Theodoret of Cyrrhus→Alexander, of Hierapolis|c. 440 AD|theodoret cyrrhus
christologygrief deathimperial politics
From: Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrrhus
To: Alexander, Bishop of Hierapolis
Date: ~433 AD
Context: Theodoret reacts with distress to news that John of Antioch has anathematized the teaching of Nestorius as part of the reconciliation with Cyril, but finds a slender consolation in the qualified wording of the anathema.
To Alexander of Hierapolis,
Your holiness should know that when I read the letter addressed to the emperor, I was deeply distressed. I know perfectly well that the writer of the letter, holding the same opinions as we do, has unwisely and impiously condemned a man who has never held or taught anything contrary to sound doctrine.
But the form of the anathema, though it is more likely to grieve a reader than his assent to the condemnation itself, has nonetheless given me some grounds for comfort -- in that it is laid down not in broad general terms but with some qualification. For he has not said "We anathematize his doctrine," but rather "whatever he has either said or held that is not consistent with the teaching of the apostles."
[This distinction gave Theodoret hope that Nestorius's actual Christological teaching -- which Theodoret believed to be orthodox -- was not being condemned, only potential errors.]
Letter 176
Please help support the mission of New Advent and get the full contents of this website as an instant download. Includes the Catholic Encyclopedia, Church Fathers, Summa, Bible and more — all for only $19.99...
Letter to the same Alexander after he had learned that John, Bishop of Antioch, had Anathematized the Doctrine of Nestorius.
Be it known to your holiness that when I read the letter addressed to the emperor I was much distressed, because I know perfectly well that the writer of the letter, being of the same opinions, has unwisely and impiously condemned one who has never held or taught anything contrary to sound doctrine. But the form of anathema, though it be more likely than his assent to the condemnation, to grieve a reader, nevertheless has given me some ground of comfort, in that it is laid down not in wide general terms, but with some qualification. For he has not said We anathematize his doctrine but whatever he has either said or held other than is warranted by the doctrine of the apostles.
◆
From:Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrrhus
To:Alexander, Bishop of Hierapolis
Date:~433 AD
Context:Theodoret reacts with distress to news that John of Antioch has anathematized the teaching of Nestorius as part of the reconciliation with Cyril, but finds a slender consolation in the qualified wording of the anathema.
To Alexander of Hierapolis,
Your holiness should know that when I read the letter addressed to the emperor, I was deeply distressed. I know perfectly well that the writer of the letter, holding the same opinions as we do, has unwisely and impiously condemned a man who has never held or taught anything contrary to sound doctrine.
But the form of the anathema, though it is more likely to grieve a reader than his assent to the condemnation itself, has nonetheless given me some grounds for comfort -- in that it is laid down not in broad general terms but with some qualification. For he has not said "We anathematize his doctrine," but rather "whatever he has either said or held that is not consistent with the teaching of the apostles."
[This distinction gave Theodoret hope that Nestorius's actual Christological teaching -- which Theodoret believed to be orthodox -- was not being condemned, only potential errors.]
Modern English rendering for readability. See the 19th-century translation or original Latin/Greek for scholarly use.