Anthony Bibawy has produced a major study, as thorough as it is insightful, on Cyril of Alexandria’s theological anthropology. Along the way, Bibawy provides short snippets from other early fifth-century Eastern authors (Isidore of Pelusium, Atticus of Constantinople, Proclus of Constantinople and Hesychius of Jerusalem). These can seem at points like an intrusion into the main subject, but their contributions are included to show that Cyril is not an outlier, but stands as a representative of a wider eastern tradition regarding Adam’s sin and its consequences.
Bibawy is directly addressing what he considers ‘a false dichotomy and the exaggeration of differences’ (p. 3) in the way eastern and western fathers have been portrayed, and his aim is to show that renowned eastern fathers from the fifth century ‘incorporate many, if not the majority, of the terms and teachings behind what is labelled as Western departures concerning original sin and humanity’s redemption’ (p. 2). The author presents this thesis in contrast to one supported by recent prominent Orthodox writers (Georges Florovsky, John Romanides, John Meyendorff, Christos Yannaras and Kallistos Ware) who have argued that the common eastern view departs in significant ways from the standard western view propounded, for example, by Augustine.
The core of this study is found in five generous chapters that make the case for this alternate eastern patristic account of Adam’s sin. In chapter 1, Bibawy revisits Pelagianism in the East. The historical overview he provides shows that ‘the Pelagian controversy certainly involved the East’ and that ‘Pelagian theology is in stark contrast with the teachings of Cyril and his contemporaries’ (p. 54). Chapter 2 considers the image of God in humans before and after the fall as the basis for understanding the consequences of Adam’s sin. Cyril (and his fellow eastern bishops) portray the image of God as including not only innate human characteristics but also divine gifts (notably the indwelling of the Spirit) that go beyond human nature. Due to the fall, the divine gifts were lost, while the innate gifts were distorted and incapable of serving the divine will. Notably, Cyril makes no distinction between the terms ‘image’ and ‘likeness’.
Chapter 3 addresses the vexed question of the transmission of sin from Adam to his progeny. Drawing on numerous texts throughout Cyril’s broad corpus (and supporting texts from other authors), Bibawy finds a general consensus that ‘Adam’s sin has left the stain, disease, and debt of sin upon all humanity and thereby the root of death and corruption’ (p. 87). Bibawy draws the strong conclusion that, for Cyril and these easterners, ‘all of humanity is guilty “in Adam”, and has offended God because of its collectivity and solidarity in Adam’s sin’ (p. 87). He further describes this in terms of all humans (and so human nature after the fall) inheriting ‘sinfulness and the inclination to sin’ (p. 147). Here I believe that the language of ‘guilt’ in reference to Adam’s sin in Cyril’s thought needs to be handled carefully. Though the terminology of guilt is warranted in one sense, Cyril typically reserves the language of guilt with respect to the personal and free responsibility each person has before God.
Chapter 4 tackles the challenging topic of divine wrath in Cyril by tracking a series of passages that display God’s aversion to humanity under sin. Here Bibawy engages the topic of God’s emotions, especially his anger. In Cyril’s narrative, God’s just anger is directed to God’s great desire to heal humanity, and so to the sending of the Word in the incarnation. ‘Humanity’s depraved state moved God to both wrath and mercy’ (p. 191), but Bibawy shows that in Cyril’s view the end goal is not judgement but a healing process that moves the sinner to repentance.
The final chapter, ‘The Condemnation of Sin in the Flesh’, brings together a synthetic account of Cyril’s theology that describes the oikonomia of grace. It answers the question: How does Cyril conceive of God’s plan in Christ to remedy the pitiful condition of the human race after the fall? Recapitulation plays a large role in Cyril’s theology, but his use of the Adam-Christ typology and his focus on the gift of the indwelling Spirit provide a positive view of the greater goods obtained through Christ than were lost in Adam. Importantly, Bibawy finds in Cyril clear language that presents Christ as providing for the satisfaction of divine justice and debt obtained in Adam. Bibawy’s treatment of Cyril’s soteriology here, inclusive of the centrality of the gift of the Spirit and the Eucharist, provides one of the most detailed accounts in scholarly literature. His conclusion is that, for Cyril and others, ‘Christ is the Savior of humanity from sin primarily’ (p. 260). This is exactly right but I would add that Cyril places equal emphasis on how deliverance from sin yields a share in the divine life of God that amounts to human deification.
In concluding, Bebawy acknowledges that this study is not designed to be a fully comparative one with either eastern or western views, but he believes that its findings warrant ‘a reassessment of the modern interpretation of Eastern Christian teaching about the transmission of Adam’s sin in humanity’ (p. 265), and he identifies further areas of research and dialogue that would advance our understanding of the various eastern and western accounts. We are deeply in debt to Bebawy for this thoroughgoing study that persuasively delineates a clear and distinct account of Adam’s sin in the thought of Cyril of Alexandria and his fellow bishops of the early fifth century.
