The following comes from:
Nicholas
Constas, Proclus of Constantinople and the Cult of the Virgin in Late
Antiquity: Homilies 1-5, Texts and Translations (Supplements to Vigilae
Christianae 86; Leiden: Brill, 2003), 296:
. . . the
emphasis on Mary’s full pregnancy is clearly a counterweight to the docetic
assertion that the Word took nothing from the humanity of Mary but instead
passed through her like ‘water through a tube’ (δια σωληνος). This latter
formula was traditionally associated with the christologies of Valentinus and
Apollinarius, and was uniformly condemned by such notables as Irenaeus, Cyril
of Jerusalem, Gregory Nazianzus, Ephrem, Epiphanius, Chrysostom, Theodoret,
[69] and John of Damascus, who provides an interesting variant: “Christ was
conceived through the Virgin’s sense of hearing (δι’ ακοης), but made his exit in the more usual
manner, even though some myth-makers claim that he was delivered through her
side (πλευρα).”
[70]
Notes
for the Above:
[69] Irenaeus, Adversus
haereses, 1.7.2: “They
say that Christ passed through (διοδευσαντα) Mary like water flows through a tube (καθαπερ υδωρ δια σμληνος οδευει)” (ed. Rousseau,
SC 264 [1979], 103, line 698); Cyril of
Jerusalem, Cat.
illum., 4.9: ‘The
incarnation did not occur in semblance or fantasy, but in truth; neither did
the Lord pass through the Virgin as if through a tube (ουδε δια σωληνος διελθων)’ (PG 33.465B); Gregory Nazianzus, ep. 101.16:
“If anyone says that Christ passed through (διαδραμειν) the Virgin like water through a tube
(δια σωληνος) he is likewise
separated from God (ομοιως αθεος)”
(ed. Gallay, SC
208 [1974], 42);
Ephrem, Homily on the
Nativity: “Not as he
entered did he leave her, for from her he put on a body and came forth” (Brock,
Harp of the
Spirit [1985], 66, lines
137–38); Epiphanius, Panarion, 31.7.4: “They (i.e., the
Valentinians) say that his body came down from heaven and passed through (διεληλθιεναι)
Mary like water through a tube (δια σωληνος)” (ed. Holl, GCS
25 [1915], 1:396,
lines 9–11; cf. ibid., 31.4.3, p. 388, lines 8–11); Chrysostom, in Mt. 4.3: “The Gospel says just enough to
refute those who say that Christ passed through (παρηλθον) the Virgin as if through a tube (δια τινος σωληνος)” (PG 57.43B);
and Theodoret, ep. 145: “Valentinus and Basilides, Bardesanes and Harmonius,
and those of their company, allow indeed the Virgin’s conception and the birth,
but affirm that God the Word took nothing from the Virgin, but devised an
alternative way (παροδον τινα ποιησασθαι) and passed through her like a tube (δια σωληνος)” (PG 83.1380B); cf. id., Haer. fab. comp., 5.11 (ibid., 488D); and Hippolytus,
Elenchus, 6.35 (ed. Wendland, GCS 26 [1916], 3:164–65). See also the
study of Tardieu, “Comme a travers un tuyau” (1981), 151–77.
[70] De fide orthodoxa, 87.4.14 (as above, n. 30). That Christ emerged from Mary’s ‘side’
is a reference to the formation of Eve from the side of Adam, cf. Gen. 2.21–22: “And God formed the rib (πλευρα) which he took
from Adam into a woman.” By extension, this is also a reference to the passion,
foreshadowed in the striking and piercing of Mary’s ear.
