, in addition to this, I agreed
with the blasphemies of Arius through unwillingness to under-
stand the difference of the sayings and that I say that some are
proper to divinity, but others are human and fitted rather to
the Incarnation. But that I am free of such errors, your excel-
lency would bear witness to the others.
(24) Yet it was necessary that a defense be made because of
those scandalized. For this reason, I wrote to his reverence that
I never had the opinions of Arius and Apollinaris and do not
indeed say that the Word of God was changed into flesh, but
neither do I say that the flesh was transformed into the nature
of divinity, because the Word of God is immutable and incom-
prehensible. The opposite is impossible. But neither did I do
away with the difference of the sayings, but I know that the
Lord speaks in a manner proper to his divinity, and humanly at
the same time, since he is in himself both God and man.
Therefore, because he 37 desires to signify this, he wrote that he
taught to confess the difference of the natures and to separate
the sayings in correspondence to the natures. But such state-
ments are not mine, but have been uttered by him.
(25) And I think to what has been said the following should
be added of necessity. For the most God-fearing Bishop of
Emesa, Paul, carne to me and then, after a discussion had been
started concerning the true and blameless faith, questioned me
rather earnestly if I approved the letter from our thrice-
blessed father of famous memory, Athanasius, to Epictetus,
the Bishop of Corinth. I said that, "if the document is pre-
served with you incorrupt," for many things in it have been
falsified by the enemies of the truth,38 I would approve it by all
37. John of Antioch.
38. By the followers of Nestorius. See Letter 39 at the end, and Letter 45,
note 19.
 LETTER 40
means and in every way. But he said in answer to this that he
himself had the letter and that he wished to be fully assured
from the copies with us and to learn whether their copies have
been corrupted or not. And taking the ancient copies and
comparing them with those which he brought, he found that
the latter have been corrupted; and he begged that we make
copies of the texts with us and send them to the Church of
Antioch. And this has been done.
(26) And this is what the most pious and most God-loving
bishop, John, wrote about me to Carrenus, namely, that "he
expounded the doctrines concerning the Incarnation, and
with us wove together the tradition of the Fathers, a tradition
which almost was in danger, so to speak, of becoming extinct
among men." But if some people carry around a letter, as if it
had been written by Philip, the most pious priest ofthe Church
of Rome, to the effect that the most holy bishop Sixtus,39 was
vexed at the deposition of N estorius and was helping him, let
. your holiness put no faith in it. For he wrote in agreement with
the holy council and maintained everything done by it and is of
the same mind as we are.
(27) But if a letter is carried around by some people, as if
written by me, to the effect that I changed my mind on the
things which we have done at Ephesus, let this also be ridi-
culed. For we are, through the grace of the Savior, in good
health of mind, nor have we come to the end of the proper use
of reason.
(28) Salute the brotherhood with you; the brethren with us
salute you in the Lord.40

39. Pope Sixtus III.

40. For ~ discussion of Cyril's objections to the heretical terms referred to
in this letter cf. H. A. Wolfson, The Philosophy of the Church Fathers, 3d rev. ed.
(Cambridge, Mass., 1970), 1:407-418.
 LETTER 41

A copy of the letter written from him [Cyril] to Acacius, the bishop,
concerning the scapegoat.'

W AS PLEASED VERY much to receive the letters sent

by your holiness 2 recently, and I almost clasped and
kissed them. In the state of mind which I reached you
somehow did not seem to be far away. The communications of
sincere men are enough to produce such a thought. These are
my reactions at the moment and I am persuaded that the
thoughts of your holiness are not different. I had to say this
since you have deigned to ask that I ought to give some account
about the scapegoat.
(2) By this the mystery concerning it may be clarified. Since
your wisdom sufficiently possesses the quickness at learn-
ing and well-ordered knowledge of the holy Scriptures and
esteemed understanding, it is superfluous perhaps to mention
anything by someone else concerning the matters being in-
vestigated. Since there is no problem in my saying what comes
into my mind also, I have written to you, for it was not possible
to refuse the assignment. But if it happens that somehow I miss
my aim slightly in my intention for accuracy, be indulgent.
Whatever things are difficult of access for the mind to contem-
plate are troublesome to interpret and do not have an easy grip
to seize them. Yet, we have much hope that, through the
prayers of your reverence, Christ guides us in this also, he who

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.4 pp. 4(}-48.
Geerard numbers this letter 5341 in CPG. See also Wickham, Select Letters,
34-61.
2. Acacius, Bishop of Scythopolis.

168
 LETTER 41 169
"removes the depths from the darkness,"3 "gives sight to the
blind,"4 and "grants speech,"5 as it is written.
(3) Accordingly, it is written in Leviticus concerning the
scapegoat, "and he shall take two male goats";6 "and he shall set
them before the Lord at the entrance of the Tent of Testimony
and Aaron shall cast lots to determine which one is for the Lord
and which for the emissary goat. 7 The goat, that is determined
by lot for the Lord, Aaron shall bring in and offer up as a sin
offering. But the goat determined by lot for the emissary goat,
he shall set alive before the Lord so that with it he may make
atonement by sending him off into the desert."8 And after
other matters, "Then he shall slaughter the people's sin-
offering goat before the Lord and, bringing its blood inside the
veil, he shall do with it as he did with the bullock's blood,
sprinkling it upon the propitiatory and before it. Thus he will
propitiate the sanctuary from the impieties of the sons of Israel
and from their wrongdoings in all their sins. He shall do the
same for the Tent of Testimony , which is set up among them in
the midst of their uncleanness."9 And these are the rites of the
goat slaughtered and· sanctifying the holy tent with his blood.
Concerning the one living and the one sent out Scripture
speaks again in this way, "And he shall bring forward the live
goat. And Aaron shall lay both hands on the head of the live
goat and shall confess over it all the transgressions, injustices
and sins of the Israelites and put them on the head of the living
goat, and he shall send it away into the desert by the hand of a
man who is ready. And the goat will carry off on himself their

3· Jb 12.22.
4· Ps 145(146).8.
5. Ps 67(68).12.
6. Lv 16.5. This chapter of Leviticus describes the rites for the Day of
Atonement.
7. See Lv 16.8, 10, 26. The ancients translated this word into Greek as:
'a'ITo'ITof.L'lTatoc;, the "escaping" or the "emissary goat." The Hebrew word,
Azazel, is used only here in the Bible. It is perhaps a name for satan, and the
goat used would then signify that the sins of the people are being sent back to
the source of evil. Cf. R. J. Faley,JBC 4:34 and J. J. Castelot,JBC 76: 157.
8. Lv 16.7-10.
g. Cf. Lv 16.15, 16.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

iniquities to an isolated region, and he will send the goat away

into the desert."l0 "All Scripture is inspired by God and
useful."ll Whatsoever God utters, this is in all aspects also
conducive to salvation. And for those who are able to under-
stand the power of the truth, its beauty comes to meet them
after the manner of light and flashes upon their minds the
knowledge of the mystery concerning. Christ.
(4) To those who do not have a well-ordered mind, but, as it
were, are still limp and play like children, to these, chosen
subjects for speculation are under censure and sometimes
indictment. I say these things regarding the writings of your
reverence which have met with questioning. For perhaps some
of those there thought that the first of the goats or bucks was
allotted to God, who is over all things, as a dedication and a
sacrifice, while the other one was sent into the desert to some
abominable, wretched and unclean demon/ 2 and this by the
hand of a priest and as a result of a legal decree. From this
point, therefore, the matter is simple-minded and ridiculous.
And one might say to those who have accepted that this is so,
"And how, indeed, was it not necessary to meditate somewhat
about the following?" For how would he who is the fashioner of
all things, who is beyond all thought and word, and alone is
God and Lord by nature, endure admitting the apostate, satan,
as a consort, as it were, of his power and glory? And we have
heard him saying clearly through one of the holy prophets,
"My glory I will give to no other."l3 But if the law enjoined
through the all-wise Moses that it was necessary to sacrifice to
him and to him alone whatever anyone wished to sacrifice, and
if he who announced the law proclaimed that it was necessary
that the glory most fitting to him and to him alone be assigned
to unclean spirits, how is he not at variance with his own words?
For what he told them not to do, he has enjoined that it be
done.

10. Cf. Lv 16.20-22.

11. 2 Tm 3.16.
12. Evidently some of those under Acacius accepted Azazel in the text. See
note 19. The problem is an ancient one. Cyril argued for a different meaning.
13. Is 42.8.
 LETTER 41 17 1

(5) But it is among the most exceedingly strange things to

think that God, who exercises authority over all, pays no heed
to the honor and glory due to him and wishes to fasten it to
others, although he dearly says through Moses, "The Lord
your God shall you worship and him only shall you serve";14
and, "You shall have no other gods besides me."15 Because of
this, the divinely inspired Moses acted in accordance with the
decrees from on high from God, and he says to those of the
blood of Israel, "These are the statutes and decrees which you
must be careful to observe in the land which the Lord, the God
of your fathers, gives you to occupy, as long as you live on its
soil. Destroy without fail every place on the high mountains, on
the hills, and under every leafy tree where the nations you are
to dispossess worship their gods. Tear down their altars, smash
their sacred pillars, cut down their groves, destroy by fire the
idols of their gods and stamp out the remembrance of them in
any such place."16
(6) Then how was it likely that he, who gives commands that
they be removed from the guile of the pagans to the light of the
truth through Moses, and that they burn the idols to ashes
along with their temples, and dig up their altars, and cut down
the groves, so that no remnant of their abomination might
remain behind, would share his glory with them, as I already
said before, and come to this opinion so that he would order
the Israelites to sacrifice to them the very animals allotted to
him as an act of worship, by sending away one of the goats into
the desert? He vehemently accused Israel for making a golden
calf in the desert, saying to the divinely inspired Moses, "Get
up, go down at once to your people, whom you brought out of
the land of Egypt for they have fallen upon evil ways. They
have made for themselves an idol. "17 He also is seen to have
inflicted a keen punishment on those who took part in the
sacrifice to Beelphegor when they involved themselves with
Moabite women, being ensnared by their comeliness to apos-
tasy, for large was the number of them who perished because

14. Mt 4.10; Dt 6.13. 16. Cf. Dt 12.1-3.

15. Ex 20.3. 17· Cf. Ex 32.7-9.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

of this crime.ls But in no small way would it have been a censure

against the divine and faultless will, if, on the one hand, some
fell and were destroyed for adoring other gods, but God him-
self, who was angry at the rebels, had enjoined that the de-
praved power opposed to him be deemed worthy of gifts, the
power which perhaps some who, because the eyes in their
minds within are blind, do not see the force of holy Scripture
and would name apopompaios .19 But we, dedicating our minds to
divine inspiration, not carelessly or lazily but with precision
and loving watchfulness, as far as and as much as possible, are
very zealous in the love of hunting for the admirable beauty of
the truth.
(7) Moreover, we say that the God of all, by promulgating
the law to the ancients through Moses to overthrow the error
of polytheism and to illumine those in darkness,2° would never
have endured becoming a way and a door, or rather a teacher
of the need to honor the unclean demons. But, by deeply
considering the matters in the divinely inspired Scriptures, we
shall find the hidden truth. It would be fitting for us when
looking into the dark shadows of the law to say what one of the
holy prophets rightly said, "Who will be wise will understand
these things; and who will be prudent will know them."21 "For
the law has but a shadow of the good things to come, and not
the exact image of the objects,"22 as it is written. Yet the shad-
ows bring forth the truth, even if they are not at all the truth
themselves. Because of this, the divinely inspired Moses placed
a veil upon his face and spoke thus to the children of Israel,23 all
but shouting by this act that a person might behold the beauty
of the utterances made through him, not in outwardly appear-
ing figures, but in meditations hidden within US.24
(8) Come, therefore, by taking off the veil of the law and by

18. Cf. Nm 25.1-g.

19. That is, Azazel, in Hebrew, cf. note 12.
20. Lk 1.79; Mt 4.16; Is 9.1.
21. Hos 14.10.
22. Heb 10.1.
23· Cf. Ex 34·33-35; 2 Cor 3.13-17.
24· Cf. 2 Cor 4.3, 4, 18.
 LETTER 41

setting the face of Moses free of its coverings, let us behold the
naked truth. He commanded that two he-goats be brought
c

and two dice be marked for them, so that the one of the he-
goats would be named the Lord's and the other named the
scapegoat. Accordingly, the names for the he-goats are, the
Lord's and the scapegoat. Through both of them the one and
only Son and Lord Jesus Christ is signified. By attending to the
accuracy of our meditations, as far as is possible, we shall tell
how this is so. Accordingly, the goat, or the he-goat, or the kid
was the sacrifice for sin according to the decision of the law, for
the divinely inspired Scripture in very many places compares
the just to sheep and the lover of iniquity to a goat. And for
what sort of reason? Because the just man is full of glory unto
virtue and for this he is fittingly considered fruitful. But the
sheep bears wool, and so for this reason the just man is likened
to a sheep, and very fittingly. But one would behold the soul of
a sinner as naked and sterile and bereft of all good deeds.
Therefore, the goat is the sign of that soul, for the animal is
unproductive and lower in price than a sheep. For this reason,
also, our Lord Jesus Christ says, "But when the Son of Man will
sit on the throne of his glory; and he will set the sheep on his
right hand, but the goats on his left."25 To those on his right
hand, since they have the fruits of justice, he delivers the
kingdom prepared for them, but to those on his left hand, fire
and punishment, and he will inflict the penalties proper to the
devil.
(9) Accordingly, the kid was sacrificed for sin and you will
understand this since the law dearly says, "If a prince shall sin
and shall do so inadvertently, one of the things which shall not
be done from all the commandments of the Lord, his God, and
shall sin and shall err and the sin which he committed shall in
itself be known to him, he shall bring as his offering from his
goats an unblemished male goat." 26 And elsewhere, the God of
all himself said concerning those to whom the priesthood was
allotted according to the law, "They feed on the sin of my

25. Cf. Mt 25.31-33.

26. Lv 4.22, 23.
174 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

people,"27 that is, on the sacrifices for sins. For the share and
heritage of the priests is the portion due to the Lord, according
to Scripture.28
(10) Thus Christ became a victim "for our sins according to
the Scriptures. "29 For this reason, we say that he was named sin;
wherefore, the all-wise Paul writes, "For our sakes he made
him to be sin who knew nothing of sin,"30 that is to say, God the
Father. For we do not say that Christ became a sinner, far from
it, but being just, or rather in actuality justice, for he did not
know sin, the Father made him a victim for the sins of the
world. "He was counted among the wicked,"31 having endured
a condemnation most suitable for the wicked. And the divinely
inspired prophet Isaiah will also vouch for this, saying, "We
had all gone astray like sheep, each following his own way, but
the Lord laid upon him the guilt of us all," "yet it was on our
behalf he suffers," "and by his stripes we were healed."32 The
all-wise Peter writes, "he bore our sins in his body upon the
tree."33
(11) Therefore, the lot of the necessary endurance of death
hung over those on the earth through the transgression in
Adam and through sin reigning from him until US.34 But the
Word of God the Father, being generous in clemency and love
of men, became flesh, that is, man, in the form of us who are
under sin, and he endured our lot. For as the very excellent
Paul writes, "By the grace of God he tasted death for all," 35 and
he made his life be an exchange for the life of all. One died for
all, in order that we all might live to God sanctified and brought
to life through his blood,36 'justified as a gift by his grace. "37 For
as the blessed evangelist John says, "The blood of Jesus Christ
cleanses us from all sin."38
(12) The name, therefore, of the immolated goat was the
Lord's, and he received his allotted immolation, a holy sac-

27· Hos 4.8. 33. 1 Pt 2.24.

28. Cf. Dt 18.1-3. 34. Cf. Rom 5.12-17.
29· 1 Cor 15.3; Is 53.4-6. 35. Heb 2·9·
30. 2 Cor 5.21. 36. cr. Rom 5.12-21.
31. Is 53.12. 37· Rom 3.24.
32. Is 53.6• 4. 5· 38. 1 In 1.7.
 LETTER 41 175
rifice, and it was sacred as a sign of Christ who did not die for
himself but for us, as I said, and sanctified the church with his
blood. Moses says, "He shall slaughter the male goat, the one
for sin, the one for the people, before the Lord and shall bring
its blood inside the veil, and shall sprinkle it upon the propitia-
tory and before the propitiatory, and he shall cleanse the
sanctuary from the defilements of the sons of Israel and from
their transgressions on account of all their sins. And he shall do
the same for the Tent of Testimony which is set up among
them in the midst of their uncleanness."39 "For Christ entered
into the Holy of Holies, not by virtue of blood of goats and
calves, but by virtue of his own blood, having obtained eternal
redemption"40 and sanctifying, as I said, the truer tent, that is,
the church and all those in it. Therefore, the divinely inspired
Paul once wrote, "and so Jesus also, that he might sanctify the
people by his blood, suffered outside the gate."41 And once
again, "Be you, therefore, imitators of God, as very dear chil-
dren and walk in love, as Christ also loved us and delivered
himself up for us an offering and a sacrifice to God to ascend in
fragrant odor."42 Except for the destruction of death and sin
we must perceive the Emmanuel in the slaughtered goat by his
death in the flesh, for he was "free among the dead,"43 that is,
untainted by sins and not subject to the penalty of death
together with us.
(13) Let us see him in the other living goat sent away, and in
his suffering as man, but not suffering as God, and in his dying
in the flesh, but being greater than death, and in not remain-
ing, according to the madness of the Jews, in the tomb as we do,
and not being held fast by the gates of the underworld together
with the other dead. For as his disciple says, "You will not
abandon my soul to the underworld, nor will you suffer your
holy one to see corruption."44 For he rose again, despoiling
death and "saying to the prisoners: Come out, to those in
darkness: Show yourselves,"45 and he ascended to his Father
39. Lv 16.15, 16. 43. Cf. Ps 87·5·
40. Heb 9.12. 44. Ps 15.10; Acts 2.27·
41. Heb 13.12. 45· Is 49·9·
42. Eph 5.1,2; cf. Ex 29.18.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

above in the heavens to a position inaccessible to men, having

taken upon himself our sins and being the propitiation for
them. Hence, the divinely inspired John writes to those who
believe in him, "My dear children, these things I write to you in
order that you may not sin. But if anyone sins, we have an
advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the just; and he is a
propitiation for our sins, not for ours only, but also for those of
the whole world."46
(14) But I think it is necessary to make a comparison of the
Scriptures as a reminder to my listeners!' And the Scriptures
are as follows, "And he shall bring forward the living male
goat, and Aaron shall place his hands upon the living male
goat. And he shall confess over it all the transgressions of the
sons of Israel and all their wrongdoings and put them on the
head of the living goat, and he shall send it forth into the desert
in the hand of a man who is ready."48 Consider, therefore, how
he calls the second goat the living one, although the first goat
was sacrificed.<g For, as I said, the one and only Son and Lord,
Jesus Christ, was depicted in both as in suffering in his own
flesh, and beyond suffering, as in death and above death. For
the Word of God lived, even though his holy flesh tasted death,
and the Word of God remained impassible, although he made
his own the suffering of his own body and took it upon himself.
(15) One might see that this is a deep and great mystery and
one delineated for us in a different way in Leviticus. For the
law through Moses pronounces that the leper has been defiled,
and has enjoined that he be sent forth from the encampment
as unclean. But if it should happen that his disease has come to
an end, then, indeed, then it bids that he be admitted. And
moreover, it says:
This is the law of the leper on whatever day he is cleansed; he
shall also be brought to the priest, who is to go outside the

46. 1 In 2.1, 2.
47. From this, we conclude that Cyril expected his letter to be read aloud to
a group.
48. Cf. Lv 16.20-22.
49. The second goat was different. It was not to be sacrificed. It was left
alive.
 LETTER 41 177

camp to examine him. And behold the sore of leprosy has

healed in the leper and the priest shall command and they
shall take for the man who is to be purified two live, clean
birds. The priest shall command and they shall slay one of
the birds over an earthen vessel with living water in it. And
he shall take the living bird, and shall dip it in the blood of
the bird that was slain over the living water and then sprinkle
seven times the man to be purified from his leprosy, and he
shall be clean, and he shall send the living bird out in the
plain.50
There are two birds, therefore, and pure ones, that is, clean
and having no fault, I mean according to the law. And the one
was sacrificed over the living water, but the other, remaining
free of being slain and then dipped in the blood of the one
killed and in the living water, was sent forth in the exact same
way as the goat is sent forth into the desert.
(16) And in this, a type would be indicated and, again, the
great and august mystery of our Savior. For he was from
above, that is, from his Father, and the Word from heaven. In
this, and very rightly, he is likened to the bird. And in the
Incarnation he came among us in our likeness and "took the
form of a slave."51 And yet he was from above. And he said,
clearly speaking to the Jews, "You are from below, I am from
above. I am not of this world";52 and again, "No one has
ascended into heaven except him who has descended from
heaven: the Son of Man. "53 As I said just recently, even after he
was made flesh, that is, perfect man, he was not of earth or of
dust as we are, but heavenly and above the world,just as in our
thoughts God is conceived to be. Yet, it is possible to see him in
the birds just as in the goats, suffering in his flesh according to
the Scriptures, but remaining also beyond suffering, and
dying as man, but living as God, for the Word was life.54 And his
all-wise disciple said that he "was put to death indeed in the
flesh, but he was brought to life in the spirit."55
(17) Yet, even if he suffered death in his own nature, the

50. Lv 14.2-7. 53· In 3. 1 3.

51. Cf. Phil 2.6, 7. 54· Cf. In 1.4·
52. In 8.23· 55. 1 Pt 3.18.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

Word has no share in death, but made his own the suffering of
his own flesh, as I already said before. For the living bird was
dipped in the blood of the one slain, having been stained with
its blood, and all but took part in its suffering and was sent into
the desert. The only begotten Word of God ascended in the
heavens with his flesh united to him, and this was a new sight in
the heavens. The multitude of holy angels was astounded
seeing the king of glory and the Lord of hosts in the form like
unto us. And they said, "Who is this that comes from Edom
(that is, from earth),56 in crimsoned garments, from Bosor."57
But Bosor is interpreted flesh or anguish and affliction. Then
the angels asked this, "What are these wounds in the middle of
your hands?" And he said to them, "With these I was wounded
in the house of my beloved."58 For just as to Thomas, who
doubted and did so very much in accordance with the economy
of salvation after the Resurrection from the dead, he showed
his hands and in them the marks of the nails, and ordered
Thomas to feel the opening in his side/9 so, also, after he was in
heaven, he assured the holy angels that his beloved Israel was
justly cast out and utterly lost from their friendship. For this
reason, he showed his garment stained with blood and the
wounds in his hands, not because he had wounds incapable of
being cast aside, for, when he rose from the dead, he put off
corruption and with it all that is from it, but, as I said, "in order
that through the church there be made known to the principal-
ities and the powers in the heavens the manifold wisdom of
God according to his eternal plan which he accomplished in
Christ."60 For the most holy Paul writes thus to some. There-
fore,just as in the goats the mystery of Christ is wisely depicted,
so is it also in the small birds.
(18) But perhaps someone will say, "How, then, do you say
that the Son and Lord, Jesus Christ, is one and the same,
although two goats have been mentioned, and two birds? Or
might the law, not obscurely undoubtedly, show that there are

56. This is Cyril's interpretation. 59· Cf. In 20.26-28.

57. Cf. Is 63.1. 60. Eph 3.10, I I .
58. Zee 13.6.
 LETTER 41 179

in some way entirely two sons and christs?" And some have
already descended to such a degree of impiety as to think and
say that the Word of God the Father is one Christ taken
separately and the other one is of the seed of David. But we say
to those who entertain thoughts that this is so out of ignorance,
and the divinely inspired Paul writes, "one Lord, one faith, one
baptism."61 So if they say two sons, there would in all events be
two lords, and two faiths, and two baptisms.
(19) Therefore, Paul, who had Christ speaking in him,62 as
he said, was telling lies! But such is not the case; heaven forbid!
Therefore, there is one Lord and one faith, and one baptism.
For we believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, that is, the only
begotten Word of God made man and incarnate. Because of
this, also, "we have been baptized into his death,"63 and we
know that he alone is Lord as God, not taking him apart as man
and God, but, as I said, maintaining that the Word of God the
Father himself became man while remaining God, for he is
immutable and unchangeable according to nature as God.
(20) Then, if those on the opposite side say that there are
two sons, one taken separately of the seed of David, and the
other, again separately the Word of God the Father, let them
state whether or not the Word of God the Father, is better by
nature than the one of the seed of David, and by incomparable
differences. For what is the nature of man compared to the
divine and supreme? But I think they will say, and not will-
ingly, that the Word of God the Father is better by nature.
Then, what will we do, seeing that the two goats are not of
different natures to each other, but rather similar in species
and differing in no way from each other insofar as being what
they are is concerned? And the same reasoning would occur
also in the case of the two birds. They should concede, since the
goats are similar in species, or the birds are similar in species,
that the Word of God is no different from man. But they will
not agree, as I think, to such reasoning, for there is the greatest
difference between divinity and humanity.
61. Eph 4.5.
62. Cf. 2 Cor 13.3.
63. Rom 6·3·
180 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

(21) We should allow the examples to be considered accord-

ing to the explanation suited to them. For the examples are
very much less than the truth and are incomplete indications of
the things signified. But we say that the law was a shadow and a
type,51 and like unto a picture set as a thing to be viewed before
those watching reality. But the silhouettes of artists' skill are
the first elements of the lines in pictures, and, if the brightness
of the colors is added to these, the beauty of the picture flashes
forth. It was fitting, therefore, that the law given through
Moses, since its intention was to delineate the mystery of
Christ, should not present him by one of the goats or one of the
birds, dying and living at the same time, lest the deed might
seem to be somehow a wonder-working show, but it regards
him in one of them as suffering his immolation, and presents
him in the other as living and having been set free.
(22) But to show that my reasoning on this matter is not
going beyond probability, I think it will be necessary to add
another image to those which I have mentioned. Accordingly,
it is written in the book concerning creation:
And after these events God put Abraham to a test. He said to
him, "Abraham, Abraham." He answered, "Here I am."
God said, "Take your dear son Isaac whom you have loved
and go into the high country and there offer him as a
holocaust on the hill which I tell you." Early in the morning
Abraham harnassed his ass, took with him two of his ser-
vants, and his son Isaac, and cut wood for the holocaust.
Then he came to the place that God told him on the third
day. He looked up and saw the place at a distance. He said to
his servants, "Stay here with the ass while the boy and I go
there to worship, then we shall come back to you." He took
the wood for the holocaust and put it upon his son Isaac
while he himself carried the fire and the knife. And the two
set out together .65
And after other verses, "Abraham built an altar of sacrifice
there and arranged the wood on it. Then he bound his son

64. Cf. Heb 10.1.

65. Gn 22.1-6.
 LETTER 41 181

Isaac and laid him on the wood upon an altar of sacrifice.

Abraham stretched out his hand to take the knife to sacrifice
his son."66 Accordingly, if someone of us desired to see the
story of Abraham portrayed in a picture, how would the
painter represent him? Would he do it in a single painting
showing him doing all the things mentioned,67 or in successive
pictures and distinctively, or in different images, but most
often Abraham himself, for example, in one picture sitting on
his donkey taking his son along and followed by his servants; in
another one, again, with the donkey staying behind down
below along with the servants, and Isaac being burdened with
the wood while Abraham holds in his hands the knife and the
fire; and, indeed, in a different painting, Abraham again in a
different pose after he has bound the youth upon the wood
and his right hand is armed with a sword in order that he might
start the sacrifice? But this would not be a different Abraham
each time, although he is seen most of the time in a different
pose, but would be the same man in every instance with the skill
of the artist continually disposing him according to the needs
of the subject matter. For it would not be likely or at any rate
probable that one would see him doing all the actions men-
tioned in a single painting.
(23) Accordingly, the law was a picture and, in the law, the
types of things were fertile with the truth, with the result that
even if the precept introduced two goats to illustrate the mys-
tery of Christ and even if there were two birds, he in both was
one, both in suffering and beyond suffering, and in death and
over death and ascending in the heavens, the first-fruits of
humanity,68 as it were, thereafter restored unto incorruption.
(24) For he restored for us the pathway upward and we will
follow him in due season, for he says, "I go to prepare a place
for you and I am coming again and I will take you to myself,
that where I am, there you also may be with me."69 We have
these true hopes.

66. Gn 22.9, 10.

67. This is the narrative style of ancient paintings.
68. Cf. 1 Cor 15.20.
69· In 14·2, 3·
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

(25) Therefore, I have written the things which I knew, but

it is your reverence's part to bring to bear on what I have
written a rather precise examination, in order that, if it should
happen that something of an improvement might be disco-
vered, it might benefit both us and the people here. For Christ
is the one who reveals profound and hidden things 70 and
implants understanding in our hearts. For in him and with him
"are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."71
Through him and with him may there be glory and power to
God the Father with the Holy Spirit unto ages of ages. Amen.

70. Cf. Mt 11.25-27.

71. Col 2.3.
 LETTER 42

To Rufus, Bishop of Thessalonica.1

T IS FITTING TO communicate to your holiness every-

thing of interest to our churches and matters arising
day by day, so to speak, lest whisperers disquiet the
God-fearing bishops there by saying some things instead of
others. Accordingly, the bishops from the East have written
requesting communion and expounding their clear faith and
saying clearly that the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God, and
that the Son of God, our Lord Jesus Christ, is one and was
ineffably begotten of the Father before all ages and finally
born as man from a woman, and that he is one person 2 and not
two. Then going back stealthily they added something differ-
ent which disturbed some of those not able to understand well
and they were considered not to be entirely clear of the follies
of N estorius.
(2) My lord Acacius, the God-fearing Bishop of Melitene,
wrote about these things to me. And it was necessary to com-
pose a rather long letter and to clarify the statements of the
bishops from the East at which some had been scandalized.
Hence I have sent a copy of the letter, so that if some of those
there also are found to be suffering from the same problem, by
looking into my letter they would have the means to know the
truth. Yet I know that I have done this superfluously since your
excellency is fully capable of being able to explain everything
and confer the benefit of your knowledge upon those who
have been overcome by ignorance.
1. For the critical text of this letter see E. Schwartz, Codex vaticanus gr. I 43 I,'
Eine antichalkedonische Sammlung aus der Zeit Kaiser Zenos in Abhandlungen der
Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften philosophisch-philologische und historische
Klasse, no. 6 (Munich, 1927),32: 19. Geerard numbers this letter 5342 in CPG.
2. Cf. Letter 40, note 30.
 LETTER 43

To Rufus of Thessalonica.'

ECAUSE OF THE PEACE of thechurches and the fact that

they are not pulled asunder in dissensions, considera-
tions are not unprofitable. For it is likely that those who
have not been received into communion may come to some
other opinion ill-advisedly because oflack of care. For heresies
are brought forth and schisms follow or else uninterrupted
disorders, since they are not accustomed to endure great cen-
sure.
(2) In view of this I was very much pleased when the bishops
from the East pursued and sought communion with us and
especially because it also happened opportunely since our
most pious and most God-loving ruler wrote about this matter.
For the unanimity of the churches has been an inevitable care
for his serenity. And when you consider this, let your excel-
lency be inclined to do whatever is fitting and looks to the
benefit of the churches of God there.
(3) Accordingly, I have written concerning the matter in
consideration of the advantages and it is the part of your
excellency to attempt the accomplishment. For it is better to
receive back those who repent rather than that they be added
in utter shamelessness to the group of those who choose to
think as Nestorius does. And, although you are all-wise and
all-perfect,2 since you commanded me to send some one of my
works and since you tolerate my babbling tongue, I dared to

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, Codex vaticanw gr. I43I,
19-20, Geerard numbers this letter 5343 in CPG.
2. These are the most extreme of the courtly superlatives in the letters of
Cyril.
 LETTER 43
send so far four books containing a long discussion concerning
the economy of salvation of our Savior from passages of the
Old Testament. But I included also what I have written against
the blasphemies of Nestorius, and your excellency is able
enough in this matter to aid both us and all those there, since I
was led to this action out of charity. After you have read and
corrected them, if anything has been overlooked, deign to
show them to the rest of the brethren. The books are as
follows: one book On Genesis, two books Concerning Worship
in Spirit and in Truth, the chapters against the writing of
Theodoret and Andrew, and one book on the Incarnation,
Against the Blasphemies of Nestorius. 3

3. Cf. Quasten 3· I 2(}--1 27 for a description of these works.

 LETTER 44

A Memorandum to Eulogius, the priest, who is staying at Constan-

tinople, from the most holy bishop Cyril. Cyril, Bishop of Alexan-
dria, to Eulogius. Greetings.'

OME A TT ACK THE exposition of faith which those from

the East have made and ask, "For what reason did the
Bishop of Alexandria endure or even praise those who
say that there are two natures?" Those who hold the same
teachings as Nestorius say that he thinks the same thing too,
snatching to their side those who do not understand precision.
But it is necessary to say the following to those who are accus-
ing me, namely, that it is not necessary to flee and avoid
everything which heretics say, for they confess many of the
things which we confess. For example, when the Arians say
that the Father is the creator and Lord of all, does it follow that
we avoid such confessions? Thus also is the case of Nestorius
even if he says there are two natures signifying the difference
of the flesh and the Word of God, for the nature of the Word is
one nature and the nature of his flesh is another, but Nestorius
does not any longer confess the union as we do.
(2) For we, when asserting their union, confess one Christ,
one Son, the one and same Lord, and finally we confess the one
incarnate phusis of God. 2 It is possible to say something such as
this about any ordinary man, for he is of different natures,
both of the body, I say, and of the soul. Both reason and
speculation know the difference, but when combined then we

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.4 pp. 35-37.
Geerard numbers this letter 5344 in CPG. See also Ebied-Wickham, Unpub-
lished Syriac Letters, 44-46, and Wickham, Select Letters, 62-69.
2. Cf. Letter 40, note 22.

186
 LETTER 44
get one human phusis. Hence knowing the difference of the
natures is not cutting the one Christ into two.
(3) But since all the bishops from the East think that we, who
are orthodox, follow the opinions of Apollinaris and think that
a mixture or a confusion took place, for such are the words
which they have used, as if the Word of God had changed over
into the nature of flesh, and his flesh had turned into the
nature of divinity, we have yielded to them, not so far as to
divide into two the one Son, far from it, but only to confess that
neither a mixture nor a confusion took place, but the flesh was
flesh as taken from a woman, and the Word as begotten of the
Father was the Word, yet the Christ, Son and Lord, is one
according to the saying of John, "The Word was made flesh,"3
and to prepare them to pay heed to the reading of the letter of
our blessed father, Athanasius.4
(4) Because in his time some were contending and saying
that God the Word from his own nature fashioned a body for
himself, he stoutly insisted to and fro that his body was not
consubstantial to the Word. But if it is not consubstantial, then
there is one nature and a completely other nature from which
two the one and only Son is known to be. And let those accusing
me not be ignorant of this, namely, that when there is mention
of a union, it does not signify the coming together of one thing,
but of either two or more which are also different from each
other according to nature. If, then, we speak of a union we are
confessing a union of flesh animated with a rational soul and
the Word, and those who speak of two natures are thinking
thus also.
(5) Yet once we confess the union, those things which have
been united are no longer separate from each other, but then
there is one Son, and his phusis 5 is one as the Word made flesh.
The bishops from the East confess these doctrines, even
though they are somewhat obscure concerning the expres-

3· jn 1.14·
4. The letter to Epictetus of Corinth. Cf. Letter 40.
5. Cf. Letter 40, note 22.
188 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

sion.6 For since they confess that the only begotten Word
begotten of God the Father was himself also begotten of a
woman according to flesh, that the Holy Virgin is the Mother
of God, that his person is one, and that there are not two sons,
or two christs, but one, how do they agree with the teachings of
Nestorius?
(6) For Nestorius in his expositions pretends to say that the
Son is one and the Lord is one but he refers the sonship and the
lordship only to the Word of God, but when he comes to the
dispensation of the Incarnation, again he says that the man
born of woman is separately another Lord conjoined to the
first by worthiness or equality of honor. But how is saying that
in this way God the Word is named Christ because he has the
conjoining with Christ not clearly stating that there are two
christs, if a christ has a conjoining with a christ as one with
another? But the bishops from the East have said no such
thing; they only separate the sayings.7
(7) And they separate them in this manner. Some are
proper to his divinity, others are human, and others have a
position in common as being both proper to his divinity and his
humanity. Yet they are sayings concerning him, one and the
same, and not as Nestorius ascribes some to God the Word
taken separately, and others to him born of woman as to
another son. For it is one thing to know the difference of the
sayings and another to distribute them to two persons as if to
one and then to another.
(8) But the letter to Acacius,8 especially the one which has as
its beginning, "Addressing one another is a sweet thing for
brothers and admirable" contains a fine answer on all these
matters. And you have very many letters in your chest, which
you ought to give out zealously, and offer also to the most

6. This is ironic, looking back on events from our standpoint. Actually the
bishops of the East were more exact in expression for they used 'lTpOOW'lTOV not
cjJlxTLo;. Cyril here defends them. Their term was not well accepted in some
circles.
7. The sayings in the Gospels and apostolic writings by Christ and about
him. Cf. Letter 40, notes 19 and 21.
8. Letter 40.
 LETTER 44 189
illustrious prefect the two books sent from me, the first being
Against the Blasphemies of Nestorius,9 the second containing the
conciliar acts against Nestorius and his adherents, and the
refutations written by me against those who wrote against the
propositions. These are two bishops, Andrew and Theodoret.IO
And the same book at the end contains concise expositions
about the dispensations concerning Christ, very fine and use-
ful. Offer to him likewise, of those on parchment, five letters;
first the letter of our blessed father Athanasius to Epictetus,lI
and second the letter to John from US,'2 and two letters to
Nestorius, one short letter and one long letter,'3 and finally the
letter to Acacius,'4 for he requested these from us.

9. Composed in 430. See Quasten 3.126.

10. Ibid., 127. Wickham (cf. note 1 supra) identifies the prefect as
Chryseros, the eunuch who is also mentioned in Letter 96.
11. Quasten 3.59. 13· Possibly Letter 2 or 4 and 17.
12. Possibly Letter 39· 14. Possibly Letter 33.
 LETTER 45

Cyril, to Succensus, most blessed Bishop of Diocaesarea in Isauria.!

READ THE MEMORANDUM sent by your holiness and I

was exceedingly pleased because, although you are
able to help both us and others from your very great
love of wisdom, yet you deign to urge us to write about what we
hold in our own mind and what we understand you think also.
Accordingly, concerning the dispensation of our Savior we
think as the holy Fathers before us thought also. For, when
reading their works, we put their thought in such order as to
follow after them and to introduce nothing strange to the
orthodoxy of their teachings.
(2) But since your excellency is inquiring whether it is
proper to speak of two natures in Christ or not, I thought I
ought to speak on this matter. A certain Diodore,2 a sometime
contender of the Holy Spirit,3 as they say, at one time was in
communion with the church of the true faith. 4 After he had put
aside, as he thought, the blot of the Macedonian heresy,5 he fell
into another sickness. For he thought and he wrote that there is
one son separately begotten of the seed of David from the Holy
Virgin, the Mother of God, and again another Son begotten

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.6 pp. 151-157.
Geerard numbers this letter 5345 in GPG. See also Ebied-Wickham, Unpub-
lished Syriac Letter, 32-38, and Wickham, Select Letters, 70-83.
2. Diodore of Tarsus against whom Cyril wrote a tractate, cf. Quasten
3. 128,397-4 0 1.
3. Gregory of Nyssa wrote against this sect, cf. Quasten 3.259.
4. Diodore died before 394, a member of the true church. Cyril accused
him of Nestorianism as early as 438, and later Diodore's writings were conde-
mned by a synod at Constantinople in 499.
5. This sect called the "contenders against the Spirit" was led by Macedo-
nius, Bishop of Constantinople, deposed in 360.

19 0
 LETTER 45
separately, the Word of God the Father. As if concealing the
wolf in a fleece of a sheep,6 he pretended to say that there is one
Christ, by referring the name Christ just to the only begotten
Son, the Word begotten of God the Father, since he allots the
name to him in the order of grace, as he says himself, and he
calls him the son of the seed of David as one united, he says, to
the one who is truly the Son, united, however, not as we glorify
him, but only according to dignity and according to authority
and according to equality of honor.
(3) N estorius became the disciple of this Diodore, and then
with mind darkened by his books he pretends to confess one
Christ, Son and Lord, but he himself also divides the one into
two, saying that the undivided man was connected to God the
Word by the same name, by the same honor, and by dignity.
And so he separates the sayings made about Christ in the
evangelical and apostolic proclamations and says that some
ought to be attributed to the man, obviously the statements
proper to the humanity, and others alone are suited to God the
Word, obviously those proper to divinity. And since in many
places he divides and successively regards the one begotten
from the Holy Virgin as man separately, and likewise sepa-
rately and successively the Son, the Word of God the Father,
for this reason he says that the Holy Virgin is not the Mother of
God, but rather the mother of a man.7
(4) But we are not disposed to hold these as true, but we
were taught according to the divine Scripture and the holy
Fathers and we confess that one Son and Christ and Lord, that
is, the Word of God the Father, was begotten of him before
ages in a divinely fitting and ineffable manner and that in
recent ages of time the same Son was begotten for us according
to the flesh from the Holy Virgin, and since she gave birth to
God made man and made flesh, for this reason we also call her
the Mother of God. Therefore there is one Son, "one Lord
Jesus Christ"B both before his Incarnation and after his In-

6. Cf. Mt 7.15.
7. The Greek is aVepW1TOT6KO~.
8. 1 Cor 8.6. Cf. Wolfson, Philosophy of the Fathers, 1:408.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

carnation. For there was not one Son, the Word of God the
Father, and again another one of the Holy Virgin, but our
belief is that he is the same who was before ages and was
begotten according to flesh of a woman, not that his divinity
received a beginning unto existence or that his existence was
summoned unto a beginning through the Holy Virgin, but
rather, as I said, that the Word, who was before ages, is said to
have been begotten from her according to the flesh. For his
flesh was his own, just as by all means each one of us has his own
body.
(5) But since some people bind upon us the opinions of
Apollinaris and say, "If you speak of one Son according to a
perfect and commingled union, who is the Word of God the
Father made man and incarnate, at once without doubt you
seem to think and you knew you thought that a mixture, or a
blending, or a confusion of the Word took place with his body,
or else a change of his body into the nature of divinity." For this
reason and very wisely we say in answer to this calumny that the
Word of God the Father incomprehensibly and in a manner
which cannot be expressed united to himself a body animated
by a rational soul and came forth a man from a woman, having
become like unto us, not by a change of his nature but rather by
the goodwill of the dispensation of his Incarnation. For he
chose to become man without losing what he was as God by
nature. But even ifhe descended unto the limitations which we
have and has possessed "the form of a slave,"9 although being
so, he remained in the preeminence of his divinity and in his
natural lordship.
(6) Accordingly when we assert the union of the Word of
God the Father to his holy body which has a rational soul, a
union which is ineffable and beyond thought and which took
place without blending, without change, without alteration, we
confess one Christ, Son and Lord, the Word of God the Father,
the same God and man, not one and another, but one and the
same, being, and known to be, God and man. Therefore some-
times he speaks as man according to the dispensation and

9. Phil 2·7·
 LETTER 45 193
according to his humanity, and sometimes as God he makes
statements by the authority of his divinity. And we make the
following assertions also. While skillfully examining the man-
ner of his dispensation with flesh and finely probing the mys-
tery, we see that the Word of God the Father was made man
and was made flesh and that he has not fashioned that holy
body from his divine nature but rather took it from the Virgin
Mary. Since how did he become man, ifhe has not possessed a
body like ours? Considering, therefore, as I said, the manner
of his Incarnation we see that his two natures came together
with each other in an indissoluble union, without blending and
without change, for his flesh is flesh and not divinity, even
though his flesh became the flesh of God, and likewise the
Word also is God and not flesh, even though he made the flesh
his own according to the dispensation. Therefore, whenever
we have these thoughts in no way do we harm the joining into a
unity by saying that he was of two natures, but after the union
we do not separate the natures from one another, nor do we
cut the one and indivisible Son into two sons, but we say that
there is one Son, and as the holy Fathers have said,1O that there
is one phusis of the Word [of God] made flesh. 11
(7) Therefore, as far as concerns our understanding and
only the contemplation by the eyes of the soul in what manner
the only begotten became man, we say that there are two
natures which are united, but that Christ the Son and Lord is
one, the Word of God the Father made man and incarnate.
And, if it seems best, let us accept as an example the composi-
tion in our own selves by which we are men. For we are
composed of soul and body and we see two natures, the one
being the nature of the body and the other the nature of the
soul, but there is one from both in unity, a man. And because
man is composed of two natures, this does not make two men
be one, but one and the same man through the composition, as
I said, of soul and body. For if we should deny that the one and
only Christ is from two different natures, and that he is indi-
10. Cf. Quasten 3.14°.
11. This is the first instance of the famous formula in the letters. Here
phusis means "person" to Cyril, cf. Letter 40, note 22.
194 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

visible after the union, those who are fighting against the true
faith will say, "If the whole l2 is one phusis, how was he made
man or what kind of body did he make his own?"
(8) But since I found in the Memorandum a certain sugges-
tion of such an expression, to the effect that after the Resurrec-
tion the holy body of Christ, the Savior of us all, has changed
into divinity so that the whole is only divinity, I thought it
necessary to speak against this also. The blessed Paul writes
somewhere when explaining the causes of the Incarnation of
the only begotten Son of God: "For what was impossible to the
law, in that it was weak because of the flesh, God has made
good; by sending his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh as a
sin-offering, he has condemned sin in the flesh, in order that
the justification of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not
according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."13 And again
somewhere:
Since therefore the children share in blood and flesh, so he
in like manner has shared in these; that through death he
might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the
devil; and might deliver them, who throughout their lives
were kept in servitude by the fear of death. For, of course, it
is not angels that he is succoring, but he is succoring the
offspring of Abraham. Wherefore it was right that he should
in all things be made like unto his brethren.14
(9) Therefore we say that, since from the transgression of
Adam human nature suffered corruption and since our intel-
lect within us is tyrannized by the pleasures of the flesh or by
the inborn motions of the flesh, it became necessary for the
salvation of us who are upon the earth that the Word of God be
made man in order that he might make his own the flesh of
man although it was subject to corruption and sick with the
love of pleasure. Since he is life and life-giver, he would de-
stroy the corruption in the flesh and rebuke its inborn motions,
plainly those which tend toward love of pleasure. For thus it

12. That is, the whole Christ after the Incarnation.

13· Rom 8·3, 4·
14. Heb 2.14- 1 7.
 LETTER 45 195
was possible that the sin in our flesh be killed. We recalled also
that the blessed Paul called this inborn motion in us the "law of
sin."!3 Wherefore since human flesh became the Word's own,
the subjection to corruption has come to an end, and since as
God, he who made it his own and proclaimed it as his own "did
not know sin,"!6 as I said, he also put an end to the sickness of
loving pleasure. And the only begotten Word of God has not
corrected this for himself, for he is what he always is, but
obviously for us. For even if we have been subject to evil from
the transgression of Adam, by all means there will come upon
us also the good things of Christ, which are immortality and
the death of sin.
(10) Accordingly he became man, and did not assume a
man, as it seems to Nestorius. And in order that it might be
believed that he became man even though he remained what
he was, God by nature obviously, therefore it is reported that
he was hungry, and was weary from thejourney, and endured
sleep, and trouble, and pain, and the other human blameless
expenences.
(11) And again, in order that he might give assurance to
those seeing him that in addition to being man he is also true
God, he worked signs of his divinity by rebuking the waves, by
raising the dead, and performing other marvelous deeds. And
he endured the cross also in order that by suffering death in his
flesh and not in the nature of his divinity he might become "the
first-born from the dead"!7 and might open up the road to
immortality for the nature of man and by despoiling Hades
might free the souls confined there.
(12) After the Resurrection it was the same body which had
suffered except it no longer had the human infirmities in it.
For we assert that it was no longer receptive of hunger, or of
weariness, or of anything else of such a kind, but was thereafter
incorruptible, and not only this but also life-giving, for it is the
body of life, that is, the body of the only begotten, for it has
been made resplendent with the glory most proper to his
15· Rom 7.25.
16. Cf. I Pt 2.22, Is 53.9, I In 3·5, 2 Cor 5.21, In 8.46.
17. Col 1.18.
196 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

divinity and is known to be the body of God. Therefore, even if

some might say that it is divine, just as, of course, it is the
human body of a man, he would not err from proper reason-
ing. Whence I think that the very wise Paul said, "And even
though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now
we know him so no longer."18 For being God's own body, as I
said, it transcends all human bodies.
(13) But it is not admissible that a body from earth under-
went a change into the nature of divinity, for it is impossible,
and, if we admit it, we are dishonoring divinity as something
coming into being and as adding to itself something which was
not proper to it according to nature. For as a statement of
absurdity it is the same thing to say that the body was trans-
formed into the nature of divinity, and to say this, that the
Word was transformed into the nature of flesh, by saying that
the divinity had changed itself into the nature of flesh. And just
as the latter is impossible, for he is unchanged and unaltered,
so also is the former impossible. For it is unattainable that any
creature change into the essence or nature of divinity, and
flesh is a creature. Therefore, on the one hand, we say that the
body of Christ is divine, since it is the body of God, and we say
that it is resplendent with ineffable glory, incorruptible, holy
and life-giving, but, on the other hand, none of the holy
Fathers has either thought or said that it was changed into the
nature of divinity, nor are we of this opinion either.
(14) Let your holiness be not ignorant also of this, that our
father Athanasius, of happy memory, who was once Bishop of
Alexandria, because some persons were disturbed at that time,
wrote a letter to Epictetus, the Bishop of Corinth, full of true
doctrine. But since Nestorius was refuted by it, and since those
who concurred in the true faith after reading it and taking
proofs from it were putting to shame those who wished to
think as he did, they perpetrated a wretched thing, and one
worthy of their heretical impiety. For after they corrupted the
letter by having taken out some things and having inserted
others, they have published it, so that our glorious father

18. 2 Cor 5.16.

 LETTER 45 197
seems to agree with what Nestorius thinks and those with him.
Therefore, lest some might show the corrupt version of it there
also, it was necessary to take a copy from those which we have
and send it to your reverence.19
(15) For, in truth, the most pious and most God-fearing
Bishop of Emesa, Paul, after arriving in Alexandria, brought
up a discussion concerning this, and the copy of the letter
which he brought was found to have been corrupted and
falsified by the heretics, so that he asked that a copy of those
which we have be sent to Antioch and we have sent it. And
following in every way the true doctrines of the holy Fathers we
have composed a book against the teachings of Nestorius, and
another one, too, since some were slandering the meaning of
the propositions,20 and I sent these to your reverence so that if
there might be some of our brethren, like unto us in faith and
in soul, but carried away by the follies of some people and
thinking that we have changed in what was said against Nesto-
rius, they might be refuted by the reading of these and learn
that we well and rightly reproved him as one wandering from
truth. And now we are no less devoted to fighting his blasphe-
mies everywhere. And your excellency, being able to under-
stand these greater matters, will be of aid to us both by writing
and by praying for us.

19· Cf. Letter 39 at the end and Letter 40, note 38.
20. At the end of letter 17.
 LETTER 46

Another copy of a letter written in response to our inquiries from

myself to the same Succensus.!

RUTH MAKES HERSELF plain to see for those who love

her, but hides herself, I think, and tries to hide from
the thoughts of intriguing men. They do not show
themselves worthy to behold her with clear eyes. The lovers of
blameless faith pray to the Lord "in integrity of heart"2 as it is
written, but those who walk in crooked paths and have "a
crooked heart,"3 according to the saying in the Psalms, gather
for their own purposes intriguing pretexts of perverse designs
in order to distort the straight ways of the Lord and lead astray
the souls of those who are rather simple into the necessity of
thinking what is not right. And I say this after having read the
Memoranda from your holiness, and then found some things
being proposed in them unsafely by those who have loved, I do
not know how, the perversion of falsely named knowledge.
(2) And they were these: I. "If Emmanuel was composed of
two natures, but after the union one incarnate nature of the
Word is known, it will follow that it is by all means necessary to
say that he suffered in his own nature."4
(3) The blessed Fathers who defined the august creed or

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.6 pp. 157-162.
Geerard numbers this letter 5346 in CPG. See also Ebied-Wickham, Unpub-
lished Syriac Letters, 39-43, and Wickham, Select Letters, 84-93' For another
translation of this letter see M. Wiles and M. Santer, Documents in Early Christian
Thought (New York, 1976),66-71.
2. Wis 1.1.
3. Ps 100(101)04-
4. The Greek word is <!>VaLli, here to be translated "nature," or the objection
to Cyril's formula has no point.
 LETTER 46 199

profession of faith 5 said that he himself, the Word of God the

Father, who is of his essence, the only begotten, through whom
are all things, was made flesh and was incarnate, and, without
doubt, we say that those holy men were not ignorant that the
body united to the Word was animated by a rational soul.
Therefore, if anyone says that the Word was made flesh, he
confesses that the flesh which was united to him was not with-
out a rational soul. Thus, as I think, or rather as it is, to speak
boldly, the all-wise evangelist John said that "the Word was
made flesh,"6 not that he was united to flesh without a soul, far
from it, nor that he endured a change or alteration, for he has
remained what he was, that is, God by nature, and having
taken to himself existence as man, that is, being born according
to the flesh as we from a woman, again he remained the one
Son, except that he is not fleshless as he was before, that is,
before the period of the Incarnation when he clothed himself,
so to speak, with our nature. But although the body united to
him is not consubstantial to the Word begotten of God the
Father, even though it is united with a rational soul, still our
thought certainly presents to our mind the difference of the
two natures which have been united, and yet we confess one
Son, Christ and Lord, since the Word was made flesh. And
whenever we say flesh, we are saying man.
(4) Accordingly what necessity is there that he suffered in
his own nature/ if it should be said that after the union there is
one incarnate phusis of the Word? For if there was not in the
plans of the dispensation of the Incarnation that which had
been begotten to endure the suffering, they would be speaking
the truth, because if that which had been begotten to suffer did
not exist, there would be in a way every necessity somehow that
the suffering happen to the nature of the Word. But if in
saying "made flesh," the entire plan of the dispensation with
flesh is introduced, for he was made flesh in no other way
except by "succoring the seed of Abraham"8 and "in all things

5. At Nicaea. 7· Cf. note 4·

6. In 1.14. 8. Heb 2.16.
200 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

he was made like unto his brethren"9 and by "taking the form
of a slave,"10 then in vain have they spoken nonsense who say
that it follows that he must have endured suffering in his own
nature, for his flesh is submitted to suffering, with regard to
which reasonably the suffering would be considered to have
occurred, since the Word is impassible. It is not for this reason
that we exclude him from being said to have suffered. Just as
the body became his own body, so also everything that is of the
body with the exception of sin alone would be said to be no less
his, since he made it his own according to the dispensation of
his Incarnation.ll
(5) But those on the opposite side will say: II. "If there was
one incarnate nature of the Word,t2 in a way there is every
necessity to say that a confusion and a blending occurred since
the nature of man in him is lessened, as it were, and taken
away."
(6) Again, those who "pervert what is right"13 have not
known that there is in truth one incarnate nature of the Word.
For if there is one Son, who by nature and in truth is the Word
of God the Father, the one ineffably begotten of him, who then
according to an assumption of flesh, not without a soul but
endowed with a rational soul, came forth a man from a woman,
he shall not be for this reason divided into two persons and two
sons but he has remained one, yet not without flesh nor outside
his body, but having his own body according to an inseparable
union. He who says this does not in any way or in any manner
signify a confusion, or a blending, or anything else of such a
kind, nor indeed will this follow as if from some necessary
reasoning or other. For even if it is stated by us that the
only-begotten Son of God is one, incarnate and made man, he
is not mixed together because of this, as it seems to them. The
nature of the Word has not passed over into the nature of the

9. Ibid., 17·
10. Phil 2.7.
1 1. In answering the objection Cyril expounds his beliefs, but does not
seem to meet the point of it completely.
12. Phusis.
13· Mi 3.9·
 LETTER 46 201

flesh. Neither has the nature of the flesh passed over into the
nature of the Word, but remaining and being considered in
the proprieti4 according to the nature of each ineffably and
inexplicably united, in accordance with the reasoning just
given by us, this has shown forth for us the one phusis 15 of the
Son; but, as I said, incarnate.
(7) For not only in the case of those which are simple by
nature is the term 'one' truly used, but also in respect to what
has been brought together according to a synthesis, as man is
one being, who is of soul and body. For soul and body are of
different species and are not consubstantial to each other, but
when united they produce one phusis of man, even though in
the considerations of the synthesis the difference exists accord-
ing to the nature of those which have been brought together
into a unity. Accordingly they are speaking in vain who say
that, if there should be one incarnate phusis of the Word, in
every way and in every manner it would follow that a mixture
and a confusion occurred as if lessening and taking away the
nature of man. For neither has it been lessened, nor is it taken
away, as the question says. For to say that he has been made
flesh is sufficient for the most complete statement of his be-
coming man. For if there had been silence about this on our
part there would have been some room for their calumny. But
since the statement that he was made flesh has been necessarily
adduced, where is there a way of lessening or subtraction?
(8) And III. "If Christ is perfect God and if he is known to
be perfect man, and if he is consubstantial to the Father
according to divinity, but according to humanity consubstan-
tial to us, where is the perfection if the nature of man no longer
subsists? Where is the consubstantiality to us, if the essence,
that is our nature, no longer subsists?"
(9) The solution or response in the previous section suffices
as a clarification of these questions also. For if in saying "the
one phusis of the Word" we had been silent by not mentioning

14· The Greek word is t8LOT'T]<;, the Latin proprietas. Cf. Lampe, PGL 665,
s.v., "t8LOT'T]<;," and Wolfson, Philosophy of the Fathers, 1 :408.
15. Cyril here uses his formula again.
202 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

"incarnate," but, as it were, setting aside the dispensation of his

Incarnation, doubtless their statement would not have been
incredible to them, as they pretend to ask, "where is the perfec-
tion in the humanity or how has the essence like to us sub-
sisted?" But since the perfection of his humanity and the
indication of an essence like unto us has been brought in by
saying "incarnate," let them stop supporting themselves upon
a rod made of reed. For whoever rejected the dispensation and
denied the Incarnation, rightly was to be accused of robbing
the Son of his perfect humanity. But if, as I said, in stating that
he was made flesh there is a clear and unambiguous confession
that he became man, nothing any longer hinders the meaning
that, since he is the one and only Son and Christ, he is God and
man and just as he is perfect in divinity so also is he in his
humanity. And moreover your excellency very rightly and
with complete understanding has expounded the matter con-
cerning the Passion of our Savior, by strongly contending that
the only-begotten Son of God in so far as he is known to be and
is God did not endure the sufferings of the body in his own
nature but suffered rather in his earthly nature.
(10) For it was necessary and proper to maintain with refer-
ence to the one true Son both that he did not suffer in his
divinity and that it is affirmed that he suffered in his humanity,
for his flesh suffered. But they again think that we are thereby
introducing what is called by them theopatheia,16 and they do not
understand the dispensation, but most maliciously attempt to
transfer the suffering to man separately, stupidly practicing a
harmful reverence, so that the Word of God would not be
confessed the Savior, as the one who gave his own blood for
our sakes, but rather so that a man, considered separately and
by himself, Jesus, might be said to set this aright. But thinking
thus overthrows the entire plan of the dispensation with flesh
and transforms our divine mystery with no uncertainty virtu-
ally into anthropolatreia,17 and they do not understand that the

16. The Greek, 8EO'lTa8ELa, signifies: "suffering on the part of God," or

"God-suffering. "
17. 'aV8pW'lTOAaTpELa, "the worship of a man."
 LETTER 46
blessed Paul said that the one who is of the Jews according to
the flesh, that is, the Christ of the seed of Abraham and Jesse
and David is, "the Lord of glory"18 and "God blessed forever"19
and "over all things," showing that the body of the Word is his
own body, the one which was nailed to the wood, and attribut-
ing the cross to him through this.
(11) And IV. But I perceive that something else besides
these matters is the thing being asked. For the one who says
that the Lord suffered merely in his flesh is making the suffer-
ing irrational and involuntary. But if one would say that he
suffered with his r,ational soul, in order that the suffering
might be voluntary, nothing hinders one from saying that he
suffered in the nature of his humanity. But if this is true, how
will we not be granting that the two natures subsist indivisibly
after the union? So that if one says "that Christ therefore
suffered in his flesh"20 for us, he is saying nothing else except
that Christ therefore suffered for us in our nature.
(12) Again this question is no less in opposition to those who
say that there is one incarnate phusis of the Word, and the
proposers, desiring to prove that this formula is rather useless,
eagerly strive to prove that two natures always subsisted. But
they have ignored the fact that those things which are usually
distinguished not just according to speculation, completely
and specifically differ from one another in every manner
separately into diversity. Let a man like unto us be an example
for us again. For we know that there are two natures in him,
one the nature of the soul and the other the nature of the body.
But when we divide him merely in thought and conceive
the difference in subtle speculations or the presentations of
thought to the mind, we do not posit the natures one apart
from the other, nor indeed do we at all impute to them virtual
existence through the division, but we conceive of them as the
natures of one man, so that the two no longer are two, but
through them both the one living being is produced. Accord-

18. 1 Cor 2.8.

19· Rom 9.5.
20. Cf. 1 Pt 4.1.
20 4 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

ingly, even though they would speak of the nature of humanity

and the nature of divinity in Emmanuel, still the humanity
became the Word's own, and one Son is meant with his hu-
manity.
(13) Since the divinely inspired Scripture says that he suf-
fered in his flesh, it is better that we also speak thus, rather than
to say in the nature of his humanity, even though, if this was
not said by some perversely, in no way at all would they do
injury to the statement of the mystery. For what else is the
nature of his humanity except flesh animated rationally, in
which flesh we say that the Lord has suffered? Hence they
speak with undue precision of him suffering in the nature of
the humanity, as if they separate it from the Word and set it
apart by itself, so that they mean two and not one, the Word of
God the Father still incarnate and made man. The word "indi-
visibly," added by them, seems somehow to us to be significant
of true doctrine. But they do not think in this fashion, for the
word "indivisible" with them is taken in a different sense
according to the babblings of Nestorius. For they say that by
equality of honor, by likeness of will, by authority is the man in
whom he dwelled indivisible from the Word of God, so that
they do not propose these words with simplicity but with some
craftiness and malice. 21

21. A textual problem occurs here. Migne (PG 77 .245) notes that the last
part of this letter is the same as the last part of Letter 40, and that Letter 46
ends here. Schwartz (ACO 1.1.6 pp. 157-162) does the same.
 LETTER 47

From John, Bishop of Antioch, to Cyril, my fellow bishop, most

beloved of God and most holy. Greetings.'

E HAVE WELCOMED one another back, my lord, with the

blessing of God or by the intervention of my lord Paul
the bishop, who is most God-fearing in all things to the
benefit of us both and is a man careless of all things in his own
regard provided that the causes of the disturbances in the
churches of God might be lulled to rest and the greatest con-
cord might exist for the glory of God. Hence he has returned
in peace and all the personal observances of friendship toward
your reverence have been fulfilled perfectly on our part, since
besides the matters stated by your holiness in your reply we
have consulted with each other on small points having no
difference of meaning but involving administrative matters. I
rather wish and pray that not only I myself but all of the most
God-fearing lord bishops of the East join with your dear and
honorable person, I mean your sincerity, which I consider of
the greatest value. A short period separated us, and then
again, with God willing it, we have returned to each other
having soothed all causes of pain and having left nothing at all
on either side worthy of strife or discord. This has not come to
be without God, but with him as the source, and with the most
Christ-loving and most God-fearing emperors using the au-
thority proper to them.
(2) Let your reverence, therefore, receive Cassius and Amo-
nius, my most pious subjects, not in order that they may be
contentious with you, but so that what has been built up by you
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz,AGO 1.1·7 p. 155. Geerard
numbers this letter 5347 in GPG.
206 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

may be brought to stability and the fairest outcome. We recog-

nize our gratitude to my lord, the most admirable and illus-
trious tribune and secretary, Aristolaus, who realized from the
matters which were stirred up among us that it was better that
we unite each other stalwartly and steadfastly by brief letters.
Receive, therefore, I urge you, what we have composed well
and with fair intent and with all the force needed to convince
you, and have sent to you. Let no thought enter your mind that
we have done anything unscrupulously in the matters pro-
posed. Our conscience knows and invites God above as witness
that we did not have unsound desires in your regard but
desired to administer our own affairs for the benefit of the
churches of Christ. The same most pious deacons will tell you
the way we administered affairs. Everything has been com-
pletely done by us so that no one would be able to repudiate the
agreement which has come to be. Receive, therefore, I urge
you, in gladness the brethren who bring to you the benefits of
peace and let your holiness pray that the matter proceed pros-
perously to the benefit of the churches of Christ.
(3) For just as we brought ourselves to you by the law of our
disposition and entrusted ourselves to you so also we are anx-
ious and desire or rather pray that no one of those with us may
neglect to have the same opinions as we, since we are zealous
with forbearance and with order in turn to draw along with us
those of the least conviction or rather those who need guidance
from us to the benefit of the Universal Church and her affairs.
(4) Accordingly realize fully that we ourselves are as you
knew us to be previously, with the same disposition both when
we send our letters to you and receive yours. For this will honor
us and will be a crown for your holiness. We send most cordial
greetings to the entire brotherhood with you.
 LETTER 48

A letter of the same to Dynatus, Bishop of Ancient Nikopolis of

Epirus.!

THOUGHT IT NECESSARY to set down for your rever-

ence what is known to have followed hard upon the
peace of the churches. Accordingly, there arrived at
Antioch my lord, the most admirable tribune and secretary,
Aristolaus, bearing imperial letters which advised the most
pious Bishop of the Church of Antioch,John, to anathematize
the abominable teachings of Nestorius, to approve his deposi-
tion in agreement with the holy council, and thus to seek
communion with us. And this was the sense of the letters. Some
of the bishops of the East, who had not yet condemned Nesto-
rius, or who even were favoring his leadership, give offense to
our true faith and in no slight way fight against the glory of
Christ, the Savior of us all. They induced Acacius, the most
God-fearing and most holy Bishop of Beroea, to write to me
certain absurd things to the effect that, since they requested it,
I ought to repudiate everything written by me against Nesto-
rius and hurl them aside as no longer in force, and agree only
to the profession of faith defined by the holy Fathers in the city
of Nicaea. And your holiness knows that such were their condi-
tions before in the city of Ephesus. But I wrote in answer to
these matters that they were requesting something not accept-
able, for we have properly written what we have written in
accordance with the true and blameless faith and we deny none
at all of our own writings. Not a thing was said, as they stated,

1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.4 pp. 31-32.
Geerard numbers this letter 5348 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 505-
50 7.

20 7
208 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

carelessly, but what I said was entirely and in every way neces-
sary and concurrent with the meaning of the truth. Rather it
was proper that they should not have made use of such detours
and delays and should not carry it beyond what was necessary.
They should acquiesce in the decisions of the most God-
fearing and most God-loving emperor himself, anathematize
the nonsense of Nestorius and the blasphemies which existed
against Christ, approve his deposition, and agree to the con-
secration of the most holy and most God-fearing bishop, Maxi-
mian.
(2) After they had all seen from these letters sent by me to
them that they would not receive communion with us unless
those things which they ought to do were carried to comple-
tion, they send to Alexandria the most pious and most God-
loving Bishop of Emesa, Paul, who bore letters to me concern-
ing communion but not very properly composed. For they
pretended to bring forward reproofs as if some things were
not properly said and done in the holy synod. I did not accept
such letters but I maintained how they only could add second
insults, who were in need of forgiveness for their previous
ones.
(3) When the most God-fearing bishop already mentioned
apologized and strongly maintained under oath that he had
not had such an intention, but rather had come to the letter in a
spirit of simplicity, I accepted this through charity. But I did
not agree to be united with him unless by having given me a
written document he anathematized the teachings of Nesto-
rius and agreed that he had been deposed and assented to the
consecration of the most pious bishop, Maximian. And he
asked that by having received such documents in behalf of all
the most God-fearing bishops of the East we would demand
nothing more from them. I objected in no way, but I sent along
with my lord, the most admirable tribune and secretary, Aris-
tolaus, two of our clerics to Antioch after placing a document
in their hands and saying that if the most God-fearing Bishop
of Antioch, John, would sign it and accept it, then let them give
him the letters of communion. For the most admirable tribune,
Aristolaus, already mentioned, objected to the delay.
 LETTER 48
(4) Accordingly when the most God-fearing bishop, John,
and the illustrious bishops with him signed it, and after they
anathematized the teachings of Nestorius and agreed that he
had been deposed and assented to the consecration of the most
pious and the most God-fearing bishop, Maximian, we have
granted them communion. For this was offered to them by the
holy council at the capital city of Ephesus.
(5) And let your holiness know this also, that the most pious
and God-fearing bishop, Paul, began exhorting me very much
at first in behalf of those deposed, namely, Palladius, Euther-
ius, Himerius and Dorotheus,2 and asked that the decisions
against them be abrogated, stoutly maintaining that otherwise
the peace of the churches was not able to be carried to comple-
tion unless this also was offered. But I said that he was putting
his hand to an impossible task, and that this would never be an
offer on our part. Accordingly they have remained in the
schism in which they still are now and no mention of them was
made in the agreements concerning the peace of the holy
churches.
(6) The others 3 have written the letter which they sent to me
and to the most God-fearing and most holy bishops, namely,
both Sixtus, Bishop of the Church of the great city of Rome
and Maximian, Bishop of the holy Church of Constantinople.
And it was necessary that your excellency be clearly informed
of these matters, lest some, who are accustomed to trifle in one
thing or another, might upset some of the brethren by saying
that we retracted what we have written against the blasphemies
of N estorius. I also sent to you copies of my letters, that is, of
the one written by me to John, the most pious Bishop of
Antioch, and of the one written by him to me about anathema-
tizing the blasphemies of Nestorius and about his deposition,
so that your excellency might clearly understand. And let no
one deliver to you any other letters concerning these matters.
(7) Salute the brotherhood with you. The brethren with us
salute you in the Lord.

2. Cf. Letter 11, note 3 and Letter go.

3. John of Antioch and his fellow bishops. See Letter 35.
 LETTER 49

To my lord, beloved brother and archbishop, Maximian, Cyril

sends greetings in the Lord. 1

HERE WAS NO DOUBT that the prayers of your holiness

were always and in every way efficacious. The Savior of
us all readily nods assent to those who love him so that
each with joy and exultation at this says, "From his holy temple
he heard my voice, and my cry to him will reach his ears."2
Behold, behold the limbs of the body of the church which had
been torn apart have been joined again to each other and
nothing severs into discord those ministering the Gospel of
Christ. We all are crowned in one faith since we have driv-
en out of the sacred enclosures Nestorius, the inventor of
impieties, and have removed from the noble flock a false
shepherd. This one success has come to be as a result of your
prayers.
(2) Since, therefore, peace concerning the churches became
a necessary anxiety for the most pious emperors, we ourselves
are also praying that there may disappear from our midst the
wall dividing us and severing us unto discord. We pray that the
peace which is most pleasing to God may blaze up like light,
since John, the most God-loving and most God-fearing Bishop
of the Church of Antioch, and the most pious bishops with him
have agreed in writing that they hold Nestorius deposed, and
that they anathematize his unholy blasphemies. I have sent
letters of communion to his reverence and to the other
bishops. We have joined in unanimity since your holiness and

I. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, ACO 1.1.4 p. 34. Geerard
numbers this letter 5349 in CPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 5IO--5Il.
2. Ps 17.7.

210
 LETTER 49 211

all the other bishops, who constituted the entirety of the holy
council, concur in this. Strife and discord do not prevail with
us. We all have had the one intention, which looks toward
peace. If indeed they who in the beginning disagreed with us
and severed themselves from us had desired it, there would
not have been any strife and separation among the churches
at all.
(3) May our Savior be blessed, who brought the storm to an
end, and spread abroad the calm of peace because of the
prayers and intercession of your holiness and of all others who
because they have the true and sincere faith render to him
adoration and service in the Spirit and in truth.
 LETTER 50

To my beloved lord and fellow bishop Valerian, Bishop of Ico-

nium, Cyril sends greetings in the Lord. I

T IS SUFFICIENT, as I see it, or rather it is the nature of

truth, to invoke the prudence of your holiness 2 very
manfully and as far as possible to place accuracy in
opposition to the random remarks of some people. Like old
gossips they use frigid phrases mixing everything up and down
and pretending to be subtly busy concerning the mystery of the
Incarnation of the Lord, the only begotten. Yet they do not
even perceive this, but change the mystery to what is not right,
and do this contentedly, while they hold perverted doctrines.
In these matters the most difficult thing is this, that they
pretend to want to have upright ideas and by pretending to
have the appearance of an inclination toward this, as if they
had fitted on a mask, they pour the poison of the impiety of
Nestorius into the souls of simpler men. In a way they are like
unto the healers of human bodies, that is, the doctors who stir
sweet honey with their bitter medicines. Beguiling by the qual-
ity of what is useful they remove the perception of what is
naturally disagreeable.
(2) But we are not ignorant of their ideas, since "we have the
mind of Christ,"3 according to the most learned Paul. If there
was someone who said that God the only begotten Word, who
was ineffably begotten of God the Father, and is the creator of
the very ages, had a beginning of his existence from the Holy
1. For the critical text of this letter see Schwartz, AGO 1.1.3 pp. 9{}--101.
Geerard numbers this letter 5350 in GPG. See also Festugiere, Ephese, 453-
4 66.
2. Bishop of lconium in Lycaonia, Asia Minor.
3. 1 Cor 2.16.

212
 LETTER 50 21 3

Virgin, to them he would not seem to have missed the mark in

what he said. If the Word of God by nature is spirit, how was he
begotten from flesh, for the Lord says, "That which is born of
the flesh is flesh?"4 Since the doctrine concerning the mystery
of Christ treads another path or road toward what is direct and
fixed and has no distortion, why do they babble in vain, "when
they understand neither what they say nor the things about
which they make assertion?"5
(3) We say that the only begotten Word of God, being spirit
as God, according to the Scriptures, 6 for the salvation of men
was made flesh and became man, not by transmuting a body
for himself from his own nature, nor by being deprived of
being what he was, nor by having sustained a change or altera-
tion, but by taking his undefiled body from the Holy Virgin, a
body animated rationally. Thus he proved that body to be his
own in an incomprehensible, unconfused and entirely inef-
fable union, not as the body of someone else but known as his
very own. Thus the only begotten came into the world as "the
firstborn,'" and the one not to be classed with creation was,
insofar as he is known to be God, "among many brethren."
Accordingly when it is said that he was born, and "of a
woman,"B necessarily it is also inferred that he was born accord-
ing to the flesh, in order that he might not be considered as
taking a beginning of his existence from the Holy Virgin.
Although he existed before all ages and is God the Word
coeternal and subsists in a unity with his own Father, yet when
he desired to "take the form of a slave"9 according to the
goodwill of his Father, then it is said he submitted to birth from
a woman according to the flesh like unto us. Therefore, admit-
tedly what is begotten from the flesh is flesh, but what is
begotten of God is God. But Christ is both by himself, being
one Son and Lord with his own flesh yet not inanimate, as I
said, but animated rationally.

4. In 3.6. This part of the sentence and the quotation express the ideas of
Cyril's opponents.
5. 1 Tm 1.7· 8. Gal 4-4-
6. Cf. In 4.24. g. Phil 2.7.
7. Rom 8.2g.
214 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

(4) Let them, therefore, not divide for us the one Son,
setting the Word separate and one Son apart, and separate
from him setting the man from a woman, as they say, but let
them rather know that God the Word was not connected to a
man, but it is stated, that he became man "succoring the
offspring of Abraham,"l0 according to the Scriptures, and
having been "made like unto his brethren"" in all things, sin
alone excepted. 12 This likeness in every way he would properly
have and, above all other similarities, his birth from a woman,
which in us is considered proper to human nature and is like
us, but in the only begotten it is perceived as going beyond this,
for God was made flesh. Accordingly the Holy Virgin is called
Theotokos. 13
(5) If they should say that God and man by coming together
in one constituted the one Christ with the hupostasis of each
obviously preserved unblended but distinguished by reason, it
is possible to see that they are thinking and saying nothing
accurate in this. God and man by coming together did not
constitute the one Christ, as they say, but, as I said, the Word
being already God partook of blood and flesh like unto us in
order that God would be known to have been made man and to
have taken our flesh and to have made it his own, in order that,
just as a man such as we are is known to be one, composed of
soul and body, so also he is confessed to be one, both Son and
Lord.
(6) The nature of man is admitted to be one, and to be one
hupostasis, even if it is known to be of different realities of
diverse kinds. For the body admittedly is of a different nature
relative to the soul, but it is the soul's own body, and helps to
complete the hupostasis of the one man. Although in our mind
and our thinking the difference between the soul and body
mentioned is not obscure, yet their coming together or meet-
ing, since it is undivided, constitutes one living man. Hence the
only begotten Word of God did not come forth as man by as-
suming a man, but, although he had an ineffable begetting

10. Heb 2.17. 12. Cf. Heb 4.15 and 2 Cor 5.21.
11. Ibid. 13. Mother of God.
 LETTER 50
from God the Father, he became man by having fashioned for
himself a temple through the holy and consubstantial Spirit.
Wherefore also he is known to be one, even though in thought
according to our reasoning his body was of a different nature
relative to him. And let it be confessed in every way that his
body was not inanimate, but was animated by a rational soul.
(7) I have learned that some have come to such a point of
madness as not to shrink from saying that God the Word, by
indwelling in a certain Son born of the Virgin, deified him.
But, my good men, I would say to them, this is not the Word of
God made flesh and made man, but rather the dwelling in a
man just as, of course, in one of the holy prophets! But the
account of the mystery in relation to us, as was clarified in the
statements just made above, means that "the Word" begotten
of God the Father "was made flesh"14 according to the Scrip-
tures. Not that he endured an alteration of nature, or varia-
tion, or change, I mean into flesh, but that he made flesh his
own, flesh rationally animated, and he came forth a man. He
was not joined to or dwelling in a man, as they say. To say that
the one who has had the indwelling has been deified, as they
maintain (for this is completely to be cast aside in our estima-
tion), how does this not have every indication of sheer stupid-
ity? It is in opposition to the scope of Sacred Scripture.
(8) The divinely inspired Paul says that the Word of God,
though he was by nature God and equal in all things whatso-
ever to his Father, "did not consider being equal to God a thing
to be clung to, but emptied himself," and "took the form of a
slave" and "was made like men" "as man" and "humbled
himself."15 But they, by changing the nature of things to the
totally opposite, and impiously huckstering off the meaning of
the truth, say that a man has been deified. Then, my good men,
who is the one who emptied himself and how has he humbled
himself? Tell me, what kind of form of a slave did he take? For
their reasoning, as it seems to us, introduces a man lifted up
from being humble like unto us, who ascends from emptiness

14· In 1.14·
15. Phil 2.6-8.
216 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

like unto us to the fullness of the divinity, and who is changed

from the form of a slave to that of the master. How, therefore,
they say that the only begotten emptied himself, or how he
endured our humility, I am not able to understand, unless they
are saying that he has emptied himself because he has honored
man with his own glory. If, by honoring man, he is wronged; if,
by glorifying man, he is emptied; how will one not say better
that he granted neither honor nor glory to anyone? He would
remain in his own preeminence, if he neither honored nor
glorified the man who, as they say, was appropriated by him.
(9) Do not the things which they determined to think and
delight to say seem worthy in every way somehow of laughter
and full of extreme stupidity? But the statement of the truth
would not raise any suspicion that he was ever emptied, if he
did not have fullness according to his own nature, neither
would there be a thought that he humbled himself, if he was
not utterly sublime and. most high in position and then de-
scended unto what he was not. He who takes the form of a slave
will know completely without doubt that he has freedom by
nature before he takes the form of a slave, and he who became
man did not know that he was this before he has become man.
(10) Since, therefore, the holy and divinely inspired Scrip-
ture names this an emptying and the form of a slave and
moreover also the humanity, and says that the one who freely
endured these is the Word of God the Father, why do they
pervert to the opposite meaning the wisdom of the well-
devised dispensation, and say that a man has been deified, with
the purpose in mind that Christians still are no different from
those who have "served the creature rather than the creator"? 16
Perhaps they will somehow concede that the holy angels them-
selves have been led into error along with us. The Sacred
Scripture says that the angels had been enjoined to adore the
firstborn when he was brought into the world. I' How would
they apply the name firstborn to the only begotten unless he
was incarnate? For if the saying is true, "firstborn among many

16. Rom 1.25.

17. Cf. Heb 1.6.
 LETTER 50 21 7
brethren"18 then rightly is he known to be the firstborn, since
he descended unto brotherhood, which is obviously brother-
hood with us, since he became man as we are, having been
made like his brethren in all things,19 sin alone excepted. 20 This
consideration and thought would be enough for our piety that
the flesh of God, the begetter of life in regard to everything,
having come into being, has his life-giving power and force,
and it enriches his unspeakable and unapproachable glory.
(ll) But it is likely that they who have determined to hold
these ideas add other slanders against the holy teachings,
which slanders take away from the person 21 of the only begot-
ten the insults which he endured at the hands of the Jews and,
in addition to these, the very death according to the flesh, and
assign them as if to another separate son of a woman. For it
seems best to them, I do not know how, by the path not
directed to piety to leap into the trap of Hades and the pit of
He1l 22 according to the Scripture. Admittedly the divine, be-
cause it is without a body, is untouchable and entirely intact,
because the divine is beyond every creature, both visible and
intelligible, and in nature incorporeal, immaculate, untouch-
able and incomprehensible. Since the only begotten Word of
God, having taken a body from the Holy Virgin, and, as I
already said over and over again, having made it his own
offered himself in an odor of sweetness23 to God the Father as a
spotless sacrifice, in this way it is asserted that he endured on
our behalf what happened to his flesh. Everything that hap-
pened to flesh would rightly be attributed to him, sin alone
excepted, for it is his own body. Accordingly since God the
Word became man, he remained impassible as God, but, be-
cause he necessarily made the things of his flesh his own, it is
asserted that he endured what is according to flesh, although
he is without experience of suffering in so far as he is thought
of as God.
(12) Therefore, an appearance of piety leads them away
18. Rom 8.2g. 21. 'll'POUW'II'OV, in Greek.
Ig. Cf. Heb 2.17. 22. Prv g.18.
20. Cf. Heb 4.15 and 2 Cor 5.21.
23· Cf. Ex 2g.18, Ez 20.41, and Eph 5.2.
218 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

from the truth, because they do not perceive that his impassi-
bility has been preserved insofar as he has divine existence and
is God, but the suffering for us according to his flesh is also
attributed to him insofar as, being God by nature, he became
flesh, that is a complete man. For who was he who said to God
the Father in heaven, "Sacrifice and oblation you would not,
but a body you have fitted to me. [In holocausts and sin-
offerings you have had no pleasure.] Then said I, 'Behold, I
come to do your will, 0 God.' "24 For he who as God was without
a body says that the body was fitted to him so that, when he
offered this for us, he might cure us all "by his stripes"25
according to the saying of the prophet. But how is it that "one
died for all,"26 one who is worth all others, if the suffering is
considered simply that of some man? If he suffered according
to his human nature, since he made the sufferings of his body
his own, then, indeed, we say, and very rightly, that the death
of him alone according to the flesh is known to be worth the life
of all, not the death of one who is as we are, even though he
became like unto us, but we say that he, being God by nature,
became flesh and was made man according to the confession of
the Fathers.
(13) But if some take away from the only begotten the
suffering according to flesh as ugly and incongruous and im-
proper, let them for the same reasons take away from him also
his birth according to the flesh from the Holy Virgin. For if the
statement that he suffered in his flesh is improper to him, how
is not that which came before the suffering, that is, his birth
according to flesh or even, to speak out once and for all, the
manner of his becoming man? Thus the Christian mystery is
gone, and the hope of salvation is henceforward rendered
meaningless.
(14) "But how," someone says, "would he suffer who did not
know suffering?" The Word of God, as I said, is admittedly
impassible in his own nature, but it is stated that he suffered in
his own flesh, according to the Scriptures, for he himself was in
24. Cf. Heb 10.5-7, Ps 39(40)·7-9·
25· Is 53·5·
26. 2 Cor 5.14.
 LETTER 50 21 9

his suffering body. And Peter will give you proof since he
writes about him, "who himself bore our sins in his body upon
the tree."27 Therefore, the Word is impassible when he is
considered God by nature, yet the sufferings of his flesh are
known to be his according to the economy of the dispensation.
For in what way would he who is "the firstborn of every
creature"28 through whom have come to be principalities and
powers, thrones and dominations,29 in whom all things hold
together, have become "the firstborn of the dead,"30 and "the
first-fruits of those who have fallen asleep,"31 unless the Word,
being God, made his own the body born to suffer? But just as
he was "born from a woman"32 according to the flesh and made
his own a birth like unto us in his human nature, although he
has his own begetting from his Father, so also it is stated that he
suffered in his flesh and in his human nature like unto us,
although impassibility was his by nature in so far as he is
considered God. Thus is he known to be Christ, thus is he also
seated with his Father, not as a man honored by the indwelling
of God the Word, but as the Son in truth even when he became
man. For the dignity of his essential, preeminent excellence is
preserved for him, even if he has appeared in "the form of a
slave"33 according to the dispensation. Therefore, as I say, even
if he was partaker of our nature as man, still he was at the same
time above all creation as God.
(15) But I learned of someone explaining the cause of the
Ascension into the heavens who said that he ascended to a safe
and secure place and was deemed worthy of sitting together
with the Father, and there, he said, the enemy of our nature is
not able to plot against him again and approach him. Tell me,
then, has heaven become a citadel for him and has his depar-
ture from us, about which we even exult, become a flight, not
an ascension? But he feared, so it seems, that the evil one would
construct a second snare for him in some way, I suppose, and if
he had not ascended, there would be snares laid for him, as it
27. 1 Pt 2.24. 31. 1 Cor 15.20.
28. Col 1.15. 32. Gal 4+
29. Cf. Col 1.16. 33· Phil 2·7·
30. Cf. ibid., 18.
220 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

appears, even after the Resurrection. Who will not depart far
from such vomitings, or who will not rise and go away from talk
of marvels so disgraceful, bidding a long farewell to those
daring to think or say such things? Away with thought so
exceedingly loathsome and fallen! I think that nothing is more
senile or more stupid. The matter has reached such a point of
vulgarity of thoughts on their part that nothing is more dis-
graceful. When Christ had completed the dispensation with
us, trampled on satan, thrown down all his power and de-
stroyed "the power of death"34 itself, he restored for us a new
and living way by having ascended "into heaven" and having
"appeared before the face of God the Father on our behalf,"35
as it is written. He is seated with him even in flesh, not as a man
considered separately and a different son besides the Word,
nor as a man having him indwelling, but as the Son being truly
the one and only Son even when he became man. Accordingly
he is seated with him as God with God, and Lord with Lord,
and as Son with his Father in truth, being this by nature even
though he is known to be with flesh.
(16) And perhaps it would not be difficult by still longer
discussions to point out the depth of their ignorance, but
refuting such vain ideas of theirs by still more arguments is
somehow perhaps being stupid at the same level as those
babbling those trifles. I think it is no doubt necessary, in addi-
tion to what has been said, to attack the means by which they
think they are able to frighten the congregation of the Lord, as
it is written and "to shoot in the dark at the upright ofheart,"36
that is, those who have chosen to pass their lives in simplicity of
purpose and who have received into their souls the tradition of
faith as a certain trust and keep it holy and free from harm.
Those who are clever at deceit and, by the intricately woven
novelties of their thoughts, carry as quarry the less learned
away from faith in the truth, by imitating the wickedness of the
rest of heretics ignorantly offer what is usual with heretics

34. Cf. Heb 2.14.

35· Heb 9.24.
36. Ps 10(11).2.
 LETTER 50 221

without considering what is written, "Woe to him giving his

neighbor foul subversion to drink."37
(17) Those who shield the impiety of Arius say that the only
begotten Word of God is of a different essence. They place him
second to the one who begot him and stoutly maintain that he is
a creature and begotten, and place among creation him
"through whom are all things"38 and "in whom are all things."39
Then, meddling in the mystery of the only begotten's dis-
pensation with flesh, most mischievously they corrupt the
force of the truth and also are subject to charges of the opinion
of Apollinaris for they confidently affirm thatthe Word of God
took flesh, but flesh in no way animated rationally. Rather they
say that he was in place of mind and soul in the body. But, as I
said, in doing this they are caught most villainously. In order
that we may not think that the human statements of our Lord
were made according to the dispensation and according to the
measure proper to the humanity since he became man, they
defraud his flesh of the rational soul indwelling in it. Thus they
drag him down and say that he is essentially among those less
than the Father and collect pretexts of their calumny against
him from the Holy Scriptures.
(18) But see, even now the emulators of their ignorance rise
up bitterly against those who do not admit the "empty prat-
tlings"40 of Nestorius, and besiege the true and blameless faith
after gathering together the garbage of their worthless ideas.
For they say that the divinely inspired Paul states concerning
Christ the Savior of us all, that "He emptied himself, taking the
form of a slave and being made like unto men and being found
in form as a man he humbled himself, becoming obedient to
death, even to death on a cross. Therefore God also has exalted
him and has bestowed upon him the name that is above every
name."41 And indeed somewhere else he says that, "God was in
Christ reconciling the world to himself"42 and again, "in whom
dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily."43 And they

37. Cf. Hb 2.15· 41. Phil 2.6-9.

38. Rom 11.36. 42. 2 Cor 5.19.
39. Col 1.16. 43· Col 2.9.
40. 1 Tim 6.20.
222 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

accommodate themselves to the words of Peter since he once

said, "how God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Spirit
and with power, and he went about doing good and healing all
who were in the power of the devil; for God was with him,"44
and again, "The times of this ignorance God has, it is true,
overlooked, but now he calls upon all men everywhere to
repent; inasmuch as he has fixed a day of judgment on which
he will judge the world with justice by a man whom he has
appointed, and whom he has guaranteed to all by raising him
from the dead."45
(19) By proposing these words and those stated in another
way according to his humanity and by fashioning sharp argu-
ments from their wretched considerations they at once ask, to
whom has God the Father given the name above every name?
To his own Word? And how is that not simply an incredible
thing, they say. For he was always God begotten of him accord-
ing to nature. This name would rightly be considered the name
above every name. For what name is beyond that of God by
nature? And whom did he anoint with the Holy Spirit or with
whom was God? And bringing in other subjects besides, they
jumble matters exceedingly and fill the minds of rather guile-
less men with uproar.
(20) Making distinctions in every direction, for they are
"sensual men, not having the Spirit,"46 and dividing the one
Christ and Son and Lord into two sons, they will be caught as a
result of their own undertakings. For they pretend to confess
one Christ and Son and say that his person is one, but dividing
him again into two hupostaseis separated and disjoined from
one another they completely sweep away the doctrine of the
mystery. They do indeed say that the one from a woman, that
is, the form of a slave, separately and by himself received the
name above every name, underwent the anointing of the Holy
Spirit and the continual abiding possession of God, that is, the
Word of God the Father. But they manifestly are belching up

44· Acts 10.38.

45· Acts 17.3 0 ,31.
46. Jude 19·
 LETTER 50 223

arguments that smell foully of fatuity the most extreme of all.

For "being evil" they would not be able "to speak good things"47
according to the saying of the Savior.
(21) Confessedly he was and is always God and Lord who
has his invisible and ineffable begetting from God the Father.
Because he was born of a woman according to flesh in a
marvelous manner and beyond us in the visitation of the Holy
Spirit upon her and the overshadowing of the power of God,4B
and because he endured a birth like unto us, for thus we state
he emptied himself and humbled himself and became obe-
dient to death and the cross,49 in this way and very rightly it is
stated that he received the name that is above every name, so
that "every knee bends to him of those in heaven, on earth and
under the earth, and every tongue will confess that the Lord
Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father."50
(22) For no reasonable creature was ignorant that the Word
who became man was God. For even if he came to be like unto
us and shared in like manner in blood and flesh,51 still he did
not therefore abandon being God nor did it make him cast
aside being what he was, for he remained adorable in the glory
of God the Father. His glory is to have his own Son ruling with
him and being adored with him even though according to the
dispensation he became man in order that he might save all
creation under heaven.
(23) Therefore, when it was believed on the part of the holy
angels and on our part who are on the earth that even in flesh
he is God by nature and in truth, then he is known to have
received the name above every name. Not that he profited in
the matter by way of an addition, for he who was and always is,
how could he receive as one not having, but rather because
God the Father illuminated the minds of all and has not
allowed it to be unknown that the incarnate Word is God by
nature, for he says, "No one can come to me unless the Father
who sent me draws him."52

47· Mt 12·34· 50. Cf. Phil 2.g-11.

48. Cf. Lk 1.35. 51. Heb 2.14.
49. Cf. Phil 2.6-g. 52. In 6·44·
224 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

(24) And his anointing also was with regard to his humanity.
Since the only begotten Son, who is begotten of the Father, is
holy according to nature just as is the Father, it is said that he
was anointed as man, that is, sanctified by the Father insofar as
he was manifestly a man. Hence the all-wise Paul writes about
him and about us, "For poth he who sanctifies and they who are
sanctified are all from one. For which cause he is not ashamed
to call them brethren, saying, 'I will declare thy name to my
brethren.' "53 Therefore when the only begotten, being holy
according to nature and sanctifying creation, bore the title of
our brother, then we state that he was anointed as a man
among us not despising the measure 54 proper and fitting to his
humanity because of the dispensation. For thus he speaks to
the divinely inspired Baptist, "It becomes us to fulfill all
justice."55
(25) But if God might be said to be with him, how did those
acute sophists not know that the Father is always by nature with
the Son being in him and having him with him? Or have they
not recalled Christ saying, "Have I been so long a time with
you, and you have not known me, Philip? He who has seen me,
has seen the Father."56 "I and the Father are one."57 "Do you
not believe that I am in the Father and the Father in me?"58 But
he also spoke elsewhere to his disciples saying, "The hour is
coming and has arrived for you to be scattered, each one to his
own house, and to leave me alone. But I am not alone, because
the Father is with me."59 Not as they think, who are stupidly
filled with the vomitings of others, that the Word being God
was as if he were one Son being with another son, the man
assumed. This is a cutting and a division introducing a duality
of sons. But God the Father was with the Son, that is, with the
Word of God made flesh and made man, for the Father is
inseparable from the Son.
(26) And even if God "will judge the world by a man whom
he has appointed,"60 no one in his right mind would think that

53. Heb 2.11,12. 57· In 10.30.

54. Cf. Eph 4.13. 58. In 14. 10.
55· Mt 3. 1 5. 59· In 16.3 2 .
56. In 14·9· 60. Acts 17.31.
 LETTER 50 225

Holy Scripture says that the only begotten, as ifhe was in a man
considered separate from the Son born of a woman, will judge
all under heaven. But we stoutly maintain rather that, of ne-
cessity, this is the holy thing to think, the very thing which
Christ says, "For neither does the Father judge any man, but all
judgment he has given to the Son, that all men may honor the
Son even as they honor the Father."61 For God the Word,
although made man62 and classed among men and named man
in common with us, nevertheless, will be judge as God and
Lord and the one Son,63 since God the Father is in him then
also. 54 For he has, as I said, the Father in him and he is in the
Father. Just as there is one God the Father from whom are all
things, so there is one Lord Jesus ,Christ through whom are all
things.
(27) They, nevertheless, distort into something ugly even
what was rightly said through the voice of the blessed Paul. For
he said, and very correctly, "God was truly in Christ, reconcil-
ing the world to himself."65 But they by again introducing a
certain coarse incision in the one Christ and Son totally tear
apart God the Word and say that he is in some other Christ
considered apart, in order that he may be considered to have
had an indwelling in a man rather than to have become incar-
nate. But, 0 wise men, the scope of Holy Scripture does not
permit these to be true. You have confused the reading and the
meaning of the ideas by turning them aside to what is im-
proper. Yet it is necessary for us to "bring every mind into
captivity to the obedience of Christ"66 as it is written. For God
was in him reconciling the world in Christ. When we are
reconciled to Christ, we effect reconciliation with God the
Father, since God the Word, who is begotten of him, is not
different from him as far as identity of essence is considered,
injuring himself in no way, even ifhe became man, as far as his
being the one Son by nature is concerned. He was this even
after he became flesh. That we have a reconciliation in Christ

61. In 5.22, 23. 64. Cf.Jn 14·11.

62. Cf. In 1.14. 65. 2 Cor 5.19.
63. 1 Cor 8.6. 66. Ibid. 10.5.
 ST. CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA

and that "he is our peace"67 who dares to deny? For he is "the
door"68 and "the way"69 and "in him dwells all the fullness of the
Godhead bodily."70
(28) But again the one who is sharp in theory and clever at
calumny lifts his ear upright and says, "if he who indwells is
one, and likewise he is another in whom he is said to dwell, how
is it not necessary to divide the hupostaseis and to say that each
one subsists apart, and then tell me, where at length is there
one person 71 left?" For if they pretend to say there is one
person of Christ, while there are two hupostaseis separate and
distinct, by all means there will be two persons also. But they
come in like legislators confirming in all ways and in every
manner what seems to them as being right. For they say, while
separating the hupostaseis, we unite the person.
(29) But how is this not incredible and ignorant and im-
possible? By speculation one would perceive, as I said, that the
flesh is of different essence from the Word united to it. But
since the divinely inspired Scriptures say that there is one Son
and Christ and Lord and the tradition of the faith has it so and
not otherwise, we, by asserting the indissoluble union of the
Word of God the Father with flesh, rationally animated, con-
fess that there is one Christ and Son. And since there is one
Son, we say that his is one person following in every way the
divine and holy Gospel and those who were from the begin-
ning eyewitnesses and servants of the Word. But we dismiss
from communion with us those who have been accustomed to
think something different from this and have turned them-
selves aside to what they should not by the inventions of inept
syllogisms, saying to them, "Walk by the light of your own fire
and by the flares you have burnt."72
(30) But since I have learned that some of these foolish men
go about saying that the perverse teaching of Nestorius has
prevailed among all the most God-fearing bishops in the East
and is considered to be right by them and that it is necessary to
follow it, I thought that the following ought to be made clear,
67. Eph 2.14. 70. Col 2.9.
68. In 10.7· 71. 1TpOUlIl1TOV, in Greek. See note 21.
69. Ibid. 14.6. 72. Is 50.11.
 LETTER 50 227

for the most God-fearing bishops throughout all the East along
with my 10rdJohn, the most God-fearing Bishop of the Church
of Antioch, made it clear to all through a written and clear
confession that they condemn the "profane novelties"78 ofNes-
torius and anathematize them with us and they never thought
them worthy of any consideration but follow the evangelic and
apostolic doctrines and harm in no manner the confession of
the Fathers.
(31) For they also confessed with us that the Holy Virgin is
the Mother of God 74 and did not add that she is the Mother of
Christ'5 or the Mother of a man,76 as those say who defend the
unhappy and loathed opinions of Nestorius. But they said
distinctly that there is one Christ and Son and Lord, God the
Word ineffably begotten of God the Father before all ages and
that he was begotten in most recent times of a woman accord-
ing to flesh, so that he is both God and man at once, perfect in
divinity and perfect in humanity. And they believe that his
person77 is one separating him in no way into two sons, or
christs, or lords. If some men telling lies, therefore, say that the
bishops of the East think anything different from these state-
ments, let them not be believed, but let them be sent away as
cheats and liars down to their father the devil so that they may
not upset those who desire to walk uprightly. If some men
fabricate letters for their own purposes and bring them
around as if they were written by the person of more illustrious
men than they, they ought not to be believed. How are those
who once confessed the faith in writing able to write something
else, as if they were carried away by repentance to the state of
not wishing to think the truth.
(32) Salute the brotherhood with you. The brethren with us
salute you in the Lord. I pray that you are well in the Lord.

73. 1 Tm 6.20. 76. 'avOplIl1ToTOKOo;.

74. 81l0TOKOo;. 77· 1TP0<1I1l1TOV, see note 71.
75. XPW'I'OTOKOo;.
 GENERAL INDEX
Numbers refer to letter and paragraph

Aaron, 41.3 Atticus, Bishop of Constantinople,

Abraham, 1.29, 1.30,5.7,31.1, 2.3, 10.6, 14.2
40.18,41.22,45.8,46.4,46.10, Baruch, 31.1
50 .4 Basil the Great, 14.2
Acacius, Bishop of Beroea, 14.1,
Beelphegor, 41.6
15.1,33.1,34.1,36.1,36.2,37.1, Bel, 29.1
38.2,44.8,48.1
Acacius, Bishop of Melitene, 40.1, Bithynia, 39.7
Bosor, 41.17
42.2 Bupha Martyr, a deacon, 10.2.
Acacius, Bishop of Scythopolis, 41.1
Adam, 1.37, 1.38,41.11,45.9 Candidianus, a count, 23.4, 23.6
Alexandria, 1.1, 1.6,2.1,8.2,17.1, Candidianus, a deacon, 29.3
18.1,19. 1,20.1,21.1,33. 12, Carrenus, 40.26
37. 1 ,39. 2 ,48. 2 Cassius, a messenger, 47.2
Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, Catholic Church, 17.7
1.9 Celestine, Pope, 2.2,11.1, 11 (a).6,
Alypius, a priest, 29.1 12.1,13. 2,16.3,17.3,17.4,18.2
Amelec, 26.3 19·2, 35. 1
Amonius, a messenger, 47.2 Chaeremon, 10.7
Anastasius, a priest, 10.1 Charmosynus, a priest, 37.1
Andrew, a bishop, 43.3, 44.8 Christ, Body of, 45.13
anthropolatreia, 46.10 conjunction of natures, 5.4, 11 (a). I ,
Antioch, 11.4, 45.15 II(a).2, 17.10, 18.4,40.12
Apollinaris, Bishop of Laodicea, Constantinople, 11.4, 11.5, 33.7,
5.8, 15. 1, 31.2, 33·9, 40.23, 36.3,40.2
4 0 . 24, 44·3, 45·5 crucifixion, 17.11, 26.1
apopompaios, 41.6
Arcadius, a bishop, 32.1 Dalmatius, a priest, 23.1
Aristolaus, tribune and secretary, Daniel, a bishop, 28.1
David, psalmist, 1.16, 1.33, 1.38,
33.12,34.1,35.2,36.1,37.1,
5.7,5. 10,28.2,31.6,41.20,45. 2,
37,3,38.1,40.3,47.2,48.1,48.3
Arians, 44.1 46. 10
Diodore, Bishop of Tarsus, 45.2,
Arius, 5.8, 6 Be 7.2, 29.2, 31.2, 33.9
40.22, 40.23, 40.24 45·3
diptychs, 11.3
Ascension, 17. 11, 50. 15
Dorotheus, Bishop of Marcianopo-
Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria,
lis, 8.1, 8.2, 11.4, 11.8, 14.1,48,5
1.6, 14.2, 29.2, 39.7, 39. 8,40.25, Dynatos Bishop of Nikopolis, 48.1
44·3, 44.8, 45. 14

229
 GENERAL INDEX

Edom, 41.17 Isaiah, 1.3, 1.31, 1.36,6807.3,31.6,

Egypt, 5.7, 11.5,33. 12,41.6 39,5,41.10
Elias, 29.1 Israel, 1.33,31.1
Elizabeth, 1.20
Emmanuel, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.21, Jacob,31.1
Jacob, father of Joseph, 5.7
1.28, 1.30, 1.31, 1.32, 1.36,
Jeremiah, 1.8
6807.3, 18.4,39,5,41.12,46.2,
Jerusalem, 1.3, 1.31, 31.6
46.12
Ephesus, 21.1, 22.1, 23.2, 23.4, Jesse, 46.10
Jews, 1.39,5.6,6807.2,26.1,4°.18,
33·7 41.13,46. 10
Ephesus, Council of, 27.4, 28.1,
28.2,33.5,33.7,33. 11 ,35. 1, Job,6807· 2
John, Bishop of Antioch, 12.7,
36.1,38.1,4°.7,4°.8,4°.27; date
of, 23.4; in Church of Mary 15.4,22.1,22.2,23.3,23.5,27.1,
Theotokos, 24.1 34.1,35.1,36.1,37.3,38.1,39.1,
Epictetus, Bishop of Corinth, 39.8, 4°.2,4°.4,4°.5,4°.26,47.1,
48.1,48.4,48.6,49.2,5°.3°
4°.25,44.8,45. 14 John the Baptist, 1.8, 1.20, 1.32,
Eucharist, 17.12
Eulogius, a priest, 23.1,37.1,44.1 5°·24
Eunomius, Bishop of Cyzicus, 31.2, John Chrysostom, 33.7
John, a count, 27.1, 28.1
33·9 John, evangelist, 1.17, 1.26, 1.28,
Eutherius, Bishop of Tyana, 48.5
excommunication, of Cyril and 6807.3, 10.6, 17,9, 17.10,41.13,
Memnon, 33.5 46,3
Joseph, husband of Mary, 5.7
Firmus, Bishop ofCaesarea, 32.1 Josue, son of Naue, 26.3
Flavian, a villain, 10.7 Juda, 1.31,31.6
Flavian, Bishop of Philippi, 12.7, Judaea, 1.32
32 • 1 Julian, emperor, 6807.2
forgeries, 2.1 Juvenal, Bishop of Jerusalem, 12.7,
13.3, 16.1,32.1
Gabriel, 39.5
Gregory, Bishop of Nazianzus, 14.2 Komarius, a bishop, 23.1
Habacuc, 1.16 Lampon, a priest, 3.1
Hades, 1.38,45.11,5°.11 Leontius, a deacon, 37.1
Himerius, Bishop of Nicomedia, Leviticus, 41.3, 41.15
48.5 Logos, 4.3
Holy Spirit, 1.10, 1.14, 1.16, 1.17,
Macedonia, 11.6, 11.7
1.25, 1.26, 1.27, 1.28, 1.31, 1.35,
Macedonian heresy, 45.2
1.36,5.7, 17. 16; procession of,
Manichaeans, 5.10
17. 17 Mark, evangelist, 29.2
Homer, Iliad, 39.8
Mary, Blessed Virgin, 1.4, 1.7, 1.8,
hypostasis, 15.2, 17.7, 17.10, 17. 13,
1.9,1.10,1.17,1.22,1.28,1.29,
17. 17, 17. 18, 17. 19.3, 17. 19.4,
1.30, 1.32, 1.35, 1.39, 2.2, 4·4,
4°.14,4°.15,5°.5,5°.6,5°.20, 4·7,5·7,8.1,8.2,10.1,10.8,11.4,
5°·28 11.8, 11(a).I, 13.2, 14.1, 17.7,
Incarnation, 1.18,2.3,4.3,5.4,5.5, 17. 18, 18.4,27,5,31.2,37.2,
23.2, 38.2, 40.15, 40.16, 44.6, 38.2,39.3,39.6,4°.10,4°.21,
45+ 45·5, 46 .4, 46,9 42.1,44.5,45.2,45,3,45.4,45.6,
Isaac, 41.22 5°.2,5°.3,5°.11,5°.13,5°.31;
 GENERAL INDEX

Christotokos, 10.8; Mother of Peter, apostle, 1.30, 17.10,33.10,

Christ, 40.10; Theotokos, 50.4 39.6,41.10,50.14,50.18
Matthew, evangelist, 6&7.3 Philip, apostle, 40.18, 50.25
Maximian, Bishop of Constantino- Philip, a priest, 32.1
ple, 30.1, 31.1, 32.2, 35. 1, 35.3, Philip, a priest of Constantinople,
36.3,37.2,38.3,40.2,40.4,48.1, II(a).6
48.3, 48.4, 48.6, 49.1 Philip, a priest of Rome, 40.26
Memnon, Bishop of Ephesus, 33.5 Phineas, 29.1
miracles, 17.16 phusis, 40.14, 44·2, 44·5, 45.6, 45·7,
Moses, 1.30, 1.33, 1.34, 1.35, 46.4,46.6,46.7,46.9,46.12
II(a).2, 31.3, 41.4, 41.5, 41.6, person, 40.14, 40.17, 42.1, 50.31
41.7,41.8,41.12 Posidonius, a deacon, II (a). I , 12.1,
Mysia, 39.7 12·3, 13.3
Potamon, a bishop, 23.1, 28.1
Nestorius, 2.1, 3.1, 4.1, 5.1, 8.1,
Projectus, a bishop, 32.1
8.2,9.1,9.2,10.5,11.4, II(a).I,
II (a).8, 13.1, 14.1, 16.1, 18.1, Rabbula, Bishop of Edessa, 34.1
19. 1,23.3,23.5,23.6,24. 1,26.2, Resurrection, 4.5, 5·4, II (a)·5,
26·3, 28.1, 31.2, 33·3, 33·5, 33.6, 17.11,41.17,45.8,45.12,50.15
33.7,33.10,33.11,33.12,34.1, Rhodes, 20.1
34.2,35.1,35.2,36.3,37.2,38.3, Roman Empire, 9.1, 33.11
40.2,40.5,40.6,40.7,40.9, Rome, Church of, 35.1
40.10,40.12,40.20,40.26,42.1, Rufus, Bishop of Thessalonica,
43·3, 44. 1, 44·5, 44. 6 , 45·3, 12.7,13.3,4 2.1,43. 1
45.10,45.14,45.15,47.13,48.1, Samuel, 1.16
48.4,48.6,49.1,49.2,50.1,
Saul, 1.16, 5.10
50.18,50.30; excommunication
sca pegoat, 41. I
of, 13.3, 14.2, 14·5, 18.5; Papal
decree against, 12.6, 17.3 Sixtus, Pope, 35.1, 40.26, 48.6
Nicaea, Council of, 1.9, 1.15, 4.3, Solomon, 1.14,31.3
Succensus, Bishop of Diocaesarea,
10.1,17.5,33. 2,33. 10,37. 1,
45. 1,46.1
38.2,39.3,39.7,40.3,48.1;
Creed of, 1.11, 17.6, 38.2, 39.3 Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrrhus,
Palladius, a bishop, 48.5 43.3,44. 8
Passion of Christ, 5·5, 5·7, 5.8 Theodosius II, emperor, 16.4,31.4,
Paul, 1.18, 1.22, 1.30, 1.32, 1.34, 35.2,36.1,38.1,40.4,43.2
Theodotus, Bishop of Ancyra, 32.1
1.35, 1.37, 1.38, 4·5, 5·3, 5·9,
Theognostus, a priest, 37.1
5. 10,31.1,39.5,39.7,40.19,
theopatheia, 46.10
41.11,41.12,41.17,45.8,45.9,
Theopemptus, a bishop, 28.1
45.12,46.10,50.2,50.8,50.21,
Theophilus, Bishop of Alexandria,
50 . 2 4
Paul, Bishop of Emesa, 36.1, 37.1, 14.2, 29. 1
Thomas, apostle, 41.17
37.3,39. 2,39.3,40.4,40.5,
Timothy, companion of Paul, 5.3
40.25,45.15,47.1,48.2
Timothy, a priest, 23.1
Paulinus, Bishop of Antioch, 15.2
Pentecost, 23.3 Valerian, Bishop of lconium, 50.1
 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

(Books of the Old Testament)

Numbers refer to letter and paragraph.

Genesis Deuteronomy
3·16: 17.18 6.13: 1.13,41.5
22.1-6: 41.22 7.20: 31.1
22.9-10: 41.22 12.1-3: 41.5
18. 1-3: 41.9

Exodus Joshua
7. 19, 20: 1.33 1.5: 11(a).2
12.11: 1.3 3.7: 11(a).2
14·21-22: 1.33
17.6,7: 1.33
17.9-13: 26,3 I Samuel (l Kings)
20·3: 41.5 2.30: 39. 1
29.18: 31.1, 41.12, 50.11 16.13: 1.16
32.7-9: 41.6 24.7: 1.16
32.26: 16.1
34·33-35: 41.7
2 Samuel (2 Kings)
3·1: 5. 10

Leviticus
4.22 , 23: 41.9 I Kings (3 Kings)
14.2-7: 41.15 18.7-45: 29. 1
16·5: 41.3 18.21: 29.1
16.7-10: 41.3
16.8, 10, 26: 41.3
16.15, 16: 41.12,41.3 Ezra
16.20-22: 41.3, 41.14 4.38 LXX: 32.1
26.11, 12: 1.34

Judith
16.2(3): 20.2
Numbers
12.8: 1.34
25.1-9: 41.6 Job
25.7-13: 29. 1
 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 233
Psalms Sirach
10(11).2: 50.16 3·21.22: 15.2
15(16).10: 41.13 4·28: 9·3
17(18)·7: 49. 1
26(27)·14: 25.1
37.17 LXX: 28.2 Isaiah
39(40).7-9: 17. 15.50.12 1.4: 1.39
44(45).8: 1.17.1.26 7. 14: 6&7·3. 39·5
46(47).6-9: 1.38 9. 1: 41.7
67(68).12: 41.2 11.9: 5.10
68(69).21: 26.1 14.20: 9. 1
74(75)·6: 25. 2.31.1 22.15-25: 31.6
79(80).19: 31.4 25.8: 17. 18
80(81).10: 1.13 26.12: 39.2
81(82).6: 1.18 32.6: 40.7
87(88).5: 41.12 33.20: 1.3
88(89)·7: 1.33 35.2: 1.3 1
88(89).io: 20.1 35.3-6: 1.3 1
95(96).11: 31.1. 39.1 40.9-11: 1.3 1
97(98).9: 17. 11 4 2.8: 41.4
100(101)·4: 46.1 42.18: 40.6
104(105).15: 1.1.6 49·9: 41.13
109(110).1: 1.28.6&7. 1 50 . 6: 39. 6
125(126).3: 25. 2 50 . 11 : 50 . 29
131(132).4.5: 10.10 53.4-6: 41.10
140(141).2: 21.1 53.5: 50.12
140(141)-4= 10·3 53.6: 1.32
145(146).8: 41.2 53·9: 45·9
53.12: 1.36.41.10
63. 1: 41.17
Proverbs
2.15: 31.3 Jeremiah
4.24: 11.4 1.5: 1.8
4.25-27: 40.6 4·3: 4 0 .6
4. 26 : 31.3
9.12 b. c LXX: 1.14
9. 18: 31.3. 50.11 Baruch
13·3: 11.4 3.36-38: 31.1
18.19: 30.2
22.28: 31.3. 39.7
Ezekiel
20.41: 50.11
Ecclesiastes 34.29: 31.4
7.26: 31.3 37. 26• 27: 1.34

Daniel
Wisdom 14·21: 29.1
1.1: 40.6. 46.1 14·27: 29. 1
234 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

Hosea Zephaniah
4.8: 41.9 2.1.2: 40.6
14. 10: 41.7

Zechariah
Micah 12.1: 1.20
3·9: 39.8• 46.6 13.6: 41.17

Habacuc
2.15: 50.16
3.13: 1.16

(Books of the New Testament)

Matthew Mark
1.1: 5.7 4·39: 15·3
1.16: 5.7 14.33-41: 5.8
1.18: 5.7
1.20: 5.7
1.21: 39.5 Luke
1. 23: 6&7·3 1.2: 31.3
1. 23. 24: 39·5 1.3°.3 1: 39·5
2.13: 5·7 1.35: 50.21
3·3: 1.32 1.37: 20.2. 21.3
3. 15: 5°·24 1.44. 45: 1.8
4.10: 1.13.41.5 1.57: 1.20
4. 16: 41.7 1.68: 32.2
5·44: 9·3 1.79: 41.7
7. 15: 45. 2 2.52: 5.8
8·3: 1.31 7.12-15: 1.31
10.20: 1.10.39.7 12·35: 1.3
10.32: 3°·1 15·5: 12·4
10.34.35: 16.1. 17. 2 22.19: 5·7
10·37: 17. 1 22.39-46: 5.8
10.38: 3°·2 22·43: 5.8
11.25-27: 41.24
12.34: 50.20
16.18: 6&7.2 John
17.25. 26: 1.30 1.1: 17.18
17.26: 1.30 1.3: 1.34
18.6: 4.2 1-4= 41.16
22.42-44: 5·7 1.14: 1.15. 1.26.4·7. 17·9. 18·4.
25.31-33: 41.8 4°.13.44.3.46.3.5°.7.5°.26
26.38-45: 5.8 1.18: 6&7.3
28.19: 19.1 2.1: 5.7
 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 235
2.19: 5.6 10.38: 1.17,17.9,5°. 18
3.6: 5°·2 16·7: 39·7
3. 13: 39·5,41.16 17.3°,31: 5°·18
3·34: 17·9 17.31: 17.11,5°.26
4.24: 5°·3
5.22, 23: 50.26
6.21: 6&7.2
6·44: 50.23 Romans
6.50: 30.1 1.3: 5·7
6.53: 17. 12 1.25: 5°·10
6,58: 3°·1 3.23: 17. 15
8.23: 41.16 3.24: 41.11
8.28-30: 17.10 4.25: 1.3 2
8·39, 40: 40.18 5.12-17: 41.11
8·40: 17. 14 5.12-21 :41.11
8.46 : 45·9 6·3: 1.37,41.19
10·7: 50.27 7. 25: 45·9
10.11: 12.2,32.2 8·3: 5·7
10.15: 31.1 8·3,4: 45. 8
10.15, 16: 1.32 8.8,9: 39·7
10.18: 1.38 8.15: 1.35
10.30: 1.14, 17.14,4°.18,5°.25 8.29: 50.3, 50.10
10.34: 1.18 8.31,32: 1.32
11.25: 17. 11 9·3-5: 40 . 19
13.12-16: 17. 10 9.5: 46.10
13. 13: 4. 1 11.3 6 : 5°·17
14.2,3: 41.24 16.16: 19.4,20.3,21.3
14. 6 : 5°·27
14·9: 17.14,5°. 25
14.9, 10: 40.18
14. 10: 1.14, 50.25 I Corinthians
14.11: 5°·26 1.31: 1.7
14. 16, 17: 17,9 2.8: 1.39,46.10
14.23: 1.24 2.16: 50.2
14. 2 7: 39. 2 4.9: 3°·1
16.13: 17.17 6.17: 17. 10
16.14: 17.16, 17.17 7.40: 1.35
16.32: 5°·25 8·5,6: 40.19
20.17: 17.10 8.6: 17.10,17.14,45.4,5°.26
20.26-28: 41.17 9.17: 11.6
11.16: 5.10
11.24: 5.7
Acts 11.26: 17.12
1.14: 5·7 15·3: 5·7, 41.10
2.1-4: 17·9 15. 17: 1.37
2.2T 41.13 15.20: 17.11,41.23,5°.14
2.31: 11 (a).5 15.26: 6&7. 1
4.2: 17. 11 15·47: 39·5
9.5: 21.2 15·53: 17. 11
 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE

2 Corinthians Colossians
3. 13- 17: 41.7 1.15,16: 50.14
4·3,8, 18: 41.7 1.16: 50.17
5.14: 50 .12 1.16,17: 1.15
5. 16: 45. 12 1.18: 17.11, 17.19.12,45.11,
5. 19: 50.18, 50.27 50 . 1 4
5. 21 : 41.10, 45.9, 50.4, 50.10 2·3: 41.24
6.16: 1.34 2.5: 20.1
10·5: 50.27 2·9: 17.9,50.18,50.27
10.8: 15.4
13·3: 41.19
13·5: 4. 2 1 Timothy
1.7: 50.2
2·5: 1.33, 17. 15
Galatians 2.6: 31.1
4·4: 17. 10,50.3,50 .14 2.8: 21.1, 26,3
4·4, 5: 1.30, 31.2 4. 13- 16 : 5·3
6.17: 30.1 4. 15: 5·9
3. 19: 1.33 6.12: 10.10
6.20: 33.11, 38.3, 40.6, 50.18,
5 0 .3 0
Ephesians
1.7: 1.37
2·14: 33. 11 , 39. 1, 50 .27 2 TIMOTHY
3. 10,11: 41.17 3. 16: 41.3
3. 17: 1.35 4.7: 10.10
4·5: 25. 2, 39·4, 41.18
4.10: 1.38
4. 13: 1.3, 50.24 Titus
5.1,2: 41.12 3·9: 12·3
5.2: 17.15, 17.19.10,31.1,50.11
5.5: 1.18
6.12: 30.2 Hebrews
6.19: 40.20 1.2: 40.10, 40.21
1.3: 1.7,1.14,17. 14
1.6: 1.28,6&7.1,5°.10
Philippians 1.13: 6&7.1
1.29: 30.1 2·9: 4.5,17. 11 ,41.11
2·5-7: 1. 23 2.11,12: 50.24
2.5-8 : 5·5 2.14: 1.29, 1.30, 17. 19.5,50.15,
2.6,7: 41.16 5 0 . 22
2.6-8: 1.22, 1.29, 50.8 2.14- 17: 45. 8
2.6-9: 40.15, 50.18, 50.21 2.16: 1.29,31.1,46.4
2·7: 1.35,31.2,39.6,45.5,46.4, 2.17: 1.29, 1.3°,31.1,46.4,50.4,
50.3,50 .14 50.10
2·7,8: 17·7, 17.10, 17. 14 3. 1: 17.15, 17. 19. 10
2.9-11: 50 .21 3. 1-6 : 1.34
2.15: 31.3 4.14,15: 17. 10
3. 14: 31.3 4. 15: 50.4, 50.10
4.13: 30 .1 6.19: 31.2
 INDEX OF HOLY SCRIPTURE 237
7·7: 1.27 4. 14: 18·5
9.12: 41.12 5.8: 21.2
9. 2 4: 50 • 1 5
10.1: 41.7, 41.21
1O·5-T 17.15,50.12 2 Peter
11.35: 17.2 1.5-8: 1.3
12.2: 1.35 2.1: 4.1
13·7: 31.3
13.8: 40.19
13.12: 41.12 1 John
1.7:41.11
2.1,2: 41.13
1 Peter 2.20: 1.17, 1.28
1.18,19: 31.1 2.27: 1.17
2.22: 45.9 3·5: 45·9
2.24: 1.32,41.10,50.14
3. 1 5: 4 0 . 8
3. 18: 1.37,41.16 Jude
4·1: 5·7, 33. 10, 39.6, 46.11 19: 50.20