Theodoret of Cyrus, Cyril of Alexandria and Nestorius.

As I was doing some reading in Theodoret of Cyrus it was inevitable that I became once again embroiled in the controversy between Cyril of Alexandria and Nestorius. Finding all the primary sources in the original languages turned out to be a big project. Just tracking down the twelve anathamas of Cyril in Greek was a project because it wasn't conveniently labeled in the Greek libraries but embedded in Concilium universale Ephesenum anno 431. I also found a site where the twelve anathamas are presented in Greek, English and Slovenky. I am working on a study of this dispute reading what I can find in the original languages focusing on these three authors.

Postscript: The Key to locating any original language text is finding a unique string of words in that language. It didn't turn out to be an easy task when sources were presented in English. Single words don't help much. Searching for example on Θεοτόκος or Θεοφόρος doesn't help because they are used frequently. You need a unique string.
 
Last edited:

BJ Bear

Active member
As I was doing some reading in Theodoret of Cyrus it was inevitable that I became once again embroiled in the controversy between Cyril of Alexandria and Nestorius. Finding all the primary sources in the original languages turned out to be a big project. Just tracking down the twelve anathamas of Cyril in Greek was a project because it wasn't conveniently labeled in the Greek libraries but embedded in Concilium universale Ephesenum anno 431. I also found a site where the twelve anathamas are presented in Greek, English and Slovenky. I am working on a study of this dispute reading what I can find in the original languages focusing on these three authors.

Postscript: The Key to locating any original language text is finding a unique string of words in that language. It didn't turn out to be an easy task when sources were presented in English. Single words don't help much. Searching for example on Θεοτόκος or Θεοφόρος doesn't help because they are used frequently. You need a unique string.
If you found the twelve chapters and also Cyril's explanation of them then all is well and good. I don't remember what was read into the record at Ephesus, but if you didn't find one then you will find it in another council.
 
If you found the twelve chapters and also Cyril's explanation of them then all is well and good. I don't remember what was read into the record at Ephesus, but if you didn't find one then you will find it in another council.
That helps. I was just looking at explanations of the anathamas and wondering who wrote the explanations. The document Concilium universale Ephesenum anno 431 isn't particularly transparent unless you know the territory which I don't.
 

BJ Bear

Active member
That helps. I was just looking at explanations of the anathamas and wondering who wrote the explanations. The document Concilium universale Ephesenum anno 431 isn't particularly transparent unless you know the territory which I don't.
For what it is worth, per McGuckin, Saint Cyril Of Alexandria And The Christological Controversy, you can read Cyril's explanation in Patrologiae Graeca (PG)76, 293-312; Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum (ACO); 1.1.5 pp 15-25; Pusey, vol 6, 240-258.

PG will definitely to meet your requirement.
 
I am wondering if the 12 anathamas constitute a TEXT so that any one of them should be read in light of the rest of them. I have tenatively concluded that this is the way to read them since unpacking anathama <ζ> seems to require understanding the previous anathamas.

Also should the 12 anathamas be considered as part of the letter of Cyril they are attached to so that the text under consideration is really the letter itself. I don't understand where this document Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum came from. Is it a modern collection or something from the fifth century?

The document that has the 12 anathamas with the explanations, is that a separate letter of Cyril? When I confront the contents of Concilium universale Ephesenum anno 431, I have no way of knowing what I am looking at. It looks like a modern collection of numerous texts published in the 1920s and then in the 1960s in Germany. Sorting out the boundaries of the individual source texts isn't a trivial problem.
 
Last edited:

BJ Bear

Active member
I am wondering if the 12 anathamas constitute a TEXT so that any one of them should be read in light of the rest of them. I have tenatively concluded that this is the way to read them since unpacking anathama <ζ> seems to require understanding the previous anathamas.
They are a list of doctrines that Nestorius must hold and teach, per Cyril's third letter to Nestorius, appended without explanation. The entirety of this letter was written in 430. The explanations of the anathemas were written in 431 at the request of the Council at Ephesus.

I may be too immersed in this type of thing but there seems to be sufficient explanatory evidence in the explanation of the seventh anathema that it can be understood on its own. Nestorius needed to hold and teach that there are not two sons.
Also should the 12 anathamas be considered as part of the letter of Cyril they are attached to so that the text under consideration is really the letter itself. I don't understand where this document Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum came from. Is it a modern collection or something from the fifth century?

The document that has the 12 anathamas with the explanations, is that a separate letter of Cyril?
Yes, written at the request of the Council at Ephesus.
When I confront the contents of Concilium universale Ephesenum anno 431, I have no way of knowing what I am looking at. It looks like a modern collection of numerous texts published in the 1920s and then in the 1960s in Germany. Sorting out the boundaries of the individual source texts isn't a trivial problem.
If it is on the net then I will take a look at it on the weekend.
 
The Twelve Anathamas of Cyril (against Nestorius) in Greek and English.


I. If any one refuses to confess that the Emmanuel is in truth God, and therefore that the holy Virgin is Mother of God (θεοτόκος), for she gave birth after a fleshly manner to the Word of God made flesh; let him be anathema.

<α> Εἴ τις οὐχ ὁμολογεῖ θεὸν εἶναι κατὰ ἀλήθειαν τὸν Ἐμμανουὴλ καὶ διὰ τοῦτο θεοτόκον τὴν ἁγίαν παρθένον (γεγέννηκε γὰρ σαρκικῶς σάρκα γεγονότα τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ λόγον), ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

II. If any one refuses to confess that the Word of God the Father is united in hypostasis to flesh, and is one Christ with His own flesh, the same being at once both God and man, let him be anathema.

<β> Εἴ τις οὐχ ὁμολογεῖ σαρκὶ καθ' ὑπόστασιν ἡνῶσθαι τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον ἕνα τε εἶναι Χριστὸν μετὰ τῆς ἰδίας σαρκός, τὸν αὐτὸν δηλονότι θεόν τε ὁμοῦ καὶ ἄνθρω πον, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

III. If any one in the case of the one Christ divides the hypostases after the union, conjoining them by the conjunction alone which is according to dignity, independence, or prerogative, and not rather by the concurrence which is according to natural union, let him be anathema.

<γ> Εἴ τις ἐπὶ τοῦ ἑνὸς Χριστοῦ διαιρεῖ τὰς ὑποστάσεις μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, μόνηι συ νάπτων αὐτὰς συναφείαι τῆι κατὰ τὴν ἀξίαν ἢ γοῦν αὐθεντίαν ἢ δυναστείαν καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον συνόδωι τῆι καθ' ἕνωσιν φυσικήν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

IV. If any one divides between two persons or hypostases the expressions used in the writings of evangelists and apostles, whether spoken by the saints of Christ or by Him about Himself, and applies the one as to a man considered properly apart from the Word of God, and the others as appropriate to the divine and the Word of God the Father alone, let him be anathema.

<δ> Εἴ τις προσώποις δυσὶν ἢ γοῦν ὑποστάσεσιν τάς τε ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελικοῖς καὶ ἀπο στολικοῖς συγγράμμασι διανέμει φωνὰς ἢ ἐπὶ Χριστῶι παρὰ τῶν ἁγίων λεγομένας ἢ παρ' αὐτοῦ περὶ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τὰς μὲν ὡς ἀνθρώπωι παρὰ τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ λόγον ἰδικῶς νοουμένωι προσάπτει, τὰς δὲ ὡς θεοπρεπεῖς μόνωι τῶι ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγωι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

V. If any one dares to maintain that the Christ is man bearing God, and not rather that He is God in truth, and one Son, and by nature, according as the Word was made flesh, and shared blood and flesh in like manner with ourselves, let him be anathema.

<ε> Εἴ τις τολμᾶι λέγειν θεοφόρον ἄνθρωπον τὸν Χριστὸν καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον θεὸν εἶναι κατὰ ἀλήθειαν ὡς υἱὸν ἕνα καὶ φύσει, καθὸ γέγονε σὰρξ ὁ λόγος καὶ κεκοινώνηκε παραπλησίως ἡμῖν αἵματος καὶ σαρκός, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

VI. If any one dares to maintain that the Word of God the Father was God or Lord of the Christ, and does not rather confess that the same was at once both God and man, the Word being made flesh according to the Scriptures, let him be anathema.

<ϛ> Εἴ τις λέγει θεὸν ἢ δεσπότην εἶναι τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον τὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖ θεόν τε ὁμοῦ καὶ ἄνθρωπον, ὡς γεγονότος σαρκὸς τοῦ λόγου κατὰ τὰς γραφάς, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

VII. If any one says that Jesus was energized as man by God the Word, and that He was invested with the glory of the only begotten as being another beside Him, let him be anathema.

<ζ> Εἴ τίς φησιν ὡς ἄνθρωπον ἐνηργῆσθαι παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ τὴν τοῦ μονογενοῦς εὐδοξίαν περιῆφθαι ὡς ἑτέρωι παρ' αὐτὸν ὑπάρχοντι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

VIII. If any one dares to maintain that the ascended man ought to be worshipped together with the divine Word, and be glorified with Him, and with Him be called God as one with another (in that the continual rise of the preposition “with” in composition makes this sense compulsory), and does not rather in one act of worship honour the Emmanuel and praise Him in one doxology, in that He is the Word made flesh, let him be anathema.

<η> Εἴ τις τολμᾶι λέγειν τὸν ἀναληφθέντα ἄνθρωπον συμπροσκυνεῖσθαι δεῖν τῶι θεῶι λόγωι καὶ συνδοξάζεσθαι καὶ συγχρηματίζειν θεὸν ὡς ἕτερον ἑτέρωι (τὸ γὰρ <συν> ἀεὶ προς τιθέμενον τοῦτο νοεῖν ἀναγκάσει) καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον μιᾶι προσκυνήσει τιμᾶι τὸν Ἐμμα νουὴλ καὶ μίαν αὐτῶι τὴν δοξολογίαν ἀνάπτει, καθὸ γέγονε σὰρξ ὁ λόγος, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

IX. If any one says that the one Lord Jesus Christ is glorified by the Spirit, using the power that works through Him as a foreign power, and receiving from Him the ability to operate against unclean spirits, and to complete His miracles among men; and does not rather say that the Spirit is His own, whereby also He wrought His miracles, let him be anathema.

<θ> Εἴ τίς φησιν τὸν ἕνα κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν δεδοξάσθαι παρὰ τοῦ πνεύματος, ὡς ἀλλοτρίαι δυνάμει τῆι δι' αὐτοῦ χρώμενον καὶ παρ' αὐτοῦ λαβόντα τὸ ἐνεργεῖν δύνασθαι κατὰ πνευμάτων ἀκαθάρτων καὶ τὸ πληροῦν εἰς ἀνθρώπους τὰς θεοσημείας, καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον ἴδιον αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμά φησιν, δι' οὗ καὶ ἐνήργηκε τὰς θεοσημείας, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

X. Holy Scripture states that Christ is High Priest and Apostle of our confession,171 and offered Himself on our behalf for a sweet-smelling savour to God and our Father.172 If, then, any one says that He, the Word of God, was not made our High Priest and Apostle when He was made flesh and man after our manner; but as being another, other than Himself, properly man made of a woman; or if any one says that He offered the offering on His own behalf, and not rather on our behalf alone; for He that knew no sin would not have needed an offering, let him be anathema.

<ι> Ἀρχιερέα καὶ ἀπόστολον τῆς ὁμολογίας ἡμῶν γεγενῆσθαι Χριστὸν ἡ θεία λέγει γραφή, προσκεκόμικε δὲ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἑαυτὸν εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας τῶι θεῶι καὶ πατρί. εἴ τις τοίνυν ἀρχιερέα καὶ ἀπόστολον ἡμῶν γεγενῆσθαί φησιν οὐκ αὐτὸν τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ λόγον, ὅτε γέγονε σὰρξ καὶ καθ' ἡμᾶς ἄνθρωπος, ἀλλ' ὡς ἕτερον παρ' αὐτὸν ἰδικῶς ἄνθρωπον ἐκ γυναικός, ἢ εἴ τις λέγει καὶ ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ προσενεγκεῖν αὐτὸν τὴν προσφορὰν καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον ὑπὲρ μόνων ἡμῶν (οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἐδεήθη προσφορᾶς ὁ μὴ εἰδὼς ἁμαρτίαν), ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

XI. If any one confesses not that the Lord’s flesh is giver of life,173 and proper to the Word of God Himself, but (states) that it is of another than Him, united indeed to Him in dignity, yet as only possessing a divine indwelling; and not rather, as we said, giver of life, because it is proper to the Word of Him who hath might to engender all things alive, let him be anathema.

<ια> Εἴ τις οὐχ ὁμολογεῖ τὴν τοῦ κυρίου σάρκα ζωοποιὸν εἶναι καὶ ἰδίαν αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγου, ἀλλ' ὡς ἑτέρου τινὸς παρ' αὐτὸν συνημμένου μὲν αὐτῶι κατὰ τὴν ἀξίαν ἢ γοῦν ὡς μόνην θείαν ἐνοίκησιν ἐσχηκότος, καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον ζωοποιόν, ὡς ἔφημεν, ὅτι γέγονεν ἰδία τοῦ λόγου τοῦ τὰ πάντα ζωογονεῖν ἰσχύοντος, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

XII. If any one confesses not that the Word of God suffered in flesh, and was crucified in flesh, and tasted death in flesh, and was made firstborn of the dead, in so far as He is life and giver of life, as God; let him be anathema.

<ιβ> Εἴ τις οὐχ ὁμολογεῖ τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον παθόντα σαρκὶ καὶ ἐσταυρωμένον σαρκὶ καὶ θανάτου γευσάμενον σαρκὶ γεγονότα τε πρωτότοκον ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, καθὸ ζωή τέ ἐστι καὶ ζωοποιὸς ὡς θεός, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.


Soruce: Greek Text Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum, Ed. Schwartz, E.
Berlin: De Gruyter, 1927/1928
The English text is all over the internet without any indication of where it came from. According to BibleHub the sources of the Greek and English Texts: (Mansi T. IV. p.1067-1082, Migne Cat.76, col.391. The anathemas of Nestorius against Cyril are to be found in Hardouin i.1297.)
 
Last edited:

BJ Bear

Active member
The Twelve Anathamas of Cyril (against Nestorius) in Greek and English.


I. If any one refuses to confess that the Emmanuel is in truth God, and therefore that the holy Virgin is Mother of God (θεοτόκος), for she gave birth after a fleshly manner to the Word of God made flesh; let him be anathema.

<α> Εἴ τις οὐχ ὁμολογεῖ θεὸν εἶναι κατὰ ἀλήθειαν τὸν Ἐμμανουὴλ καὶ διὰ τοῦτο θεοτόκον τὴν ἁγίαν παρθένον (γεγέννηκε γὰρ σαρκικῶς σάρκα γεγονότα τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ λόγον), ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

II. If any one refuses to confess that the Word of God the Father is united in hypostasis to flesh, and is one Christ with His own flesh, the same being at once both God and man, let him be anathema.

<β> Εἴ τις οὐχ ὁμολογεῖ σαρκὶ καθ' ὑπόστασιν ἡνῶσθαι τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον ἕνα τε εἶναι Χριστὸν μετὰ τῆς ἰδίας σαρκός, τὸν αὐτὸν δηλονότι θεόν τε ὁμοῦ καὶ ἄνθρω πον, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

III. If any one in the case of the one Christ divides the hypostases after the union, conjoining them by the conjunction alone which is according to dignity, independence, or prerogative, and not rather by the concurrence which is according to natural union, let him be anathema.

<γ> Εἴ τις ἐπὶ τοῦ ἑνὸς Χριστοῦ διαιρεῖ τὰς ὑποστάσεις μετὰ τὴν ἕνωσιν, μόνηι συ νάπτων αὐτὰς συναφείαι τῆι κατὰ τὴν ἀξίαν ἢ γοῦν αὐθεντίαν ἢ δυναστείαν καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον συνόδωι τῆι καθ' ἕνωσιν φυσικήν, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

IV. If any one divides between two persons or hypostases the expressions used in the writings of evangelists and apostles, whether spoken by the saints of Christ or by Him about Himself, and applies the one as to a man considered properly apart from the Word of God, and the others as appropriate to the divine and the Word of God the Father alone, let him be anathema.

<δ> Εἴ τις προσώποις δυσὶν ἢ γοῦν ὑποστάσεσιν τάς τε ἐν τοῖς εὐαγγελικοῖς καὶ ἀπο στολικοῖς συγγράμμασι διανέμει φωνὰς ἢ ἐπὶ Χριστῶι παρὰ τῶν ἁγίων λεγομένας ἢ παρ' αὐτοῦ περὶ ἑαυτοῦ καὶ τὰς μὲν ὡς ἀνθρώπωι παρὰ τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ λόγον ἰδικῶς νοουμένωι προσάπτει, τὰς δὲ ὡς θεοπρεπεῖς μόνωι τῶι ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγωι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

V. If any one dares to maintain that the Christ is man bearing God, and not rather that He is God in truth, and one Son, and by nature, according as the Word was made flesh, and shared blood and flesh in like manner with ourselves, let him be anathema.

<ε> Εἴ τις τολμᾶι λέγειν θεοφόρον ἄνθρωπον τὸν Χριστὸν καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον θεὸν εἶναι κατὰ ἀλήθειαν ὡς υἱὸν ἕνα καὶ φύσει, καθὸ γέγονε σὰρξ ὁ λόγος καὶ κεκοινώνηκε παραπλησίως ἡμῖν αἵματος καὶ σαρκός, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

VI. If any one dares to maintain that the Word of God the Father was God or Lord of the Christ, and does not rather confess that the same was at once both God and man, the Word being made flesh according to the Scriptures, let him be anathema.

<ϛ> Εἴ τις λέγει θεὸν ἢ δεσπότην εἶναι τοῦ Χριστοῦ τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγον καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον τὸν αὐτὸν ὁμολογεῖ θεόν τε ὁμοῦ καὶ ἄνθρωπον, ὡς γεγονότος σαρκὸς τοῦ λόγου κατὰ τὰς γραφάς, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

VII. If any one says that Jesus was energized as man by God the Word, and that He was invested with the glory of the only begotten as being another beside Him, let him be anathema.

<ζ> Εἴ τίς φησιν ὡς ἄνθρωπον ἐνηργῆσθαι παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγου τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ τὴν τοῦ μονογενοῦς εὐδοξίαν περιῆφθαι ὡς ἑτέρωι παρ' αὐτὸν ὑπάρχοντι, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

VIII. If any one dares to maintain that the ascended man ought to be worshipped together with the divine Word, and be glorified with Him, and with Him be called God as one with another (in that the continual rise of the preposition “with” in composition makes this sense compulsory), and does not rather in one act of worship honour the Emmanuel and praise Him in one doxology, in that He is the Word made flesh, let him be anathema.

<η> Εἴ τις τολμᾶι λέγειν τὸν ἀναληφθέντα ἄνθρωπον συμπροσκυνεῖσθαι δεῖν τῶι θεῶι λόγωι καὶ συνδοξάζεσθαι καὶ συγχρηματίζειν θεὸν ὡς ἕτερον ἑτέρωι (τὸ γὰρ <συν> ἀεὶ προς τιθέμενον τοῦτο νοεῖν ἀναγκάσει) καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον μιᾶι προσκυνήσει τιμᾶι τὸν Ἐμμα νουὴλ καὶ μίαν αὐτῶι τὴν δοξολογίαν ἀνάπτει, καθὸ γέγονε σὰρξ ὁ λόγος, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

IX. If any one says that the one Lord Jesus Christ is glorified by the Spirit, using the power that works through Him as a foreign power, and receiving from Him the ability to operate against unclean spirits, and to complete His miracles among men; and does not rather say that the Spirit is His own, whereby also He wrought His miracles, let him be anathema.

<θ> Εἴ τίς φησιν τὸν ἕνα κύριον Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν δεδοξάσθαι παρὰ τοῦ πνεύματος, ὡς ἀλλοτρίαι δυνάμει τῆι δι' αὐτοῦ χρώμενον καὶ παρ' αὐτοῦ λαβόντα τὸ ἐνεργεῖν δύνασθαι κατὰ πνευμάτων ἀκαθάρτων καὶ τὸ πληροῦν εἰς ἀνθρώπους τὰς θεοσημείας, καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον ἴδιον αὐτοῦ τὸ πνεῦμά φησιν, δι' οὗ καὶ ἐνήργηκε τὰς θεοσημείας, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

X. Holy Scripture states that Christ is High Priest and Apostle of our confession,171 and offered Himself on our behalf for a sweet-smelling savour to God and our Father.172 If, then, any one says that He, the Word of God, was not made our High Priest and Apostle when He was made flesh and man after our manner; but as being another, other than Himself, properly man made of a woman; or if any one says that He offered the offering on His own behalf, and not rather on our behalf alone; for He that knew no sin would not have needed an offering, let him be anathema.

<ι> Ἀρχιερέα καὶ ἀπόστολον τῆς ὁμολογίας ἡμῶν γεγενῆσθαι Χριστὸν ἡ θεία λέγει γραφή, προσκεκόμικε δὲ ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἑαυτὸν εἰς ὀσμὴν εὐωδίας τῶι θεῶι καὶ πατρί. εἴ τις τοίνυν ἀρχιερέα καὶ ἀπόστολον ἡμῶν γεγενῆσθαί φησιν οὐκ αὐτὸν τὸν ἐκ θεοῦ λόγον, ὅτε γέγονε σὰρξ καὶ καθ' ἡμᾶς ἄνθρωπος, ἀλλ' ὡς ἕτερον παρ' αὐτὸν ἰδικῶς ἄνθρωπον ἐκ γυναικός, ἢ εἴ τις λέγει καὶ ὑπὲρ ἑαυτοῦ προσενεγκεῖν αὐτὸν τὴν προσφορὰν καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον ὑπὲρ μόνων ἡμῶν (οὐ γὰρ ἂν ἐδεήθη προσφορᾶς ὁ μὴ εἰδὼς ἁμαρτίαν), ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

XI. If any one confesses not that the Lord’s flesh is giver of life,173 and proper to the Word of God Himself, but (states) that it is of another than Him, united indeed to Him in dignity, yet as only possessing a divine indwelling; and not rather, as we said, giver of life, because it is proper to the Word of Him who hath might to engender all things alive, let him be anathema.

<ια> Εἴ τις οὐχ ὁμολογεῖ τὴν τοῦ κυρίου σάρκα ζωοποιὸν εἶναι καὶ ἰδίαν αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἐκ θεοῦ πατρὸς λόγου, ἀλλ' ὡς ἑτέρου τινὸς παρ' αὐτὸν συνημμένου μὲν αὐτῶι κατὰ τὴν ἀξίαν ἢ γοῦν ὡς μόνην θείαν ἐνοίκησιν ἐσχηκότος, καὶ οὐχὶ δὴ μᾶλλον ζωοποιόν, ὡς ἔφημεν, ὅτι γέγονεν ἰδία τοῦ λόγου τοῦ τὰ πάντα ζωογονεῖν ἰσχύοντος, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.

XII. If any one confesses not that the Word of God suffered in flesh, and was crucified in flesh, and tasted death in flesh, and was made firstborn of the dead, in so far as He is life and giver of life, as God; let him be anathema.

<ιβ> Εἴ τις οὐχ ὁμολογεῖ τὸν τοῦ θεοῦ λόγον παθόντα σαρκὶ καὶ ἐσταυρωμένον σαρκὶ καὶ θανάτου γευσάμενον σαρκὶ γεγονότα τε πρωτότοκον ἐκ τῶν νεκρῶν, καθὸ ζωή τέ ἐστι καὶ ζωοποιὸς ὡς θεός, ἀνάθεμα ἔστω.


Soruce: Greek Text Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum, Ed. Schwartz, E.
Berlin: De Gruyter, 1927/1928
Thanks. Those are the anathemas appended to Cyril's third letter to Nestorius. The body of the letter will provide context, but they are the anathemas without the later explanation of them written by Cyril.
 

BJ Bear

Active member
I am wondering if the 12 anathamas constitute a TEXT so that any one of them should be read in light of the rest of them. I have tenatively concluded that this is the way to read them since unpacking anathama <ζ> seems to require understanding the previous anathamas.

Also should the 12 anathamas be considered as part of the letter of Cyril they are attached to so that the text under consideration is really the letter itself. I don't understand where this document Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum came from. Is it a modern collection or something from the fifth century?

The document that has the 12 anathamas with the explanations, is that a separate letter of Cyril? When I confront the contents of Concilium universale Ephesenum anno 431, I have no way of knowing what I am looking at. It looks like a modern collection of numerous texts published in the 1920s and then in the 1960s in Germany. Sorting out the boundaries of the individual source texts isn't a trivial problem.
Thanks for starting this thread. The ACO is great resource.

I didn't find access to the volume which contains the Explanations of the Twelve Chapters but I was able to browse the volumes on Chalcedon. So assuming he used the same method in the the other volumes he produced (+1940) the introductory material and background information is generally in German and sometimes Latin. The documents in the collections that I saw were Greek and Latin copies of various dates which are or are among the earliest copies and considered reliable.
 
This has the three letters, the explanations, and a whole lot more. Explanations begin at 294. https://books.google.com/books?id=7yMMAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA291&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=3#v=onepage&q&f=false

Thank you. I found a more assessable[1] source here although it is on an insecure site which I have had zero problems with over the weekend. I have started a new thread for asking questions about the third letter to Nestorius.

[1] Something I can read with my old eyes.
 
Thank you. I found a more assessable[1] source here although it is on an insecure site
Well it isn't something we want to discuss here but using an unlocked site isn't a good idea. BRAVE imposed encryption on first access to the site but one you click on the English translation box and click OK you get a warning that you are now about to enter an unencrypted world.

http://apologia.sk is in Slovakia. Don't know how to find out what this is all about.
 
Last edited:
Top