Did Cyril of Alexandria Write That Peter was “set as shepherd” Over the Church?

In an article on Catholic Answers titled “The Attempt to Whitewash Peter’s Primacy” by Steven O’Reilly, the claim is made that Cyril of Alexandria (375-444) wrote “He [Christ] promises to found the Church, assigning immovableness to it, as he is the Lord of strength, and over this [the Church] he sets Peter as shepherd.” No citation is given by the author of the article.

Under “Proof of the Papacy,” a Catholic organization called “Sacred Heart Christian,” cites the same words differently in their post titled “St. Cyril of Alexandria,” attributing the following to him: “‘…by the words ‘on this rock I shall build my church’, Christ makes Peter its Pastor, literally he places Peter over it as shepherd [ποιμένα].’ (Commentary on Matthew).” The only citation is a vague reference to the Gospel of Matthew, very unlike the rest of the citations on the same page.

Patheos attributes the following to Cyril in the article “Cyril of Alexandria (d. 444) vs. Sola Scriptura as the Rule of Faith,” quoting Cyril was writing: “‘He promises to found the church, assigning immovableness to it, as He is the Lord of strength, and over this he sets Peter as shepherd.’ (Commentary on Matthew).” Again, as before, only a vague reference to a commentary on Matthew is included as a valid citation.

In an article from “CatholicBridge” titled “Did the early Eastern Church recognize the primacy of the Pope?” AND in this web page titled “Papal Primacy – Patristic Thoughts,” the following is attributed to Cyril: “‘He (Christ) promises to found the Church, assigning immovableness to it, as He is the Lord of strength, and over this He sets Peter as shepherd.’ (Cyril, Comm. on Matt., ad loc.)” For perspective (because I had to look it up), “ad loc. means “to or at the place —used to indicate that a reference is from the same location within a source as a previous reference.” This “citation,” however, is the first from Cyril in that article. I think you will find as I did that it is a farse of a citation.

There are several reasons for the vagueness. It is highly doubtful that Cyril of Alexandria actually wrote it. For one thing, there is no full commentary on Matthew that Cyril wrote. The argument is that only fragments survived. How do we know this? Because (so the claim goes) a 13th century theologian by the name of Thomas Aquinas (a name that is known for its centrality in Rome’s system of theology) said that Cyril wrote it. CCEL has the book “Catena Aurea – Gospel of Matthew, by Thomas Aquinas,” free in its database, wherein it is said to be quoted by Aquinas. However, the passage is completely absent. You can find the following there, however:

Cyril [ed. note: ‘ This passage is quoted in the Catena from ‘Cyril in Lib. Thes.’ but does not occur in any of S. Cyril’s works. On the subject of this interpolation, vid. Launoy’s Epistles, part i. Ep. 1-3. and v. Ep. 9. c. 6-12. From him it appears that, besides the passage introduced into the Catena, S. Thomas ascribes similar ones to S. Cyril in his comment on the Sentences, Lib. iv. cl. 24. 3. and in his books ‘contr. impugn.reliq.’ and ‘contra errores Graee.’ He is apparently the first to cite them, and they seem to have been written later than Nicholas I. and Leo IX. (A. D. 867-1054.) He was young when he used them, and he is silent about them in his Summa, (which was the work of his last ten years,) in three or four places where the reference might have been expected.]

According to this promise of the Lord, the Apostolic Church of Peter remains pure and spotless from all leading into error, or heretical fraud, above all Heads and Bishops, and Primates of Churches and people, with its own Pontiffs, with most abundant faith, and the authority of Peter. And while other Churches have to blush for the error of some of their members, this reigns alone immoveably established, enforcing silence, and stopping the mouths of all heretics; and we [ed. note: The editions read here, ‘et nos necessario salutis,’ the meaning of which, says Nicolai, it is impossible to divine], not drunken with the wine of pride, confess together with it the type of truth, and of the holy apostolic tradition.

Outside of this, it is not known in any of Cyril’s known works. The citation is attributed to Cyril on the basis of the word of a thirteenth century Roman Catholic.

Besides this, the citation itself sounds like something Aquinas would write, not something Cyril would write. The language is far closer to that of a Medieval theologian, not a from a theologian who lived 375-444. Until someone can actually both citing a specific source for this quote, I consider this a complete fabrication, from beginning to end.

If you would like to read about the true Cyril of Alexandria, his life and works, I whole heartedly recommend Danile Hames’ Cyril of Alexandira, His Life and Impact.