St. Cyril of Alexandria
On the Unity of Christ
Dialogue
Dialogue between speakers A and B, including reported objections and their answers; quoted opponents are not endorsements. Translation: P. E. Pusey, 1881.
B. They too will say, I suppose, The Incarnate Word.
A. How will this be true, except He have BEEN MADE flesh, i. e. man, making the human body His own by a union which may not be plucked asunder, in order that it may be conceived of as His and not anyone's else? for thus will He send unto us too the grace of the sonship and we too shall be born of the Spirit, in that in Him first the nature of man attained this. And the Divine Paul appears to me, thinking over with himself something of this sort, to have said full rightly, For as we bare the image of the earthy we shall bear the image too of the heavenly: and he said that the first man was from out of earth, earthy, the second from out of Heaven. But as the earthy such (he says) are the earthy ones too, and as the Heavenly One such the Heavenly ones also. For we are earthy, in that there stole in upon us as from the earthy one, Adam, the curse, decay, through which the law of sin too entered in, which is in the members of our flesh: but we have been MADE heavenly, receiving this in Christ. For He being God by Nature and out of God and from above, hath come down in our estate, in an unwonted and strange way, MADE offspring of the Spirit according to the flesh, in order that WE too as He might remain holy and undecaying, the grace descending upon us as from out a second beginning and root, i. e., Him.
B. You speak excellently.
A. How do they say that He has been made like also in all things to His brethren, i. e., us? or who at all will He be conceived to be who entered into this likeness, unless He were other by Nature and not in our estate? for that which is made like to any, must full surely be different from them and not like to them but rather of other form, other nature. The Only-Begotten therefore being by Nature unlike us is said to have been made like when MADE as we, i. e. man: and this will take place rightly and solely, in birth in our estate, even though in wondrous wise in Him, for He Who was Incarnate was GOD. Yet let it be acknowledged that the body united to Him has been rationally ensouled: for the Word being God, would not, letting alone that which is superior in us, i. e., the soul, have taken thought for the earthy body only, but in wisdom provided for soul and body alike [9].
B. I agree, for you deem rightly.
A. Hence if the opponents say that the holy Virgin ought to be called in no wise mother of God, but mother of Christ, they blaspheme openly and drive away Christ from being God and Son: for if they believe that He is really God, in that the Only-Begotten has been MADE as we, why do they shudder at calling her mother of God, who bare Him, I mean after the flesh?
B. Yea (they say): for the name Christ because of his having been anointed with the Holy Ghost beseems only him who is of a woman and of the seed of David: the Word out of God will never need so far as belongs to His own Nature such grace, seeing He is holy by Nature. For does not the Name Christ indicate that some anointing took place?
A. You said right, that because of the anointing alone is He called Christ, just as Apostle by reason of Apostolate, and Angel from bearing tidings, (for such kind of names signify certain things, not special persons or known individuals; for the Prophets too have been called christs, as is sung in the psalms, Touch not My christs and deal not wickedly with My prophets; the Prophet Habbacuc too said, Thou wentest forth for the salvation of Thy people, to save Thy christs): yet tell me this, Do not themselves too say that the Only-Begotten Word of God is One Christ and Son, as being Lord Incarnate and made man?
B. Perchance they say so, yet they want the name Christ not to belong to the Word born from out of God the Father, by reason that Ho has not been anointed according to His own Nature as God, but they add this as well: For it is not (they say) one of the names by which we should speak of the Father Himself or of the Holy Ghost.
A. The statement is not yet quite clear; explain it therefore, for you will do well.
B. Listen then: for one can see the appellation of the Son most manifold and diversely brought out by the God-inspired Scriptures, for He has been named God and Lord and Light and Life and besides King and Lord of hosts and Holy and Almighty. But if one pleased to say these things of the Father too or the Holy Ghost, one would not miss what is befitting. For of One Nature, one full surely is the Excellence of the dignities. If therefore Christ is a name truly befitting the Only-Begotten, let it pass (they say) without distinction with the rest both to the Father Himself and the Holy Ghost: but seeing it is utterly unmeet to accommodate it to the Father and the Holy Ghost, neither will it rightly pertain to the Only-Begotten Himself but rather has been apportioned in truth to him of the seed of David in regard to whom anointing by the Spirit may without any blame be conceived and said.
A. We too ourselves say that the names of the God-befitting dignities are common to Father Son and Holy Ghost, and with equal glories are we wont to crown together with Him Who begat Him the Son Who is begotten out of Him and the Holy Ghost besides.
Yet, o most excellent (would I say), the name Christ and the fact itself, that is, the Anointing, along with the conditions of the emptiness have accrued to the Only-Begotten, introducing to the hearers a manifest proof of the Incarnation: for that He has been anointed in that He has been made man, it will very well betoken. If therefore we were investigating not the plan itself of the Economy with flesh but it were proposed to us to look on the Only-Begotten Word of God as yet external to the measures of the emptiness, it were with good reason wholly dishonouring to call Him Christ Who has not been anointed: but since the Divine and most holy Scripture says that He WAS MADE flesh, the anointing too will now befit Him, which took place in regard to the Incarnation which is His. And truly the all-wise Paul says, For both the Sanctifier and the sanctified are all out of one, for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brothers saying, I will declare Thy Name to My brothers: for He was sanctified together with us when He WAS MADE in our estate.
And that truly SON was He Who is anointed in that He WAS MADE flesh, i. e. perfect man, the Divine David will testify saying to Him, Thy Throne o God is for ever and ever, a sceptre of Tightness the sceptre of Thy Kingdom: Thou lovedst righteousness and hatedst transgression wherefore God Thy God anointed Thee with the oil of rejoicing above Thy fellows. Understand therefore how having both said that Ho is God and given Him a Throne for ever, he says that He has been anointed by God, clearly the Father, with some choice anointing above those who partake of Him [10], i. e. ourselves. For if the Word have BEEN MADE man too, albeit God, yet was He thus too without lack of the Goods of His proper Nature; being Self-Perfect and full of grace and truth, according to the voice of John: and Himself Perfect in every kind of thing God-befitting, while from His fulness all we received, as it is written. Making His own therefore along with the measures of His own human nature what also belong thereto, He is called Christ, even though He be conceived of as not anointed, according (I mean) to the Nature of the Godhead or as He is conceived of as God. Since (tell me) how else will He be conceived of as Christ Son and Lord, if the Only-Begotten have disdained the anointing and abide not the measures of the emptiness?
Translator’s notes (P. E. Pusey; selected by the electronic edition)
[9] k "We say therefore that the whole Word which is out of God has been co-united to the whole manhood of ours: for He would not have deemed of no account, that which is best in us, i. e. the soul, bestowing on the flesh alone the Toils of His Coming." de recta fide to the Emperor Theodosius p. 18 d and (as a Dialogue) with slight modifications in the Ad Herm. Book 7, 692 b. Similarly Theodoret in his great letter to the monks of Constantinople, after saying, " the Only-Begotten Son of God taking both body and soul...." adds, "For if the body only of Adam sinned, it would have needed that this alone should reap the cure; but since the soul not only sinned with it but also before it (for thought first limns the sin, then works it through the body), it were right, I suppose, that it too obtain healing" (Ep. 145 p. 1250 init.). See also S. Irenaeus, "Thus the Lord having redeemed us with His own Blood and given His Soul for our souls and His own Flesh for our flesh" (Book v. 1. 1. p. 450 O.T.).
[10] m παρὰ τοὺς μετέχοντας αὐτοῦ. S. Cyril had in earlier life said, "Blessed David sings and says to the SON, Therefore God Thy God anointed Thee with the oil of gladness above them that are participant of Thee (παρὰ τοὺς μετόχους σου). If therefore that which partakes is other than that which is partaken (for one must be conceived of in other), and the creature partakes of the SON, He will be other than the creature which partakes of Him: hence neither is He generate. But if the Son be not other than the creature, be not severed from it by Nature, what need of participation? or how can any partake of what itself is?" Thes. cap. 1 fin. p. 14.
Source: On the Unity of Christ (Tertullian.org)