Cyril posits a very interesting interpretation
of how Christ was “made sin.” Turning to Hosea 4:8 (“They feed on the sin of my
people”), Cyril believes this refers to the offering for sins, which he then
connects to 2 Corinthians 5:21. Thus Christ was not literally transformed into
sin but rather became the offering to remove sins. Cyril makes similar statements
concerning Romans 8:3 and 1 Corinthians 5:7. (Commentary on 2 Corinthians PG
74.945) Although not supported by the citations he provides, Sabourin concludes
that Cyril believes Christ to have become sin from the moment of his conception
in the womb by joining himself to sinful human nature, and even more so in his
death when he became the ultimate “sin-offering.” (Joseph Lucas, Jewish and
Christian Sacrifice in Cyril of Alexandria [2023], 56)
. . . Cyril quotes at length Leviticus
6:24-9 in which God prescribes the annual sacrifice of the goat for the
expiation of Israel’s sins. He then clarifies a common question of New
Testament readers: why is Christ called “sin,” if he did not commit any sins
himself. Did he literally become sin? Cyril responds, “He commands the
sin [offering] to be sacrificed, meaning for sin.” (PG 65.549) He
continues:
This goat was a type of Christ who, as
we said, made himself sin. “For he was numbered among the transgressors” (Is
53:12), and he crucified himself together with the transgressors, and also made
himself accursed, for it was written, “Cursed is anything hung on a tree” (Deut
21:23; Gal 3:13). For he lowered himself to these things for our sakes out of
economy, although he was and is holy—not by communing with another as we do,
but because he himself is God by nature. For we believe that through himself
all creation is sanctified. Even when you consider the angels, and those in
even greater glory, or even if you consider those in the highest place, meaning
the Thrones and Principalities, or even if you name the Seraphim, they do not sanctify
themselves in any other way than from the Father through the Son, in the
Spirit. Because even if he made himself sin, he remained what he was, meaning
holy according to his divine nature, and he “does not give the Spirit by
measure” (Jn 3:34), according to the word of John the Baptist. (PG 65.549)
Cyril envisages cosmic redemption. Being
God by nature, he united himself to creation in order to sanctify all things. Following
an argument made in Hebrews 1:1-2:9, he asserts that none of the angelic hosts
are greater than Christ, for each receives its sanctification and glory from
the Father through the Son. Consequently, the term “sin” can never be applied
ontologically to Jesus because his humanity did not receive “the Spirit by
measure,” that is to say, it was wholly sanctified from conception (not
gradually). The idea that Jesus could have sinned in any way is considered an impossibility
in light of the hypostatic union. For Cyril, Christ is only called “sin” in as
much as he offered himself as a means to expiate humanity’s sins, just as the
goat was not the sources of sin, but merely a vehicle to actuate absolution for
the people. (Joseph Lucas, Jewish and Christian Sacrifice in Cyril of Alexandria
[2023], 108-9)
But if his death was indeed a sacrifice,
then what sort of offering was it?
The answer is found in Paul’s epistles.
Cyril writes, quoting the apostle, “’For [God] made him who knew no sin to be
sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him’ (2 Cor 5:21).
But does this mean that Jesus literally became sin, or something else? Cyril
finds the solution in the Old Testament. IT is not that Christ became sin, but
that he became the sin-offering (“sin” being shorthand for the latter). He writes,
“[Christ] also likens himself to the scapegoat. For what reason? He offered
himself for our sins, according the Scriptures. But according to the Law, the
goat is sacrifice for sin.” (PG 69.128) Interpreting the cultic prescriptions
in Leviticus, Cyril says that God
commands the sin to be sacrificed, mean for
sin. . . . This goat was a type of Christ who, as we said, made himself sin. “For
he was numbered among the transgressors” (Is 53:12), and he crucified himself
together with transgressors, and also made himself accursed, for it was
written, “Cursed is anything hung on a tree” (Deut21:23). For he lowered
himself to these things for our sakes out of economy, although he was holy—not by
communing with another as we do, but because he himself is God by nature. For
we believe that through himself all creation is sanctified. . . . Because even
if he made himself sin, he remained what he was, meaning holy according to his
divine nature. (PG 69.549)
The two goats of the Yom Kippur
sacrifice were themselves pure and blameless, and merely bore the transgressions
of others, just as the antitype remained holy as he carried the sins of all.
Here Cyril is comfortable using the language of Scripture, while also rising to
a higher theological understanding. In the incarnation, the human nature of
Jesus is entirely sanctified and therefore holy, and could never be called “sin”
or “curse.” These titles speak only of his economic activity, in that he became
the ultimate sin-offering so that through his life-giving death sin may be
blotted out. He is depicted as both the High Priest sacrificing the
sin-offering, and the sin-offering itself; but in fact, it is because he is
both divine and human that his voluntary death is able to overcome the power of
sin, his holiness thus sanctifying human nature so that “all creation is
sanctified,” meaning the material world with which we humans are connected. (Joseph
Lucas, Jewish and Christian Sacrifice in Cyril of Alexandria [2023], 202-3)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift
card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift
Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
