Was St. Cyril of Alexandria as a Monophysite

Book review: Meunier B. Christ of Cyril of Alexandria. Humanity, salvation and the Monophysite question. Paris, 1997. 304 p. (Meunier B. Le Christ de Cyrille d’Alexandrie. L’humanité, le salut et la question monophysite. Paris, 1997. 304 p.) Key words: Cyril of Alexandria, Christology, soteriology, Monophysitism, Humanity of Christ, nature, hypostasis, fall, recapitulation, anthropological model. The author of the monograph, Bernard Meunier, is director of the Institute of the Christian Sources Collection (Sources Chrétiennes). His research interests include the concept of personality in pagan culture and the Judeo-Christian tradition, the history of dogma and the history of theology of the first centuries. In collaboration with Marie-Odile Boulnois, he worked on the translation of the Easter Epistles of St. Cyril of Alexandria in the “Christian Sources” series. The monograph in question is a revised dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philology, which Bernard Meunier defended in January 1993 at the Department of Religious Sciences of the Practical School of Higher Studies (Paris). The monograph has not been translated into other languages. In the introduction of the book, the author says that the Alexandrian theological school, and especially St. Cyril, often accused of a tendency toward Monophysitism, raises the question: is St. Was Kirill the predecessor of this teaching? To answer it, it is necessary to study the Christology of the saint, to which the monograph is primarily devoted. B. Meunier uses a new approach to the problem - he studies the Christology of St. Cyril based on his soteriology. In the preliminary chapter, the author analyzes how St. Kirill talks about a person. In the works of the saint one can identify many passages that briefly outline the history of salvation. B. Meunier called them “summaries of faith.” He examines the summary of faith in various works of St. Kirill and states that they have a similar soteriological structure - the opposition of the Fall in Adam and salvation in Christ. Based on this conclusion, the author builds a plan for his research, consistent with the train of thought of St. Kirill. The first part of the work analyzes the Adam-Christ typology. The first section deals with Adam and his deeds. The subject of the first chapter is the expressions with which St. Cyril describes the Fall. The author reminds us that the saint is not a philosopher and that his expressions are often not technical terms, but rather metaphors. At the same time, the subject of the fall of the saint is expressed either individually (Adam) or collectively (human nature). The second chapter lists the consequences of the Fall: punishment - curse (ἀρά, κατάρα), physical - death (θάνατος) and corruption (φθορά), moral - tendency to sin, spiritual - loss of the Holy Spirit, which Adam received in paradise (Gen. 2:7). The third chapter examines the question of the representativeness of humanity in Adam. According to the author, St. Cyril tends to associate biological language (Adam as the root and ancestor) with the theme of death, and symbolic language (Adam as the image of human nature) with the theme of sin. Nevertheless, Adam for St. Kirill is not an abstract concept or a universal person, but a specific person. The saint’s titles for Adam – “root” (ῥίζα), “firstfruits” (ἀπαρχή), “beginning” (αρχή) – indicate the idea of ​​representing all of humanity in him. The second section of the first part of the monograph deals with the work of the second Adam, Christ. Chapter four talks about a new beginning and recapitulation in Christ. According to St. Cyril, the reason for the incarnation of Christ is recapitulation (heading, Eph. 1:10), which has three levels: moral (condemn sin), physical (put to death) and spiritual (return the Holy Spirit). However, the symmetry between the two Adams is not absolute, since Adam is a man, while Christ is the incarnate Word of God. Chapter five examines the way Christ conveys salvation to people. St. Cyril applies to Christ the same titles as for Adam. Some of them (the Second Adam, the Beginning, the Door, the Way) relate to the Word, while others (the Firstfruits) are more related to Humanity. Thus, according to the author, St. Kirill uses two soteriologies in his works - ascending (the behavior of Christ as a Man grants salvation) and descending (the perception of humanity by God grants salvation), with the latter prevailing, since salvation is understood as a continuation of the creative act of God. The second part of the book explores the second side of soteriology, namely the way each person receives salvation. The first section concerns the issue of participation in the Divine nature (2 Peter 1:4) through Christ. The sixth chapter talks about the double communion of people with God. According to the logic of St. Cyril, the dual dimension of man (body and soul) corresponds to the duality of Christ (Man and God), Who gives life in a double way: bodily and spiritually (through the Eucharist and the Spirit). The seventh chapter deals with bodily communion, carried out through the Eucharist. The flesh of Christ is life-giving because it belongs to the Incorruptible Word. In the eighth chapter, the author talks about spiritual communion: in the works of St. Kirill is not clear on this issue. On the one hand, it is included in bodily communion, since the Eucharist sanctifies people both physically and spiritually. On the other hand, spiritual communion in St. Kirill is often associated with Epiphany. In the second section of the second part, B. Meunier finally moves from the matter of salvation to the existence of the Savior, from soteriology to Christology. In the ninth chapter he examines texts from the Nestorian period to reveal the position of St. Kirill. The researcher notes that St. Cyril bases his Christology on soteriology: it was necessary for the Word Himself to undergo death in order for it to become salvific for the world. Although the texts reviewed emphasize the greater Divinity of the Savior, His Humanity is not presented as merely a passive instrument. St. Cyril affirms the perfect humanity (against Apollinaris) and the uniqueness of the subject (against Nestorius) of Christ. In the tenth chapter we talk about the anthropological model of St. Kirill. According to this model, just as man consists of two different essences, body and soul, so Christ has two different essences (natures): Divinity and Humanity. This comparison was previously used as an argument by Nestorius, but St. Cyril uses it only as an illustration: on the one hand, that in Christ there is one subject (the Word), and on the other hand, that during the suffering of Christ the Word remained dispassionate. The eleventh chapter examines the understanding of St. Cyril of the Humanity of Christ. The saint confesses that Christ is a true Man, His human nature is consubstantial with ours. However, he never uses the term “human nature,” because for him it means another hypostasis, another subject in Christ. According to B. Meunier, the famous so-called. The Monophysite formula “the one incarnate nature of the Word” appeared in St. Kirill in connection with the anthropological model. Thus, the word “nature” in St. Kirill is ambiguous, it means either the essence or the subject (hypostasis). Regarding the statement about two natures in Christ, St. Kirill accepts it only if this distinction is made mentally. The researcher also draws attention to the fact that in the Christology of St. For Cyril, the idea of ​​“appropriating” the flesh by the Word plays a big role. Thanks to this, firstly, the unity of the subject is preserved, and secondly, the Word communicates to His flesh what is characteristic of Him. St. Cyril also emphasizes the difference between the concept of “appropriation” of the body by the Word and the “communion” of the human body to Christ. So, the work of B. Meunier is valuable primarily for its new method of studying Christological problems in St. Cyril of Alexandria, namely the transition from soteriology to Christology. In addition, the author draws conclusions based on numerous quotes from the works of St. Cyril, which he cites in his book in ancient Greek along with a translation into French (that is, the book can also be used as a collection of Christological fragments from the works of the saint). Based on the quoted texts, the researcher was able to prove that St. Cyril remains completely Orthodox in his teaching about Christ. Although he does not use the Chalcedonian formula of two natures, he teaches that the Humanity of Christ is not absorbed into His Divinity. However, it seems to us that the author should also include in his study excerpts from the works of Monophysite theologians in order to better identify their difference with the teachings of St. Kirill. Maxim Nikulin. Was St. Cyril of Alexandria a Monophysite? A review of Meunier B. Le Christ de Cyrille d’Alexandrie. L'humanité, le salut et la question monophysite. Paris, 1997. 304 p. Keywords: Cyril of Alexandria, christology, soteriology, monophysitism, humanity of Christ, nature, hypostasis, the Fall, recapitulation, anthropological model. Marksim Sergeyevich Nikulin – Graduate Student at St. Petersburg Theological Academy (maximvzzz@gmail.com).