Cyril of Alexandria was the church father who argued tirelessly for an orthodox Christology which could genuinely call Mary the Theotokos. He struggled against Nestorius, who allegedly attempted to inappropriately distinguish between the actions and experiences of the divine Son of God and the human Jesus. Against this teaching, Cyril fought to the death to preserve the unity of the divine and human in the Incarnation. For Cyril, the perfect union of God and Man in the Incarnation was the heart of soteriology – the truth of how God has saved humanity.
When one reads Cyril they find that he has a collection of “pet texts” that he references often in order to explain key passages of Scripture or to defend certain doctrines. For Cyril, his “go-to” texts consisted of John 1:14, Philippians 2:5-11, Hebrews 2:14-17, and (as I argued in my thesis) Romans 5:14. It’s not hard to see why – all of these verses emphasize the Incarnation of the eternal Word of God and its salvific implications. Thus, no matter what text or doctrine Cyril is dealing with, a quick and steady reference to these texts helps put the issue in his overall theological context. As an example, see my post on Cyril’s theological reading of Luke 10:23-24.
I wonder if this practice, of developing a “canon within the canon” of sorts, is a helpful example for Christians wishing to faithfully interpret Scripture and understand key doctrines. In fact, I would suggest that most Christians already (perhaps subconsciously) interpret Scripture and various theologies in this fashion.
I know that I have a few “go-to texts” that I immediately think of when pondering exegetical or theological issues: John 1:14-18, Hebrews 1:1-4, Galatians 1:3-4, and Philippians 3:20-21. Those who know me can easily see why/how these texts work in my thinking: I consistently emphasize Jesus as the clearest and fullest picture of God (John 1:14-18 and Hebrews 1:1-4), I also have a fairly apocalyptic eschatology (Galatians 1:3-4), and I think Christians should focus more on the future resurrection of the dead (Philippians 3:20-21). Thus, one of my first questions when thinking through an exegetical or theological issue is often: “How does this fit with an understanding of the life and teachings of Jesus as the perfect revelation of God’s character and will?”
I’m interested in whether you have some “pet texts,” what they say about your theology, and whether you think that this practice is ultimately helpful or harmful. So:
Do you have “key texts” which function for you as a “canon-within-a-canon”?
What do you they say about your theology?
What dangers are there to employing such an approach to exegesis/theology?
6 thoughts on “Cyril of Alexandria’s “Canon within the Canon” – What is yours?”
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
I find I frequently think of things from the vantage point of 1 Corinthians 1-4. I sometimes toy with the thought of writing a book on ‘Theology Starting from 1 Corinthians’ – not meaning a ‘theology of 1 Corinthians’- but rather thinking through broader systematic categories from the distinctive vantage point of Paul’s concerns in that letter. I think there’s some value in that sort of exploration.
I would agree with you. Would be interesting and most likely a helpful framework for lots of theological categories and issues. When can I expect you to be finished with it? 😉
Reblogged this on Highland Church of Christ Texarkana.
Like Cyril, Philippians 2:5-11 is one of mine (probably my core text if I had to pick one).