VI. If anyone shall dare say that the Word of God the Father is the God of Christ or the Lord of Christ, and shall not rather confess him as at the same time both God and Man, since according to the Scriptures, “The Word was made flesh”:  let him be anathema. Notes. Nestorius. VI. If anyone, after the Incarnation calls another than Christ the Word, and ventures to say that the form of a servant is equally with the Word of God, without beginning and uncreated, and not rather that it is made by him as its natural Lord and Creator and God, and that he has promised to raise it again in the words:  “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will build it up again”; let him be anathema. Hefele. This [statement of Nestorius’s that any should call “another than Christ the Word”] has no reference to Cyril; but is a hyper-Nestorianism, which Nestorius here rejects.  This [that “the form of a servant is without beginning and uncreated”] was asserted by some Apollinarists; and Nestorius accused St. Cyril of Apollinarianism. Petavius. As Nestorius believed that in Christ there were two distinct entities ( re ipsa duos ) that is to say two persons joined together; it was natural that he should hold that the Word was the God and Lord of the other, that is of the man.  Cyril contradicts this, and since he taught that there was, not two, but one of two natures, that is one person or suppositum, therefore he denied that the Word was the God or Lord of the man; since no one should be called the Lord of himself. Theodoret in his answer shuffles as usual, and points out that Christ is styled a servant by the Prophet Isaiah, because of the form of a servant which he had received.  But to this Cyril answers; that although Christ, inasmuch as he was man, is called the servant of the Father, as of a person distinct from himself; yet he denies that the same person can be his own lord or servant, lest a separation of the person be introduced.