Message to the clergy of Constantinople, confused by dissent in the church

Letters to St. Cyril of Alexandria relates to the emergence and development of the Nestorian dispute, the Third Ecumenical Council, negotiations with Antioch and the achievement of peace, the controversy regarding Diodorus of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia, etc. In his “Message to the Constantinople Clergy, Confused by Dissent in the Church” (circa 430), St. Cyril of Alexandria rejects the accusations of the Nestorians that he teaches about the suffering of the deity of the Word. He writes that the arguments of opponents only cover up their doctrine of “two Sons” united by “unity of Persons.” The saint points out that the terms “Christ Mother” and “Receiver of God” used by Nestorius have no basis either in the Holy Scriptures or in the patristic tradition. I read the entry you sent to me. From it I learned that Anastasius the presbyter, in his speech to you, tried to show that he was looking for unanimity and peace; he said about me: “our way of thinking is the same as his in his letter to the monastics.” But afterwards, deviating to his own way of thinking, he spoke about me: “and he said that the holy council did not use the word: Mother of God.” But I wrote this: the council, even if it did not use the words of the Mother of God, acted very well, because in its time there were no troubles such as now, and therefore there was no need to expose what did not require research. The Council, if you delve into the essence of its thoughts, recognized that the Holy Virgin Mary is the Mother of God; because he says that he who was born of the Father, the One by whom all things came into being, became incarnate, became man, suffered, rose from the dead, ascended into heaven and will come to judge the living and the dead; but does not say that the Word, born from the nature of the Father, died or was pierced by a spear in the side. What kind of rib does He who is incorporeal have, tell me? how would life die? But the Word, having united Himself with the flesh when it was subjected to suffering, appropriates suffering to itself, because His own body suffers. Those who say otherwise are false and deluded. That they are seduced and carry the poison of evil in their hearts can be seen from the following. To the martyr, Deacon Wufa, who carefully takes part in church affairs, they wrote two letters: one composed by Photius, or someone else, against my letter to the monastics; and the other, which makes up a small notebook, has a strange title, in the following words: “against those who, in the doctrine of the union of natures (in Christ), either humiliate the deity of the Only Begotten, or idolize humanity.” In the preface an attack is made on heretical blasphemies, which are presented very harshly; then the writer tries to prove that it was the body that suffered, and not the Word of God, since, according to him, some say that the Divine Word, not involved in suffering, suffered. But no one has ever reached such recklessness. The Holy Council, as I have often said, said that the Word itself suffered - He by whom all things came into being, but suffered in the flesh, according to Scripture. It is said that the Word itself suffered when His body suffered, just as we say about a person that his soul suffers when only its body suffers, because it, by its nature, is not subject to suffering. And as their hidden thought is to admit two Christs and two Sons, of whom one is only man, and the other is only God, and to allow the union of only persons (and not natures): then this is why they are so flowery in words, so skillful “not to bear the guilt of sins,” as Scripture says (Psalm 140:4). When you happen to speak with them, then tell them: you are not doing well that you are causing some to embarrass your bishop with your idle talk, and by your favor and approval you are making them an instrument of your malice. But this is not the cause of sorrow; your bishop is not opposed to this. What saddens all bishops, Eastern and Western, is that a teaching about Christ has arisen that is not only wrong, but perverted. To prove this, it is enough to point out what is contained in the conversations of Nestorius and what no one has ever said in the churches. This teaching is as follows: Nestorius says: “I measure the people’s love for me not by their cries, but by their zeal for teaching, by the way they think about the divinity and humanity of the Lord.” After a few words, we read: “As I carefully observe the people, I see that they have deep reverence and the warmth of piety; but in the knowledge of God it is full of imprecise concepts. The fault is not with the people themselves; but the fact is that (I’ll say closer to the point) the teachers did not have time to convey to him any more correct teaching.” How? Did his predecessors really not devote time to teaching the people? Is he really more pious than John? Is he really more sensible than blessed Atticus, or at least equal to him? What is this arrogance based on? Wouldn't it be better for him to sincerely admit that he brought a strange, unprecedented teaching, one that not one of the holy churches, not a single meeting of believers thought about as absurd? Until now I had nothing to do with him. But how good it would be if he repented and confessed the right faith! And for what he did against me, that he aroused enemies against me, irritated them against me, he will give an answer to God. It is not at all surprising that we are slandered by the most insignificant people in the city, such as: Chaeremon, Victor, Sophronius and the servant of Flavian, who is everywhere raising troubles: at all times there are evil people, to the detriment of both themselves and others. But let the one who incites them against us know that we are not afraid of either a long journey or the labor of defending ourselves before their court, as soon as circumstances require it. It usually happens that the Savior’s providence, regarding even small and insignificant matters, gathers a council in order to cleanse its Church, which contains an immaculate, pure and good faith. And that unfortunate man, even if many high-ranking people, according to his request, were my accusers, do not hope to be a judge in my case, even if the right to do so was given to him by the amphictyon. Upon my arrival there, I will demand a different trial, and he himself, if God pleases, will have to justify himself in his blasphemous words. We do not shy away from the world in the least; and we also strive for it, if only they profess the right faith and stop saying those strange words with which they cause death. The notebook they sent with his blasphemous teaching contains so much that is perverse that the reader is desecrated by its uncleanness. He blames Scripture, or what is also the holy council, for the fact that the council used a word that had not been used before, calling the Holy Virgin the Mother of God; but we also ask them: where in Scripture did they find the word: Mother of Christ, or the word: Receiver of God? By the way, he also added the following words: “by using the word Receiver of God, we do not equate the Virgin with God.” He doesn't understand what he's saying. If the Virgin did not give birth to God, did not have Christ in her womb, who is God, then how did she become the recipient of God? He also calls the Father himself the Mother of God. I don’t know where he read such words. Besides this, many other false thoughts follow one after another in his interpretative writings; they will remain (with me) until time, if he does not repent. I received and read your petition sent to me, which, not without our opinion, should be presented to the emperor. Since it contains a lot of evidence against the one who is there with you - whether it is a brother or some other name to call him - I kept him with me so that he would not think of saying: “You accused me before the emperor as a heretic.” We presented the request in different words: we ask not to entrust him with the trial, pointing out his hostile actions against us, but to transfer the legal proceedings to other dignitaries who would be completely impartial. After reading this note, submit it when the need arises. If you see that he remains consistent with his thoughts and undertakes any action directly directed against us, then you do not hesitate to write about it. And I will select from among the bishops and monastics several pious and prudent persons and send them to you at the first opportunity that presents itself. “I will not give sleep to my eyes,” I will say in the words of Scripture, “and to my slumber every time, and to my sleep in peace” (Psalm 131:4), until I accomplish the feat for the salvation of all. Therefore, knowing the way I think, be courageous. We will not hesitate to write what messages are needed and to whom they are needed. For my faith in Christ, I am ready to suffer and endure all the torments that are considered the most severe, so that I will meet death itself, when I undergo it for this, with pleasure. You might be interested in: