{"author":"Historical editor/translator (individual note author unspecified)","date_end":1892,"date_label":"1892 (historical English edition; transcription printing date uncertain)","date_start":1892,"edition_year":1892,"edition_year_basis":"Original NPNF Series II Volume III title and contemporary Jackson bibliography, 1892; physical transcription printing unknown; scan/transcription preface dates differ","id":"ws-library-full-note:54fcd4479ad1d7afe04f:cite_note-52","is_genuine_commentary_verified":false,"license_url":"https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Wikisource:Reusing_Wikisource_content","public_import_allowed":true,"publication_location":"source-library","record_type":"editorial-footnote","references":[],"rights_approved":true,"section":"Chapter uncertain; original source section: Contents and Character of the Extant Works, editorial note cite_note-52","semantic_kind_reviewed":false,"source_context":["In the Epistle of Cyril to Celestinus and the Commonitorium datum Posidonio Cyril shows what sense he wishes to fix on the utterances of Nestorius. “The faith, or rather the ‘cacodoxy’ of Nestorius, has this force; he says that God the Word, prescient that he who was to be born of the Holy Virgin would be holy and great, therefore chose him and arranged that he should be generated of the Virgin without a husband and conferred on him the privilege of being called by His own names, and raised him so that even though after the incarnation he is called the only begotten Word of God, he is said to have been made man because He was always with him as with a holy man born of the Virgin. And as He was with the prophets so, says Nestorius, was He by a greater conjunction (συνάφεια). On this account Nestorius always shrinks from using the word union (ἔνωσις) and speaks of ‘conjunction,’ as of some one without, and, as He says to Joshua ‘as I was with Moses so will I be with thee.’ But, to conceal his impiety, Nestorius says that He was with him from the womb. Wherefore he does not say that Christ was very God, but that Christ was so called of God’s good pleasure; and, if he was called Lord, so again Nestorius understands him to be Lord because the divine Word conceded him the boon of being so named. Nor does he say as we do that the Son of God died and rose again on our behalf. The man died and the man rose, and this has nothing to do with God the Word. And in the mysteries what lies (i.e. on the Holy Table) (τὸ προκείμενον) is a man’s body; but we believe that it is flesh of the Word, having power to quicken because it is made flesh and blood of the Word that quickeneth all things.”"],"source_library_url":"/library/54fcd4479ad1d7afe04f/#ws-library-full-note:54fcd4479ad1d7afe04f:cite_note-52","source_url":"https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Nicene_and_Post-Nicene_Fathers:_Series_II/Volume_III/Theodoret/Prolegomena/Contents_and_Character_of_the_Extant_Works#cite_note-52","translator":"Blomfield Jackson","verification":{"proof_file":"raw/review/source-library-note-batch-0062/proof-records.jsonl","proof_file_sha256":"87ac19c66dcf691b7d925a42029bc37a8a4357e5c005fab9223fd715854f7606","proof_record_id":"ws-library-full-note:54fcd4479ad1d7afe04f:cite_note-52"},"verified":true,"work":"Prolegomena","work_id":"ws-npnf2-3-jackson-d2a971243e02713ed703"}