“How good and how pleasant it is, when brothers dwell together as one!” (Ps. 132, 1 [133])

With these words of the Psalm we want to express our pleasure for being with you tonight, beloved brothers and children, during this Liturgical Celebration of the Roman-Catholic Episcopal Conference of our Country, gathered in the synodal path that our sister Church of the Elder Rome is experiencing. We have enthusiastically accepted the invitation extended to our Modesty to pray together and meditate briefly here in Ephesus, a place full of history for the whole of Christendom and a sign of sharing and meeting not only between Christians belonging to different Churches, but also a place of holiness for so many of our Muslim brothers and sisters, who respect it with great devotion and faith.

Ephesus immediately brings to our mind the figure of the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Theotokos, the Mother of our God, since the Third Ecumenical Council, at the beginning of the 5th century, took place here. We do not want to make a historical excursus of the events of that Council, -this is not the place-, but some elements of the events that occurred then can undoubtedly help us to better understand the meaning which that Council can offer to us Christians today and also to the Synodal path of Your Church.

At a time when Christological theology had not yet been fully developed, and mainly with reference to the First Council of Nicaea in 325, which exerted great authority upon the dogmatic formulations of subsequent councils, in the early 400s, following Nestorius’ election as Archbishop of Constantinople, a discussion arose about the title of “Theotokos” given to the Mother of God. This title, – Deipara in Latin, is not a formulation of the Council of Ephesus in 431, as many mistakenly think, but it had long belonged to traditional Christian language. Already an ancient antiphon from the 3rd century records this title: “Ὑπὸ τὴν σὴν εὐσπλαγχνίαν καταφεύγομεν Θεοτόκε, τὰς ἡμῶν ἱκεσίας μὴ παρίδῃς ἐν περιστάσει, ἀλλ᾿ ἐκ κινδύνων λύτρωσαι ἡμᾶς,” in Latin “Sub tuum praesidium…” “Under your mercy, we take refuge Mother of God, do not reject our supplications in adversity, but deliver us from dangers.” Although the term had been used by numerous Church Fathers, including Athanasius of Alexandria, Eusebius of Caesarea, Cyril of Jerusalem, Epiphanius, Didymus, Origen, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Ambrose of Milan, it opened a discussion on the mystery of the unity of Christ God and man, a topic that would later be addressed and resolved in Chalcedon in 451. However, already the Nicene Creed confessed faith “in one God, Father, Almighty… and in one Lord, Jesus Christ, Son of God… who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became man, suffered, died and rose again on the third day…” The faith of Nicaea is indeed held to be the faith of the Church. But the importance of the Council of Ephesus draws attention not so much to the figure of the Virgin Mary, but to the very unity of Christ, as “God who bears flesh” (Θεός σαρκοφόρος), according to the expression of Athanasius of Alexandria and later of Cyril and the Alexandrian School, defined Unitive Christology, in relation to the “God-bearing man” (ἄνθρωπος θεοφόρος), related to the Arian expression, reported by Apollinaris, of the “man in whom God dwells” (ἄνθρωπος ἔνθεος), defined divisive Christology.

Nestorius, considered perhaps erroneously as the promulgator of such a divisive Christology, had not gone as far as the limits of this, which had already been advocated earlier by theologians of Antioch, such as Diodorus of Tarsus and Theodore of Mopsuestia, which among other teachings the Council of Ephesus did not condemn, but as he expounded his doctrine in his Epistle to Celestine, bishop of Rome, he declared the Virgin “Christotokos” and stated: “I cannot worship a God who was born, who died and who was buried” (Acta Conc. I, V, 1, 37). Nestorius, in antithesis to the Bishop Cyril of Alexandria, who was the real “deus ex machina” of the Council, insisted on the distinction between the two natures in Christ and their conjunction in one “πρόσωπον,” which seems to be the term of the union of the two natures, rather than the principle of their unity. The Alexandrian school with Cyril, on the other hand, considers in the first place not the two natures but the one person of the Word, who has existed from all eternity and who at the end of time became incarnate. As the Gospel of John states: “And the Word became flesh.” St. Cyril’s affirmation, therefore, became load-bearing in that Council: “Just as the Word of God the Father is perfect as to divinity, so is he perfect as to humanity: he did not assume a body without a soul, but a body animated by a rational soul” (Ad Reginas 13, PG 76,1221). There is neither mixture nor confusion after this union; there is no absorption or confusion of the two natures, as would later appear in Monophysitism. The title, therefore, of “Theotokos” fully expresses the common faith of the Church, showing its dogmatic foundation in the mystery of the Incarnate Word.

These brief quotations from the discussion of the Council of Ephesus lead us to an examination of the living of the Christian world in the midst of the great challenges of secularism, in which a neo-Nestorianism often finds easy ground. The Churches must deal together with this threat, and each synodal journey must have the capacity to respond to this challenge, urging a reflection on the issue. In Christian-majority countries, there is no longer a true denial of God but rather a vision of a transcendent and never immanent God. Often the transcendent God is flanked by the historical Christ, the Christ Man, the social Christ, interpreted for every human and even revolutionary situation. But thus the Christ God and Man disappears, the salvific character of Redemption is forgotten for an ephemeral human salvation, the prophetic, priestly and kingly word of the Incarnate Son of God is abandoned, and we rely on a Christocentrism, completely disconnected from the Unity and Trinity of God. And this exceeds even the rosiest understanding at the definitions of the Council of Ephesus and the other Councils. Then there is also a new tendency, albeit on a smaller scale, that of deifying Christ the Man as not belonging to human history and relegating him to a dubious hyper worship, which in turn deprives humanity of a personal and communal relationship with the God of the Trinity and causes it to walk toward a new monophysitism. As Christians we must forcefully proclaim what the Holy Spirit and not men, even when holy, has announced to His Church through these Holy Councils and which the People of God over the centuries have confirmed and experienced.

Thus, the Council of Ephesus did not in fact express particular dogmatic definitions, but it specified-according to the terminology of the time-the Christological aspect already defined at the Council of Nicaea in 325 and subsequently of Constantinople in 381. There is, however, another aspect that that Council offered to the Church and which has great weight today in both intra-ecclesiastical and ecumenical relations, that of Synodality.

To our contemporary mentality perhaps this Council appears very human in its behaviors, yet we cannot forget that this is “a sign of the freedom that reigns there” (H.Jedin Kleine Konzilgeschichte, Freiburg 1959) and a sign of the mystery of the Church in which the Holy Spirit leads every action. The Council, convened by Emperor Theodosius II to “ensure the peace and tranquility of the Church,” called bishops from the various territories of Christendom, from East to West, through that symphony of apostolic sees, already defined in the Pentarchy expressed by the Council of Constantinople in 381.

Thus Pope Celestine’s legates moved from the Western Church, Augustine of Hippo was also expected, but he was to die shortly before the Council opened, from the schools of Alexandria and Antioch, from all over the East, and from the great metropolitan sees of the Empire. Difficulties in travel, delays in arrivals, and a certain impatience that swirled in Ephesus and Constantinople, induced Cyril of Alexandria to open the Council without waiting for the legates of Celestine of Rome and Bishop John of Antioch with the Syriac bishops and to decree the deposition and excommunication of Nestorius of Constantinople. From history we know that this council went through alternating phases, given by the arrival of Roman legates, the counter-council of John of Antioch and the bishops of Syria, of the intervention of the imperial power that even went so far as to arrest Cyril. We know that the council closed without having found common positions on the subject. What interests us is that, in 433, the parties-in a spirit of reconciliation-found agreement, expressing together the true doctrine of the Church that remains with us to this day. The spirit of reconciliation is expressed primarily in the synodality of the Church, which through the participation of each local Church reveals the fullness of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Synod – Council, means “walking together, treading a path together,” and it is expressed in its fullness in the local, regional and universal character of the Church. Even in Ephesus, as today, local churches gathered their people around their bishop. As St. Cyprian of Carthage states, “The bishop is in the Church and the Church is in the bishop, and if anyone is not with the bishop, he is not in the Church” (Cyprian of Carthage, Ep. 69.8, PL 4, 406A.) The synodality or conciliarity that exists in the Church and has its basic expression in the institution of synods or councils, can truly be compared with the harmony and concord that reigns among the Persons of the Trinity. And this applies to every dimension of synodality, because in it is exercised the role of “oversight” of the bishop (or Primate in the various levels) regarding the purity of the faith and its conformity to the living Tradition of the Church and the participation in it of the people of God. It is the collaboration of the head and members of the Mystical Body of Christ in the affirmation of the common faith and the fulfillment of the tasks Christ gave to the Apostles and their successors. As Paul Evdokimov wrote: “Episcopal power is always exercised in the Church and with the Church, never above the Church or over the Church…for there is but one Church, taught by Christ Himself” (Fr. Evdokimov, Orthodoxy, 1959). The synodal path of listening, initiated by the sister Roman Catholic Church, among her children, reminds us, in conclusion, of an axiom dear to the Orthodox world, expressed in the 1848 Eastern Patriarchs’ Encyclical: “All the people of the Church are custodians of piety and faith,” because we are all first and foremost members of the “people of God.”

Brothers in the Lord and beloved children, we cannot forget, however, that in this city of Ephesus, great is the veneration of the Theotokos, the Third Ecumenical Council gave a definitive word on Mary’s divine motherhood, giving a theological dimension to the title of Theotokos. Therefore, to our common Mother we must spend a thought of love and gratitude.

The proclamation of the title of Theotokos to the Virgin Mary by the Council of Ephesus provoked a strong theological and liturgical movement in both East and West. So many churches from the 4th century onward have been dedicated to Mary. Liturgical development made Mary omnipresent in the liturgical year. Among the earliest feasts dedicated to her are the Nativity on Sept. 8, the Presentation in the Temple on Nov. 21, the Meeting of the Lord in the Temple on Feb. 2, the Annunciation on March 25, and the Dormition/Assumption on Aug. 15, as well as a large number of minor feasts. There are many prayers and supplications dedicated to her, among the best known in the East the Akathistos Hymn. Hymnology is very rich in the East as in the West, and theology after Ephesus also had a splendid development, confessing her divine motherhood, her perpetual virginity, holiness and purity, and faith in Mary’s intercession to her Son on behalf of the Christian people. In fact, all Marian theology, thus expressed at the time of the great councils has remained unchanged in the East to this day. One of the most splendid and ancient hymns derived from that epoch is the hymn of the Ἄξιόν ἐστιν: “It is truly meet to proclaim Thee blessed, O Theotokos, ever blessed and all unblemished and Mother of our God. More honorable than the Cherubim and more glorious beyond compare than the Seraphim, without corruption You gave birth to God the Word, true Theotokos, we magnify You!”, a hymn that manifests all the love and theological scope of the Virgin’s presence in salvation history.

Mary is the one who in every age teaches us to say “Yes, come Lord,” for it is in her that the fiat of the Lord is answered by the fiat of the Creature, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord” (Lk. 1:38). On Christmas Eve the Church sings of humanity’s offering to God: “What shall we offer you Christ … heaven offers you angels, earth brings you its gifts, but we, men, offer you a Mother-Virgin.” It is in her that what her Icon represents to us is fulfilled forever: the Icon of the Virgin holding the child Jesus is not an icon of the Virgin in the strict sense, but the icon of the Incarnation or icon of the Church: the communion of the divine and the human. Thus St. Cyprian exclaims, “He cannot have God for Father, he who does not have the Church for mother” (De cath. Eccles. unitate, c.6).

Concluding these thoughts dedicated to what Ephesus represents for all of Christendom, we wish this evening to address a special supplication to our common Mother, the All-Holy, the All-Pure, the More Spacious than the Heavens, the Mother worthy of all singing, the Ever-Blessed, the Queen of the Universe, the Life-giving Source, the Most Holy, and to the many other titles dedicated to her, the greatest of which is Theotokos, that she may always be present in the Church, as at Pentecost, accompanying our journey on the path of unity, on the ability to listen to each other and above all to reconcile.

But still to Her we entrust our supplication and ask for Her motherly intervention with Her Son and God in this dark hour of the earth’s life, when unthinkable rumblings of wars and weapons of mass destruction, if not of God’s entire creation, resound as a normal possibility in conflicts among men. The world does not need wars, it does not need weapons, it does not need new Cain and Abel, but it does need conversion to God, it needs to meet its Savior, it needs fraternity and justice, it needs reconciliation, listening, cooperation and patience. May the “Silent of the Gospel,” according to the expression of Sergei Bulgakov, She who found grace with God, intercede for each of us and accompany us towards her Son and our God and save this humanity from every misfortune and sin, in the name of the One who was, It is and shall be forever. To Him glory forever! Γένοιτο!