Customer Reviews

St. Cyril of Alexandria: The Christological Controversy : Its History, Theology, and Texts (Supplements to Vigiliae Christianae)

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I found McGuckin's book very interesting, readable, and informative.

Cyril of Alexandria is probably one of the most underappreciated saints in the West, and this book goes a long way to show his importance, especially in the area of Christology. McGuckin does a great job in Chapters 2 and 3 explaining both Nestorius' and Cyril's conflicting theologies. He takes the at times subtle and at times downright confusing debates of the early 5th century and explains them in such a way as to be understandable to the modern reader. Note, however, that this is not an intro book to these topics, McGuckin does assume the reader has a basic understanding of the issues involved before he delves more deeply into them.

The reason I am giving this book 4 stars instead of 5, however, is due to Chapter 4, in which McGuckin writes about the ecumenical reception of Cyril's work after his death, especially at Chaldedon. I understand that he is an Orthodox priest, and as such, will have a different perspective of Chalcedon than most in the West. However, I felt this Chapter was simply reactionary: he simply found every opportunity to denigrate Pope Leo's (very important) contribution to Chalcedon, and to act like Leo's Tome was basically inconsequential to the proceedings. While it may be true that Leo's contribution is overstated at times in the West, McGuckin seems to be more interested in attacking the West's perception than he is of simply recounting the actual history in an objective manner.

The book provides a detailed and well written presentation of the often confusing events connected with the Council of Ephesus (431AD) and has two chapters analyzing the theology of Cyril and Nestorius. There is also a good selection of hard to find writings by Cyril and his contemporaries (over 150pp). The author works to offset the generally negative modern outlook on Cyril and to make understandable the very high esteem in which this important Church Father and his theology were held by much of the Early Church.

For a book on such a heavy subject the book is remarkably well written, readable and enjoyable. McGuckin does a very fine job of interweaving history and theology, keeping the political and dogmatic dramas in balanced perspective. I am a novice in this area so I cannot judge whether McGuckin's conclusions are correct, but the work seems to be fair and scholarly. He clearly writes from an Eastern Orthodox and pro-Cyril perspective but presents material that causes difficulties for his views as well. Of particular interest is his finely nuanced discussion of the complicated role of the Pope in this early chuch controversy.

McGuckin writes with complete lucidity about very complicated dogmatic issues. Anyone who has struggled with the issues of Ephesus and Chalcedon will benefit from McGuckin's analyses. There is plenty of history here too, but the author is at his best at conceptual analysis. He clearly is on Cyril's side in the debates of the era, and presents Cyril as a champion of not only the divinity of Jesus, but also of his true and complete humanity.

St Cyril of Alexandria is the sphragidis of the Fathers, the seal of the Fathers. While he is not the last word in Christology, he was an able summarizer of Christological thought and was remarkably consistent. He's also disliked among academics today. St Cyril played hardball and it seemed like he used unsavory means to keep heretics from being represented at Council.

(Word to the wise, currently at the time of the review, amazon is not carrying this book. You can probably find it at St Vladimir Seminary press website)

Prof McGuckin dismantles these myths. McGuckin a) exposes the postmodern and elitist presuppositions of the university professors and b) offers a different angle on the Nestorian Controversy--and he does it with dash, flair, and humor.

To be fair, though, it is difficult to know exactly what Nestorius actually believed. Nestorius was accused of maintaining there were two persons in Christ, a position he seemed to deny. Yet McGuckin makes clear that Nestorius believed in two prosopon in Christ. This word can mean "person" but doesn't always, and that appeared to give Nestorius an out. Yet as McGuckin and St Cyril make clear, Nestorius nonetheless held to two operating principles in Christ. (At this point McGuckin gives a long summary of Nestorius's Christology. In short, it reads:

* Extreme divine impassibility: the Logos cannot suffer (131).

* Christ's two natures remain ontologically apart, existing side by side (135).

* The Church's confession of Christ should always begin with his double reality (156).

On pp. 138ff McGuckin gives a helpful summary of the meanings of ousia, physis, hypostasis, and prosopon.

Cyril's Christology

Before examining St Cyril's Christology, McGuckin surveys Apolloniarius's Christology. While denounced as a heretic (and rightly so), Apollonaris put his finger on many important points. To put it another way, while Apollonaris's heresy was bad, it set the stage for Cyril's triumph. Apollonaris saw the important point that had to be maintained: the single subject of the Logos (179).

Redemptive Deification

St Cyril's Christology was tied to his soteriology: "The incarnation was a restorative act designed for the ontological reconstruction of a human nature that had fallen into existential decay as a result of its alienation from God" (184). The Logos appropriates human nature--and this human nature becomes that of one who is God--the human nature is lifted up to extraordinary glory.

St Cyril also offers us a way to think about divine impassibility: we should see the intimacy of the connection between the two realities of Christ...In the incarnation the power of the one transforms and heals the fallibility of the other.

"The human nature is conceived as the manner of action of an independent and omnipotent power--that of the Logos; and to the Logos alone can be attributed the authorship of, and responsibility for, all its actions" (186). The subject is unchanged, but that subject now expresses the characteristics of his divinely powerful condition in and through the medium of a passible and fragile condition.

Of course, St Cyril ties this in with the holy mysteries (188). The believer is deified because the encounter brings him into life-giving proximity with the Logos--and this proximity was the metaphysical root of all being.

St Cyril's vision was the transformation of the human race according to the paradigm of divine appropriation of a human nature in the incarnation (188).

The Ecumenical Reception of St Cyril

Cyril preferred to say that Christ was of two natures, placing the stress on the Incarnation (231).

McGuckin scores major points in noting that St Leo's Tome actually had to pass muster before it was excepted. The Church didn't merely receive it and note, "Leo has spoken. The end." They said this, but only after it passed a Cyrillene test. Why did they praise Leo? Because his Tome agreed with Cyril and the Fathers, not merely because he was "pope."

Conclusion

This was a fantastic book. It is truly one of the great books written on Christology. Because of the timeline it does not deal with later concerns about the energies and wills of Christ. However, it wonderfully ties in ecclesiology, Christology, soteriology, and the Eucharist into one prism which then sheds multi-perspectival light on the Church.