The exegetical method of St. Cyril of Alexandria in his “Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews”

Priest Maxim Sergeevich Nikulin – Master of Theology, Master of Humanities and Social Sciences (École Pratique des Hautes Études), graduate student of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy (maximvzzz@gmail.com). A study of the exegetical method of St. Cyril of Alexandria using the example of one of his works - “Commentaries on the Epistle to the Hebrews.” The author of the article relies on the monograph by M.-O. Boulnois, dedicated to the triadology of the saint, but also containing extensive information about the hermeneutical foundations of Trinitarian disputes. In a specific work by St. Cyril, the author of the article notes the characteristic exegetical principles used by the saint in many of his works, namely: the definition of “skopos” of a biblical passage; distinguishing between “time”, “person” and “circumstances” of a fragment; the double Christological language of Scripture; polemical aspect of biblical exegesis; a special order of interpretation of verses; interpretation of Scripture by Scripture; consideration of the Old Testament in the light of the New; use of biblical florilegies; different types of exegesis of the same verse. The article traces the method of refuting St. Cyril in his “Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews” on the Christological views of Theodore of Mopsuestia on the basis of his incorrect hermeneutical principles. In his monograph on the triadology of St. Cyril of Alexandria, M.-O. Boulnois devoted a chapter to the study of the exegetical method of the saint 1 . According to the scientist's conclusions, the exegesis of St. Cyril is both dogmatic and polemical in nature, and its context is a refutation of the positions of his opponents. According to St. For Cyril, in order to correctly interpret a verse or episode of Holy Scripture, it is necessary to first study its context. First you need to determine the σκοπός (“goal, reason, meaning, intention”) of the text. It must be borne in mind that Scripture has a double meaning: literal (ἱστορία) and spiritual (θεωρία). Some texts have a literal meaning as skopos, others have a spiritual meaning. Not only specific passages have their skopos, but also all of Holy Scripture, the purpose of which is the Incarnation. Another method of exegesis of St. Cyril is the distinction between “time” (καιρός), “person” (πρόσωπον) and “circumstances” (πρᾶγμα) of the passage. This triad was already present in St. Athanasius of Alexandria, especially emphasizing the importance of defining "time", namely the moment before or after the Incarnation of the Word. St. Athanasius sets out his hermeneutic principle in the First Oration Against the Arians as follows. In this case (Heb. 1:4) it is necessary to act in the same way as in all Divine Scripture, namely, to accurately determine the time (καιρὸν) about which the apostle speaks, then the person and circumstance (τὸ πρόσωπον καὶ τὸ πρᾶγμα) of what is written, so that the reader who does not know these points or also others, have not moved away from the true meaning (τῆς ἀληθινῆς διανοίας) 2 . And St. Cyril speaks of the same method, for example, in his “Book of Treasures about the Most Holy and Consubstantial Trinity”: Anyone who begins to study the Divine Scriptures, first of all, should pay attention to the time (τὸν καιρὸν) at which this or that saying is said, and to the person (πρόσωπον) by whom, or for the sake of which, or about whom it is spoken 3 . St. Cyril uses the category of “time” to, firstly, determine the literal (historical) meaning of the passage, and secondly, to separate two periods of dispensation: before and after the Incarnation of the Word. The concept of “circumstance” often has a more technical meaning for the saint, namely πράγματα correspond to two realities, two natures in Christ, Divine and Human. According to St. Cyril, it is necessary to take into account the double language of Scripture, that is, to keep in mind that the Word of God can speak either Humanly or Divinely at the same time of His Incarnation. To correctly interpret the text, it is necessary to understand the intentions of Christ, prompting Him to speak either according to the Divine or according to the Human nature. This distinction between a double language (Divine and Human) was already developed before the Nestorian controversy. After these preliminary remarks, borrowed from the study of M.-O. Boulnois, let us consider the exegetical method of St. Cyril using the example of his “Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews”, in which we find traces of the above hermeneutic principles. In the preface of the book by St. Cyril expresses his opinion on the purpose (σκοπὸς) of the Epistle to the Hebrews. According to him, the goal of St. The Apostle Paul is to show that the Old Testament is a prototype (τύποι) of the New and that the Law of Moses, intended for the Jews, is no longer relevant (περιττὴν) for Christians. In the course of his commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, the saint generally follows the order of the verses of the book (which, however, did not yet exist at that time). He distributes the text of the message into groups according to the topic he wants to touch upon in his interpretation. For example, commenting on Hebrews 1:1, St. Cyril reveals the theme of God's economy in the Old Testament; Heb.1:2a – the saving economy of the Son in the Incarnation; Hebrews 1:2b – inheritance of Christ; Hebrews 1:2c – The divinity of Christ; Heb.1:3ab - The Divinity of the Word, etc. The saint quotes and interprets the verses of Heb.1:3cd-4 together, because for him these verses speak of the suffering and glorification of Christ. He does likewise with Hebrews 1:10-12 (quoting Ps. 102:26-28) to show that the Word remained God in kenosis, etc. When the Epistle to the Hebrews quotes from a book of the Old Testament, St. Kirill sometimes turns to this Old Testament book and follows its order. For example, having considered the question of the inheritance of the Son (Heb.1:2) 4, the saint moves on to the question of His adoption (Heb.1:5) 5. He probably does this following the order of the second psalm, because Ps. 2:7 (quoted in Hebrews 1:5) speaks of adoption, while Ps. 2:8 speaks of the inheritance of the Son. Having interpreted Hebrews 1:5, the saint resumes the theme of the inheritance of Christ, commenting on Hebrews 1:2b 6. Commenting on the verses of the Epistle to the Hebrews, St. Cyril also quotes verses from other biblical books as evidence for his interpretation. For example, interpreting Hebrews 1:1, the saint writes: “God spoke to the ancients in the Spirit (ἐν Πνεύματι) through (διὰ) the mouth of the saints and through (διὰ) the voice of the prophets” 7 . As a biblical argument for his thought, St. Cyril quotes Zechariah 1:5–6, which uses the same preposition regarding the action of the Holy Spirit: “Your fathers, where are they? And the prophets, will they live forever? Accept My rules and My statutes, all that I command in My Spirit (ἐν πνεύματί μου) to My servants the prophets.” Often the same biblical quotations appear together in the works of the saint. Therefore, we can assume that they were part of the biblical florilegium, illustrating one or another theological point. For example, commenting on Heb.1:1, after quoting Hos.12:11 St. Cyril cites Is.52:6–7: “I am the One who speaks, I am present like spring on the mountains, like the feet of one who brings good tidings of peace, who brings good tidings of good news.”8 In the “XIII Festal Epistle” (dated 425), focusing on the Mystery of the Incarnation, St. Cyril had already used Isaiah 52:6–7 in connection with Hebrews 1:1–2: To indicate the time (καιρὸν) of the Incarnation, so long awaited by us, the Word from God the Father (ὁ ἐκ Θεοῦ Πατρὸς Λόγος), as if It had already become like us (καθ’ ἡμᾶς γεγονὼς), proclaimed in advance with a loud voice: “Speaker Himself, I am present like spring on the mountains, like the feet of one who brings good news (εὐαγγελιζομένου) about peace, who brings good news (εὐαγγελιζόμενος) good” (Isa. 52:6–7). “In many ways and in various ways God, who spoke to the fathers in the prophets, at the end of these days spoke to us in the Son” (Heb. 1:1–2), thanks to whom we blossomed into incorruptibility and life 9 . This is followed by an allegorical exegesis of Isa. 52:6–7, in which the saint says that it was Christ who was for humanity “like spring on the mountains” and “like the feet of one who brings good tidings of peace, who brings good news.” The first image he uses is the image of spring coming and conquering winter, which St. Kirill also often illustrates with a quote from the Song. 2:10–13. The second image is of a messenger proclaiming peace to a country attacked by barbarians. We find together quotations of Hebrews 1:1-2 and Isa. 52:6–7 also in the “Commentary on the Gospel of John” 10, “Dialogues on the Trinity” 11 and “Commentary on the Book of the Prophet Isaiah” 12. Sometimes St. Cyril uses verses from Hebrews to interpret other verses in the same epistle. For example, in commenting on Hebrews 1:2c, he quotes Hebrews 13:8 because it also deals with the deity of Christ. Interpreting Hebrews 2:17–18, the saint discusses the high priesthood of Christ and cites Hebrews 10:4 to prove the lower status of the Old Testament 14. In the commentary on Hebrews 3:1 St. Cyril continues to develop the theme of the high priesthood of Christ and quotes Hebrews 9:11–12 to show that the sacrifice of Christ is superior to the sacrifices of the priests of the Old Testament, 15 etc. Often the saint explains quotations from the Old Testament through the New. For example, in interpreting Ps. 8:2–3, he uses the fact that Christ quotes Ps. 8:3 during His entry into Jerusalem (Matt. 21:16). St. Cyril cites passages from John 12 and Matthew 21, describing the same gospel episode. He concludes that David, in the eighth psalm, foresees the Son becoming man and riding on a colt, admires His Incarnation and turns his prayer to Him 16. It should be taken into account that the Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews is, first of all, a polemical work. Therefore, the saint’s exegesis often aims to refute the theses of his opponents. Let us consider the exegetical method of St. Cyril using the example of his interpretation of the verses Hebrews 2:6–9, quoting and commenting on Ps.8:5–7. The saint interprets these verses in two fragments. The first fragment 17 does not seem to have a polemical orientation. In it, the saint first presents a “summary of faith” that sets the framework for the interpretation of subsequent verses. The first man was created by God in His own image and likeness. He received great honor and command to rule over creation. But because of Adam's crime, human nature became sick. As a result of Adam's sin, man was deprived of his blissful state, lost the Divine glory, the original blessings and became corruptible. However, Christ saved humanity and made it possible for man to regain lost benefits. Based on this introduction by St. Cyril carries out an anthropological exegesis of Ps. 8:5–7. According to him, in Ps.8:5 St. the prophet David is surprised that God visits man, although man came from the earth and is of little importance. Ps.8:6 shows, according to the saint, that human nature was created inferior to the angelic nature. However, God gave man honor and glory (Ps. 8:6) and appointed him as the head of all creation (Ps. 8:7). However, Hebrews 2:8 says that the world has not yet been subjected to man. From this the saint concludes that St. The Apostle Paul gives an eschatological exegesis of Ps. 8:5–7, which he calls “mystical” (ἐξήγησιν μυστικὴν) 18 . Following this instruction from the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, St. Cyril is looking for another point (καιρός) for the interpretation of Ps.8:5–7 19 . Thus, the saint interprets Ps.8:5–7 through the prism of Hebrews 2:8. He concludes that St. The prophet David and the apostle Paul (“secret leaders”) speak about the estatological era. So, St. Cyril does not carry out a Christological exegesis of Ps. 8:5–7, as the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews apparently does in Hebrews 2:9. For the saint, Hebrews 2:9 speaks of the restoration of human nature by Christ. As P.M. pointed out in his article. Parvis 20, in the second fragment there are 21 St. Cyril refutes the exegesis of Ps.8:5–7 of Theodore of Mopsuestia. Here is an excerpt from Theodore's Treatise on the Incarnation, which St. refers to. Kirill. What is Man, that You remember Him, or the Son of Man, that You visit Him?” (Ps. 8:5). Let us therefore inquire (σκοπῶμεν) who is the Man about whom he [David] marvels and admires, because the Only Begotten (ὁ μονογενὴς) has honored (κατηξίωσεν) His memories and visits. But the fact that this is not said about every person (οὐ περὶ παντὸς ἀνθρώπου) was shown above. And that (this was not said) also about one of the accidental (creations) (ούδὲ περὶ ἑνός τινος τῶν τυχόντων), this is also very clear. But in order to omit all this, we will present the testimony of the apostle, the most worthy of faith 22. Indeed, the apostle writes to the Jews, speaking about Christ, and, affirming His Person (personamque), which is not accepted by them, says this: “Someone has testified somewhere, saying: “What is Man, that You remember Him, or the Son of Man, that You visit Him? For a little while You made Him a little lower than the angels, You crowned Him with glory and honor, You set Him over the works of Your hands, You put all things under His feet” (Ps. 8:5-7; Heb. 2:6-8) And, having brought this testimony, he [the apostle] said, interpreting it: “When He put all things in subjection to Him, He left nothing unsubdued to Him. Now we do not yet see that all things are subjected to Him” (Heb. 2:8). Since there were doubts, instructing us who this Man was, he [the apostle] concluded from the word written by blessed David: “We see that Jesus was made a little lower than the angels for a little while, (but) crowned with glory and honor because of the sufferings of death (Heb. 2:9). So, if we are taught by the Gospels that blessed David addressed everything (said) in the psalm to the Lord, etc., and that “You remember Him” (memor es), “You visit Him” (uisitas), “You have diminished” (minorasti), “You have subdued” (subiecisti); and if we learn from the apostle that David speaks about Jesus, saying that (God) remembers Him, visited Him, but also that (God) subjected everything to Him after humiliating Him for a short time before the angels, then stop at least this time your shamelessness and acknowledge what is due! Indeed, you see, O most wicked of all people, how great is the difference of natures (quanta naturarum est differentia) that (David) admires One [Only Begotten] because He is pleased to remember Man and visit Him, and to make Him a partaker of (gifts) greater than those of whom He (already) made Him a partaker (ceterorumque participem facere, quorum eum participem fecit). But the Other [Christ] (David) admires, on the contrary, because He deserved to become a partaker of such great (gifts) surpassing His nature (tantorum particeps esse supra suam naturam meruit). And the One [Only Begotten] (David) is admired as the Benefactor (tamquam beneficium dans), and far superior (magna praestans), and (being) above the nature of the Beneficent (supra naturam eius qui consequitur beneficium). And the Other [Christ] (David admires) as the One who is Benefited (tamquam beneficium consequens) and the One who receives from Him [the Only Begotten] greater (gifts) in comparison with what He [Christ] is (et maiora quam est ab eo suscipiens) 23. From the above it is clear that the Bishop of Mopsuestia, on the contrary, uses Hebrews 2:9 to exegesis Ps.8:5–7. Therefore, he remains more faithful to the letter of Hebrews. Thus, Theodore interprets Ps. 8:5–7 Christologically and identifies as the “person” (πρόσωπον) of the passage the Man Christ, different in nature from the Only Begotten Word of God. In the second passage under consideration in the Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews, St. Kirill first gives the exegesis of his opponent, quoting and retelling his thought 24. However, to the saint the Christological exegesis of Ps. 8:5–7 seems dangerous, since it divides the Word and Christ. Having outlined the interpretation of the eighth psalm of Theodore, St. Kirill begins to comment on the psalm from its beginning. In his opinion, in Ps.8:2–3 St. David speaks of Christ as the Word incarnate, and in Ps. 8:5-7 the prophet speaks of humanity being saved by the Word Incarnate. Thus, St. Cyril carries out a christological exegesis of Ps. 8:2–3, but repeats the anthropological exegesis of Ps. 8:5–7, which we examined in the previous fragment. The saint states that the purpose (σκόπος) [Such an emphasis in this word (here and below) in the printed edition. – Editor AB) Ps.8:5–7 is the restoration of humanity in the eschatological era 25. Commenting on the verse Heb.2:9, which is itself a Christological exegesis of Ps.8:5, St. Cyril says, however, that St. The apostle Paul understands the person in the psalm as a person in general (ὡς ἐν ἑνὶ προσώπῳ τὸν καθόλου σημαίνων ἄνθρωπον), and not as the One Man Christ (περὶ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου) 26 . Thus, according to St. Cyril, Theodore incorrectly identified the person (πρόσωπον) and the goal (σκόπος) Ps.8:5–7. According to the saint, St. The apostle Paul wrote Hebrews 2:9 to point to the One who restored man after the fall, and not to interpret Psalm 8:5–7 Christologically. That is, in the second passage the saint actually repeats what he had already said in the first. In the Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews we also find that St. Kirill sometimes carries out two types of exegesis of the same verse. For example, in Hebrews 6:7–8, the author of Hebrews compares the righteous to a land that produces useful plants, and sinners to a land that produces thorns and thorns. For St. Cyril, the land that produces thorns is an image (παρεικάζοιτο) of a careless soul. The verb παρεικάζω is often used by the saint in order to introduce analogies or images that reflect spiritual reality 27 . The soul received God's gift (seed), but did not produce fruit, so it must be burned. Having presented a tropological interpretation, St. The saint also gives typological exegesis. The land that produced thorns also symbolizes the people of Israel, who at first were as fertile as a vineyard (Hos. 10:1), but then produced thorns (Is. 5:4) and became wild 28. Commenting on Hebrews 13:8, St. Cyril mentions the exegetical rule of distinguishing between double language regarding Christ, the Word incarnate 29 . The saint distinguishes three groups of biblical verses that speak of the Word either according to Humanity (ἀνθρωποπρεπεῖς), or according to Divinity (θεοπρεπεῖς), or in two ways (μέσαι). He includes Hebrews 13:8 among the latter. The saint also expresses this double language in other terms - bodily (σωματικῶς) and spiritual (πνευματικῶς) 30 . 5. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Epistulae paschales sive Homiliae paschales. Lettres I–VI/introd. gen. P. Évieux, introd. crit., texte grec W. H. Burns, trad. et notes L. Arragon, M.-O. Boulnois, P. Évieux, M. Forrat, B. Meunier // SC. T. 372. – Paris, 1991; Lettres VII–XI / dir. P. Évieux, texte grec W. H. Burns, trad. et notes L. Arragon, P. Évieux, R. Monier // SC. T. 392. – Paris, 1993; Lettres XII–XVII / texte grec W. H. Burns, trad. et notes M.-O. Boulnois, B. Meunier // SC. T. 434. – Paris, 1998; Lettres XVIII–XXX // PG. T. 77. – Lutetiae Parisiorum, 1859. – Col. 800–982. 6. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Fragmenta in sancti Pauli Epistulam ad Hebraeos / Introd., ed., et not. P. E. Pusey // CAO. T. 5. – Oxonii, 1872. – P. 362–440. 7. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Thesaurus de sancta et consubstantiali Trinitate // PG. T. 75. – Lutetiae Parisiorum, 1859. – Col. 9–656. 8. Theodorus Mopsuestenus. De Incarnatione (fragm.) / ed. H. B. Swete // Theodori episcopi Mopsuesteni in Epistolas B. Pauli Commentarii. T. 2. – Cambridge, 1882. – P. 290–312. 9 . Cyril of Alexandria, St. Book of Treasures about the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity / trans. and comm. R.V. Yashunsky, entry. Art. G.I. Benevich. – St. Petersburg: Oleg Abyshko Publishing House, 2014. – 384 p. 1. Boulnois M.-O. Le paradoxe trinitaire chez Cyrille d'Alexandrie. Herméneutique, analyzes philosophiques et argumentation théologique. – Paris, 1994. 2. Parvis P. M. The Commentary on Hebrews and the Contra Theodorum of Cyril of Alexandria // JTS (NS). – 1975. – No. 26.2. – P. 415–419. CAO = Sancti Patris nostri Cyrilli archiepiscopi Alexandrini [opera], 7 vol. /ed. P. E. Pusey. Oxonii, 1868–1877 (reprint: Bruxelles, 1965). JTS (NS) = Journal of Theological Studies. New Series. PG = Patrologiae Cursus Completus. Series Graeca/ed. J. P. Migne. SC = Sources chrétiennes. Priest Maxim Nikulin. The Exegetical Method of St. Cyril of Alexandria in His Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. This article focuses on the exegetical method of St. Cyril of Alexandria used in one of his works – Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews. The author relies on the important monograph of M.-O. Boulnois, which is devoted to the saint’s triadology, but also contains extensive information about the hermeneutic foundations for the trinitarian disputes. In this particular work of St. Cyril, the author of the article finds exegetical principles characteristic of the Alexandrian father, used throughout his works, namely: the definition of the “skopos” of the biblical passage; the distinction between “time”, “person” and “circumstances” of the fragment; the double Christological language of Holy Scripture; the polemical aspect of biblical exegesis; a peculiar order of commenting on the verses; the technique of Scripture interprets Scripture; consideration of the Old Testament in the light of the New; the use of biblical florilegies; and different types of exegesis of the same verse. The article traces the way St. Cyril in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews refutes the theological views of Theodore of Mopsuestia based on the latter’s incorrect hermeneutic position. Boulnois M.-O. Le paradoxe trinitaire... P. 55–102. Athanasius Alexandrinus, st. Oratio I contra Arianos. I, 54, 1. Translation by the author of the article. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Thesaurus... XX, 337b. Translation: Cyril of Alexandria, St. Book of Treasures about the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity / trans. and comm. R.V. Yashunsky, entry. Art. G.I. Benevich. St. Petersburg, 2014. P. 199. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Fragmenta in sancti Pauli Epistulam ad Hebraeos. P. 365. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Epistulae paschales... XIII // SC. T. 434. P. 90. Translation by the author of the article. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Commentarii in Joannem. P. 57–58. It's him. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. De sancta Trinitate Dialogue. III, 481cde, 482a. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Commentarius in Isaiam prophetam. V, I, 1153a. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Fragmenta in sancti Pauli Epistulam ad Hebraeos. P. 367. Ibid. P. 382, 20–384, 33. Parvis P. M. The Commentary on Hebrews... P. 416. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Fragmenta in sancti Pauli Epistulam ad Hebraeos. P. 386, 2–391, 7. Further, the fragment was preserved only in Latin translation. Theodorus Mopsuestenus. De Incarnatione, X. P. 301–302. Translation by the author of the article. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Fragmenta in sancti Pauli Epistulam ad Hebraeos. P. 386–387. Boulnois M.-O. Le paradoxe trinitaire... P. 110. Cyrillus Alexandrinus, st. Fragmenta in sancti Pauli Epistulam ad Hebraeos. P. 406.