Christ's body could in no way be called 'flesh of sin.' Rather, it is the likeness of sinful flesh. It is a body like ours, yet without knowledge of the sickness of fleshly uncleanness, for this divine temple was holy from His mother's womb. As concerns the notions and definitions of nature, no one will hesitate to say that, since it was flesh, it had in itself its own innate movement. But since the Word who sanctifies all creation dwelt in it, the power of sin was condemned, so that this accomplishment might extend also to us. For we have become partakers of Him spiritually and bodily. When Christ also dwells in us through the Holy Spirit and through the blessing of the mystery, then the law of sin is certainly condemned in us as well. Therefore it is true that the weakness from which the law suffered because of the flesh ceased through Christ. He condemned and abolished sin in the flesh, so that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us.
Blessed Paul, explaining the causes of the Incarnation of the Only-begotten Son of God, writes: 'For what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do, God did. He sent His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, as an offering for sin, and condemned sin in the flesh, so that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit' (Rom 8:3-4). And again: 'Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise partook of the same, that through death He might destroy him who had the power of death, that is, the devil. He delivered those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong bondage. For surely He does not take hold of angels, but He takes hold of the seed of Abraham. Therefore He had to be made like His brethren in every respect' (Heb 2:14-17).
We therefore affirm that, because of Adam's transgression, human nature was subjected to corruption. Our reason suffers violence from the desires of the flesh, or from the movements born within us. For the salvation of us who dwell on earth, it became necessary for the Word of God to become man. He had to make His own the human flesh that was subject to corruption and sick with pleasure-loving. Since He is Life and Life-giving, He thereby brought corruption in it to an end. He also bridled the innate movements, namely those that draw toward pleasure-loving. For in precisely this way sin was put to death in it. We also remember that blessed Paul called the movements innate in us 'the law of sin' (Rom 7:23). Therefore, once human flesh became proper to the Word, corruption ceased to be active in it. And because He who made it His own and showed it to be His own is God and knows no sin, the sickness of pleasure-loving also ceased in it, as I have said.
The Only-begotten Word of God did not accomplish this for Himself, for He is always what He is. He did it, of course, for us. If the evils that followed the transgression in Adam came upon us, then what is in Christ will also surely come upon us (1 Cor 15:22). This means incorruption and the putting to death of sin. Therefore He became man, and did not assume a man, as Nestorius thinks. In order that we might believe He became man, while remaining what He was, namely God by nature, it is said of Him that He hungered and grew weary from the journey. He also endured sleep, fear, grief, and the other human and blameless passions. On the other hand, in order fully to assure those who saw Him that, while being man, He is also true God, He performed divine signs. He commanded the sea, raised the dead, and ordered other wondrous works. He also endured the Cross. Thus, by suffering death in the flesh, in the flesh and not in the nature of the Godhead, He became 'the firstborn from the dead' (Col 1:18). He opened the way to incorruption for human nature and, having despoiled Hades, freed the souls held there.
As Saint Eulogius of Alexandria observes, in his work Treasury of Sayings on the Holy and Consubstantial Trinity, Saint Cyril himself says that God the Word, having become High Priest for our sake, assumed man like a podirion, or a temple, from Mary. Why, then, does he say here that God the Word 'did not assume a man'? The explanation is given at once. He denies that God the Word assumed a man in the sense 'as Nestorius thinks.' That is, He did not assume some separately existing man. According to Saint Cyril, God the Word brought this man into being in Himself, giving him hypostasis. He truly became man, while remaining unchanged in His Godhead. For Saint Eulogius, this is a vivid example of how Saint Cyril 'does not entrust his mind to expressions, but weighs expressions by reason,' τῇ διανοίᾳ. In other words, for him the verbal side of Christology has a subordinate, not self-sufficient, significance.
Although the initiator into the mysteries is worthy of admiration and very subtle in contemplation, he calls himself 'unskilled in speech' (cf. 2 Cor 11:6). Therefore we too are not at all ashamed to say that the arrangement of the words before us lacks some small thing for the full disclosure of their meaning. It ought to have said: 'For the weakness of the law, in which it was weakened because of the flesh,' was, for example, destroyed or brought to an end. Then it should have introduced the explanation of this circumstance. It should have joined to it the manner of this destruction, adding in turn that God, having sent His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and on account of sin, condemned sin in the flesh, and so forth.
Since the arrangement of the words is as it stands, let us consider the manner of the healing given through Christ. How did the weakness of the law cease? What, in general, should be understood by this weakness of the law? And of what law? The divine preacher tells us all this in detail. He agrees that the law helps those who know it. I mean, of course, the written law, but also the law of the spirit. By this law we became able to will the good, even if we perhaps lacked the power to accomplish it. For he says: 'For to will the good is present with me, but to do it is not' (Rom 7:18). Clearly sin prevailed, and the law of the flesh turned the mind, even against its will, toward what belonged to itself.
In exactly the same way, I think, the weakness of the law may rightly be understood. This applies to the written law given through Moses, as I have just said. It also applies to the law innate in us. According to this law even Gentiles, though they do not have the written law, appear to do by nature what the law requires and are a law to themselves. They show that the work of the law is written in their hearts (Rom 2:14-15), as it is written. But it is time to examine what the weakness in both laws is.
The written law was a teacher of propriety and an instructor in virtue, yet it did not grant justification to anyone at all. The law innate in us, which the Apostle also calls 'the law of the Spirit' (Rom 8:2), was inclined toward the good. Yet it yielded too readily to that law which called toward shameful things. Therefore the weakness, that is, the infirmity of either the written or the innate law, ceased through Christ. Since the flesh has in some manner been put to death, and desire in us has as it were been abolished, the law of the spirit, or of the mind, will in no way grow faint.
Let us say, as far as possible, how sin was put to death in us. The Word of God, by the good pleasure of God the Father, came in the likeness of sinful flesh in order to condemn sin in the flesh. For He became man, bringing Himself down into self-emptying. Can anyone doubt that His body is of the same kind and nature, όμοειδές και όμοφυές, as our bodies? Yet if the bodies of other human beings may be called sinful flesh because they are naturally sick with the arising of absurd desires, then of Christ's body one must affirm that it is not sinful flesh, by no means. Rather, it is the likeness of sinful flesh. That is, although it is like our bodies, it no longer knows the sickness of fleshly uncleanness. For this divine temple is holy from the maternal womb.
As to the concepts and notions belonging to human nature, anyone will say without hesitation that, since it was flesh, it could have in itself its own innate movement. But because the Word who sanctifies all creation dwelt in it, the power of sin was condemned in it, so that this achievement might pass also to us. For we have become partakers of Him both spiritually and bodily. When Christ also makes His dwelling in us through the Holy Spirit and through the mystical blessing, then the law of sin is inevitably condemned in us as well. This means through the Eucharist, whose purpose, according to the saint, is 'to cause Christ to dwell bodily in us through participation and communion in His holy Flesh.' The saint repeatedly speaks of a twofold union with Christ, spiritual and bodily. For example: 'We have become members of His body through the mystical blessing. We are united with Him also in another way, since we have become partakers of His divine nature through the Spirit, for He dwells in the souls of the saints.'
Thus it is true that the weakness of the law, in which it was weakened because of the flesh, ceased through Christ. He condemned and abolished sin in the flesh, so that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us. For the righteous requirement of the law has been fulfilled. This means the power foretold by the law, or the will directed toward virtue. As I have said, the law existing in us no longer grows faint in any way through suffering violence from innate desires. Therefore the righteous requirement of the law has been fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh, but who desire, rather, to live spiritually.
THEOSIS