English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This article examines the rhetoric of destruction and damage with which Cyril of Alexandria depicted Nestorius and the deviating theological views during the Christological dispute (the Nestorian controversy). In my analysis, I focus on Cyril’s ways of appealing to security, unity and peace. One of the aims of this article is retranslate Cyril from a venerated church father into a late antique opinion leader who had both the capacity and the power to persuade and who used language not only for describing, but also for moulding social reality. Consequently, I draw attention to the rhetorical techniques by which he constructed the disagreement of theological views into a heresy that dangers the life and salvation of fellow Christians. In this analysis, the discursive category called “orthodoxy” is, therefore, understood as a process in which “orthodoxy” was continually defined, redefined, tested, retested, preserved and challenged in particular historical situations. Cyril’s rhetoric of confrontation and the ways he represented himself as the guardian of the correct doctrine were in line with the conventions of other earlier ancient as well as contemporary ecclesiastical writers. Furthermore, in this article, Cyril’s rhetoric of confrontation is considered in the framework of the reign of Theodosius II. Guarding the borderlines of the correct doctrine was associated with protecting the borders of the Roman Empire. The concerns for heresy and orthodoxy were increasingly understood as an issue of public security: thus, what was claimed to be at stake was not only the unity of the church, but also the fate of the whole Empire, as Cyril’s argumentation shows.

Ditches of destruction – Cyril of Alexandria and the rhetoric of public security