What do you think?
Rate this book
On the Unity of Christ by St. Cyril of Alexandria (1-Dec-1995) Paperback
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews
December 17, 2024
All my homies hate Nestorianism
February 29, 2024
Highly polemical, and very repetitive.
The repetition isn't redundant, though, he picks up nuance every time he circles back, so it's thorough and at points monotonous, but very insightful.
The repetition isn't redundant, though, he picks up nuance every time he circles back, so it's thorough and at points monotonous, but very insightful.
November 22, 2023
Deep, deep and deep. I would not call it your lazy Sunday afternoon easy-read book. And like many other books that translate ancient texts, this book has two major sections: an introduction and the translation of St Cyril's article 'On the Unity of Christ'. I found the language difficult to understand in both sections!.
The introduction gives a historical overview of life in the fifth century in Alexandria. This is where St. Cyril lived. I found this very interesting. Before I read this book, I used to think that St. Cyril was abrupt and exaggerating. Now, I know why he defended the faith that way. It was the culture of his time and his spiritual experience of Christ. The rest of the introduction would talk about St. Cyril theological themes .
The main text of his article, needs some background in philosophy. And my knowledge in philosophy is a bit broken. So, it took me a couple of reads to understand some things. But I pressed on to finish it.
The introduction gives a historical overview of life in the fifth century in Alexandria. This is where St. Cyril lived. I found this very interesting. Before I read this book, I used to think that St. Cyril was abrupt and exaggerating. Now, I know why he defended the faith that way. It was the culture of his time and his spiritual experience of Christ. The rest of the introduction would talk about St. Cyril theological themes .
The main text of his article, needs some background in philosophy. And my knowledge in philosophy is a bit broken. So, it took me a couple of reads to understand some things. But I pressed on to finish it.
February 1, 2025
good book :D. L nestorianism. All my homies hate non-chalcedonian christology
November 29, 2024
This originally appeared at The Irresponsible Reader.
---
WHAT'S ON THE UNITY OF CHRIST ABOUT?
In a dialogue between characters creatively named A and B, Cyril advances--Scripturally, theologically, and philosophically--the classic case against Nestorius and his teachings, advancing what's now received as the orthodox position on Christ's nature as the god-man.
UH, WHAT?
I haven't read a lot of the books in this series, but of the handful that I have read, this is one that had me scratching my head the most. There were a few times that I just had no idea why Cyril was addressing topics or making a certain argument. Those either were moved on from quickly, or I finally got the point--I don't think this was a problem on his part--it's just me not knowing the ins and outs of my Fifth Century theology, particularly the Christological conflicts.
There were even a couple of times where I was following Cyril, but I really didn't think the argument was that sound or helpful--and both times, my notes tell me that within two pages, I'd come on board (well, largely).
It's a good reminder that just because someone is a reliable teacher/writer--even an Early Church Father--they're flawed people (flawed people who've had people reading them for centuries, sure). And while the smart thing to do is shut up and learn from them regardless, they still can stumble from time to time. You've still got to keep your brain engaged and to test the Spirits.
TONE
Hoo-ee, Cyril did not hold back what he thought of his opponents or those who differed from him:
It's a different time. It's a different atmosphere. The stakes (typically) in theological controversy aren't quite as high for us as they were then. So we don't usually talk like that. I'm not going to say whether Cyril was right or wrong in that--it's just too hard to apply different cultural standards.
But let's put it this way: you know where you stood with him. No doubt. It reminded me of reading Luther, to be honest.
SO, WHAT DID I THINK ABOUT ON THE UNITY OF CHRIST?
So, I'm obviously not going to get into any kind of critique of Cyril's thinking or writing--I know my place in history and his (I might get into something closer to that in a few weeks when I talk about a book about Cyril). So, this is focusing on this read.
This is a really easy read given how important it (and Cyril) is in history. The translator (like with the rest of this series) has got to be at least partially responsible for that.
Except for the moments I mentioned above, I had no trouble understanding his points--either what he claimed his opponents taught or his response to it. The text flows easily, the dialogue format helps you track what he's saying (I don't always appreciate that style, but I got into it with this).
I enjoyed this, I profited from it, and (if nothing else) it serves as a good motivation to get more from this series.
---
WHAT'S ON THE UNITY OF CHRIST ABOUT?
In a dialogue between characters creatively named A and B, Cyril advances--Scripturally, theologically, and philosophically--the classic case against Nestorius and his teachings, advancing what's now received as the orthodox position on Christ's nature as the god-man.
UH, WHAT?
I haven't read a lot of the books in this series, but of the handful that I have read, this is one that had me scratching my head the most. There were a few times that I just had no idea why Cyril was addressing topics or making a certain argument. Those either were moved on from quickly, or I finally got the point--I don't think this was a problem on his part--it's just me not knowing the ins and outs of my Fifth Century theology, particularly the Christological conflicts.
There were even a couple of times where I was following Cyril, but I really didn't think the argument was that sound or helpful--and both times, my notes tell me that within two pages, I'd come on board (well, largely).
It's a good reminder that just because someone is a reliable teacher/writer--even an Early Church Father--they're flawed people (flawed people who've had people reading them for centuries, sure). And while the smart thing to do is shut up and learn from them regardless, they still can stumble from time to time. You've still got to keep your brain engaged and to test the Spirits.
TONE
Hoo-ee, Cyril did not hold back what he thought of his opponents or those who differed from him:
What nonsense that is. Surely it is the clearest proof of delirious brain.
My goodness. I cannot imagine how stupid and intellectually superficial they must be who hold to such a conceptos. The whole thing is faithlessness and nothing else. It is the novelty of wicked inventions, the overthrowing of the divine and sacred kerygma which has proclaimed One Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, truly the Word of God the Father...
who is this serpant who has recently appeared? And what are these idiotic things he ser against the teachings of the truth?
What has happened to their brains and their intelligence—people who hold such opinions?
Do they have anything from the sacred scriptures to demonstrate for us the truth of their doctrine on such matters? Or are they innovating in the faith? “Speaking things from their own hearts and not from the mouth of the Lord,” as it is written (Jer 23:6). Perhaps they find themselves unable to say: “As for me, let me never boast save in the cross of Christ, through whom the world is crucified to me, and I to the world” (Gal 6:14).
It's a different time. It's a different atmosphere. The stakes (typically) in theological controversy aren't quite as high for us as they were then. So we don't usually talk like that. I'm not going to say whether Cyril was right or wrong in that--it's just too hard to apply different cultural standards.
But let's put it this way: you know where you stood with him. No doubt. It reminded me of reading Luther, to be honest.
SO, WHAT DID I THINK ABOUT ON THE UNITY OF CHRIST?
So, I'm obviously not going to get into any kind of critique of Cyril's thinking or writing--I know my place in history and his (I might get into something closer to that in a few weeks when I talk about a book about Cyril). So, this is focusing on this read.
This is a really easy read given how important it (and Cyril) is in history. The translator (like with the rest of this series) has got to be at least partially responsible for that.
Except for the moments I mentioned above, I had no trouble understanding his points--either what he claimed his opponents taught or his response to it. The text flows easily, the dialogue format helps you track what he's saying (I don't always appreciate that style, but I got into it with this).
I enjoyed this, I profited from it, and (if nothing else) it serves as a good motivation to get more from this series.
October 28, 2025
In reading the patristics through the "Popular Patristics" series I have enjoyed engaging with primary sources. My faith has been enriched and I continue to want to read them. This text has risen above the others at this point. A few thoughts:
The introduction was a huge highlight. The editor gave incredible historical context and an overview of Cyril of Alexandria's life. It was lengthy but so helpful.
The actual content was great. Cyril was an incredibly passionate author who used really strong language to make his points. The writing is given as an exchange between himself and someone who has heard and knows the errors of the heretical teachers that Cyril is combating. This format is accessible, enjoyable, and not uncommon in the time. I laughed at some of the ways Cyril described his opponents. Not necessarily something we should do (routinely calling the idiots and fools) but certainly made his points strongly.
Finally, Cyril gives us a great vocabulary around how God the Son assumed the flesh in a way that we must understand this union as one person taking on two natures -- yet unmixed, not confused, and still one unified person. His language is central to an orthodox understanding of the reality of the incarnation and how we can understand the person of God the Son, the Word of God, in flesh.
A worthy read for anyone who would like to expand their understanding of the Scriptures, on the nature of the incarnation, and how we should worship the one Son of God in the flesh.
The introduction was a huge highlight. The editor gave incredible historical context and an overview of Cyril of Alexandria's life. It was lengthy but so helpful.
The actual content was great. Cyril was an incredibly passionate author who used really strong language to make his points. The writing is given as an exchange between himself and someone who has heard and knows the errors of the heretical teachers that Cyril is combating. This format is accessible, enjoyable, and not uncommon in the time. I laughed at some of the ways Cyril described his opponents. Not necessarily something we should do (routinely calling the idiots and fools) but certainly made his points strongly.
Finally, Cyril gives us a great vocabulary around how God the Son assumed the flesh in a way that we must understand this union as one person taking on two natures -- yet unmixed, not confused, and still one unified person. His language is central to an orthodox understanding of the reality of the incarnation and how we can understand the person of God the Son, the Word of God, in flesh.
A worthy read for anyone who would like to expand their understanding of the Scriptures, on the nature of the incarnation, and how we should worship the one Son of God in the flesh.
July 10, 2024
Trying to review a book by one of the patristic fathers feels incredibly arrogant. Am I supposed to thank Cyril for defending the faith and giving us the categories we use to describe the unity of Christ's manhood and godhood, but then tell him he was unnecessarily mean in describing his opponents and a little repetitive? I guess I will try.
Every book in the popular patristic series has been incredible and this book is no exception. The introduction is helpful in explaining all of the background information needed to understand the work. It gives a great biography of Cyril and manages to make him come alive as a person. The translation itself is readable and easily understandable. The book is written as a dialogue between two people which makes it much easier to follow.
Cyril is not one of my favorite church fathers. I have a particular affection towards the ones who lived, particularly holy lives. Cyril appears to be constantly surrounded in controversy and political maneuvering. That takes a little away from my enjoyment of the book, but that is my own hangup. He also continually insults his theological opponents. This is not unusual for patristic writings, but it did seem extreme even for the time period.
You cannot separate books like this from their historical significance in history. I am deeply thankful Cyril wrote it and I can read it even if it was not my favorite. Reading the patristics is always worth it.
Every book in the popular patristic series has been incredible and this book is no exception. The introduction is helpful in explaining all of the background information needed to understand the work. It gives a great biography of Cyril and manages to make him come alive as a person. The translation itself is readable and easily understandable. The book is written as a dialogue between two people which makes it much easier to follow.
Cyril is not one of my favorite church fathers. I have a particular affection towards the ones who lived, particularly holy lives. Cyril appears to be constantly surrounded in controversy and political maneuvering. That takes a little away from my enjoyment of the book, but that is my own hangup. He also continually insults his theological opponents. This is not unusual for patristic writings, but it did seem extreme even for the time period.
You cannot separate books like this from their historical significance in history. I am deeply thankful Cyril wrote it and I can read it even if it was not my favorite. Reading the patristics is always worth it.
June 5, 2026
St.Cyril =W , Nestorius=L. With all jokes aside , St.Cyril provides in depth back and forth on the two natures of Christ and how they work together. Nestorius was later condemned for his teaching of the natures of Christ as the church affirmed the teachings of St. Cyril in the ecumenical councils. His description of how Christ human nature and divine nature work and the importance of understanding them can be summarized like this. Christ is fully human and fully God , with his natures being of one hypostasis in the hypostatic union. His human nature being deified by the divine nature allows for the sacrifice of the cross to redeem the curse of Adam. While they are two natures they are considered one being unified in one hypostasis fully working together as one but not mixed, blended or confused . Which destroys PSA and creates a correct Christalogical understanding of what happened at the cross.
March 1, 2024
Worth reading. Makes one appreciate the men who ground the axe head of theology centuries before us. As Christ followers we often take for granted the fights our forefathers in the faith fought to articulate orthodox Chistology. We often wield the sharpened axe head today without appreciating the centuries of work put in before us.
Cyril has a long winded logic which makes it hard to find a place to pause.
Introduction to the work is well done.
Cyril has a long winded logic which makes it hard to find a place to pause.
Introduction to the work is well done.
March 8, 2025
A good entry to the early church fathers. Explores the interface between Christs human and divine natures especially the difficult questions that all Christian’s have to answer at some point. If Christ was God, and Christ died, does that mean that God dies?
In His flesh, the Immortal dies, the God man suffers impassably.
In His flesh, the Immortal dies, the God man suffers impassably.
August 2, 2025
Cyril seems like a good hang and actually made me laugh a couple of times. All my homies hate Nestorius
November 2, 2025
A perfect exposition. My #1 patristic recommendation for understanding Orthodox Christology. 5 stars! ☦️
Displaying 1 - 12 of 12 reviews