{"slug":"khazarzar-cyril-of-alexandria-thesaurus-de-sancta-et-consubstantiali-trinitate","id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-cyril-of-alexandria-thesaurus-de-sancta-et-consubstantiali-trinitate","title":"Thesaurus de sancta et consubstantiali trinitate","title_source":"Thesaurus de sancta et consubstantiali trinitate","author":"Cyril of Alexandria","genre":"other","date":"","tradition":"greek","coverage":"not-located","coverage_claim":{"status":"not-located","text":"No English translation is known: a language model asked twice could name none, and the source corpus records none. That is not proof — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},"publication":{"status":"machine-draft","reviewed_by":null,"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","generated":"2026-11-15T06:30:50Z","cost_usd":0.002205},"source":{"registry_id":"greek:khazarzar:khazarzar-cyril-of-alexandria-thesaurus-de-sancta-et-consubstantiali-trinitate","work_id":"khazarzar-cyril-of-alexandria-thesaurus-de-sancta-et-consubstantiali-trinitate","edition":"khazarzar","language":"","license":"Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer","url":"http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/Cyril%20of%20Alexandria_PG%2068-77/Thesaurus%20de%20sancta%20et%20consubstantiali%20trinitate.pdf"},"stats":{"passages":3,"english_words":810,"coptic_letters":0,"source_letters":3071,"commentary_units":18,"commentary_kinds":6,"derived_notes":0,"ambiguities":5,"work_notes":5,"external_links":0,"timeline":6},"summary":{"work":"khazarzar-cyril-of-alexandria-thesaurus-de-sancta-et-consubstantiali-trinitate","abstract":"Cyril of Alexandria's *Thesaurus de sancta et consubstantiali trinitate* is a Greek theological treatise defending the consubstantiality of the Trinity, composed during the Nestorian controversy of the 430s. The work refutes Arian and Eunomian interpretations by arguing that the Father's exclusive claim to being the only true God does not exclude the Son, but only false gods. It survives in a single manuscript tradition, with the earliest witness a 10th-century codex, and was cited as authoritative at the Second Council of Constantinople (553). The Khazarzar edition lacks a critical apparatus, obscuring textual variants. The work's structure, marked by repeated headings like Ἄλλο, suggests a compilation of distinct arguments or excerpts.","historical_context":"Cyril of Alexandria (c. 376–444) wrote this treatise in Greek during the Nestorian controversy, likely in the 430s, to defend Trinitarian orthodoxy against Arian and Eunomian subordinationist views. The work reflects the theological debates of the post-Nicene period, where the consubstantiality of the Son and Holy Spirit with the Father was contested. The text survives in a single manuscript tradition, with the earliest witness a 10th-century codex; later editions, including those used by Khazarzar, rely on 17th- and 18th-century printed collations. The work was cited at the Second Council of Constantinople (553) as authoritative and excerpted by John of Damascus in his *Expositio fidei*. Its polemical context shapes scriptural citations, which are tailored to counter specific adversaries. The repeated heading Ἄλλο suggests a compilation of separate notes or excerpts, possibly from different stages of composition.","significance":"The *Thesaurus* is a key text in the development of Trinitarian doctrine, providing a systematic defense of consubstantiality that influenced later conciliar definitions and patristic florilegia. Its citation at the Second Council of Constantinople underscores its authority in Eastern Orthodox theology. The work also illustrates Cyril's exegetical method and his engagement with Arian and Eunomian arguments, making it valuable for studying 5th-century Christological and Trinitarian controversies.","timeline":[{"date":"c. 376–444","event":"Life of Cyril of Alexandria."},{"date":"430s","event":"Composition of the *Thesaurus* during the Nestorian controversy."},{"date":"553","event":"Work cited as authoritative at the Second Council of Constantinople."},{"date":"10th c.","event":"Earliest surviving manuscript witness (10th-century codex)."},{"date":"17th–18th c.","event":"Printed editions based on manuscript collations."},{"date":"Modern","event":"Khazarzar edition published without critical apparatus."}],"relations":[{"work":"Expositio fidei","relation":"Excerpted by John of Damascus","key":"wikipedia:John of Damascus","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Second Council of Constantinople","relation":"Cited as authoritative for Trinitarian orthodoxy","key":"wikipedia:Second Council of Constantinople","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Arian controversy","relation":"Refutes Arian and Eunomian interpretations","key":"wikipedia:Arian controversy","label":null,"url":null},{"work":"Nestorian controversy","relation":"Composed during this controversy","key":"wikipedia:Nestorianism","label":null,"url":null}],"external_links":[],"cautions":["The exact date of composition is uncertain; the 430s is a scholarly estimate based on the Nestorian controversy.","The Khazarzar edition lacks a critical apparatus, so variant readings from the manuscript tradition are not recorded.","The work's structure with repeated Ἄλλο headings may indicate a compilation of separate notes or excerpts, not a continuous argument.","Scriptural citations are tailored to polemical context; readers should verify original contexts."],"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor","provider":"Relace","cost_usd":0.000486,"generated":"2026-11-15T06:30:50Z"},"links":[{"kind":"source","label":"Patrologia Graeca text (khazarzar mirror)","url":"http://khazarzar.skeptik.net/pgm/PG_Migne/Cyril%20of%20Alexandria_PG%2068-77/Thesaurus%20de%20sancta%20et%20consubstantiali%20trinitate.pdf"}],"checks":{"work":"khazarzar-cyril-of-alexandria-thesaurus-de-sancta-et-consubstantiali-trinitate","status":"pass","blocking":[],"warnings":[],"stats":{"passages":3,"translated":3,"commentary_passages":3,"commentary_units":18,"english_words":810,"source_letters":3070,"commentary_kinds":6},"model":"deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash:floor"},"work_notes":[{"unit":"dating","kind":"chronology","basis":"external","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"Cyril of Alexandria (c. 376–444) wrote this treatise during the Nestorian controversy, likely in the 430s, to defend the consubstantiality of the Trinity against Arian and Eunomian interpretations.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"transmission","kind":"transmission","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"The Greek text survives in a single manuscript tradition, with the earliest witness being a 10th-century codex. The edition by Khazarzar relies on collations from 17th- and 18th-century printed editions.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"external","lemma":"","severity":"info","text":"This work was cited in the Second Council of Constantinople (553) as authoritative for Trinitarian orthodoxy, and later excerpted in John of Damascus’s *Expositio fidei*.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"sense","kind":"sense","basis":"text","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"The Khazarzar edition does not provide a critical apparatus; variant readings from the manuscript tradition are not recorded, so the user cannot assess textual decisions.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"background","lemma":"","severity":"caution","text":"Cyril’s polemical context means that some scriptural citations are tailored to counter specific adversaries; readers should verify the original context of each proof-text.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"derived_work_notes":[{"kind":"coverage","severity":"info","text":"No English translation is known: a language model asked twice could name none, and the source corpus records none. That is not proof — translations in dissertations, recent books and other modern languages are easily missed."},{"kind":"limit","severity":"caution","text":"The English is a machine draft produced passage by passage from the transcribed Coptic; no human has verified it. The commentary is model-written and cites only keys the pipeline could resolve."},{"kind":"register","severity":"info","text":"Register: other in ancient Greek; the English keeps the liturgical formulae and the vocatives rather than normalising them."},{"kind":"structure","severity":"info","text":"Passages: 3 narrative."},{"kind":"source","severity":"info","text":"Source edition: khazarzar — Migne PG text (public domain); khazarzar host and the digitising project state no licence for this layer"}],"derived_structure":{"narrative":3},"term_index":[],"citations":{},"segments":[{"i":1,"ref":"p1","source":"Κεφάλαιον ΚΖʹ. Εἰς τό· Ἵνα γιγνώσκωσί σε τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεὸν, καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν; Ἄλλο. Εἰ πάντα διὰ τοῦ ἰδίου Λόγου πεποίηκεν ὁ Πατὴρ, καὶ ἀληθεύει λέγων ὁ μακάριος εὐαγγελιστής· Πάντα δι' αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδέν· καὶ πάλιν εἰ πάντα διὰ τῶν προφητῶν εἰρημένα διὰ τοῦ Λόγου λέλεκται, καὶ οὐ δι' ἑτέρου τινὸς, πῶς οὐκ ἄτοπον ἐννοεῖν αὐτὸν καθ' ἑαυτοῦ τὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ Λόγον τοιαύτας ἀφεῖναι φωνάς; Οὐκοῦν πρὸς ἀναίρεσιν τῶν ψευδωνύμων θεῶν τὰ τοιαῦτά φησιν ὁ Θεὸς καὶ Πατὴρ δι' Υἱοῦ; Ἄλλο εἰς ἀναίρεσιν τοῦ τῶν Ἀρειανῶν δόγματος, περιτρέπον τοῦ ποιήματος τὴν δύναμιν. Λέγων ἑαυτὸν ὁ Πατὴρ ἕνα καὶ μόνον ἀληθινὸν εἶναι Θεὸν, οὐκ ἀνατρέπει τὸ ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγενῆσθαι τὸν Υἱὸν, καὶ εἶναι Θεὸν ἀληθινὸν, ὥσπερ καὶ αὐτὸς, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἐκεῖνον τῆς θεότητος ἐκβάλλει ὃν ἂν ὑμεῖς ἔξωθεν τῆς οὐσίας αὐτοῦ Θεὸν ἢ υἱὸν ἑαυτοῖς ἐπινοήσητε· οὗτος γὰρ ὄντως οὐκ ἔστιν ἀληθινὸς, ἀλλὰ τῆς προσούσης ὑμῖν ἀμαθίας εὕρημα. Ἄλλο Ἐὰν ἀληθινὸς καὶ μόνος λέγεται Θεὸς ὁ Πατὴρ, οὐκ εὐλόγως ὁ Υἱὸς τῆς πρὸς αὐτὸν ὁμοιότητος ἐξοικισθήσεται, οὐδὲ τοῦ εἶναι Θεὸς ἀληθινὸς ἐκβληθήσεται. Εἰ γὰρ οὐ ψεύδεται λέγων· Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἀλήθεια, καὶ ἐστὶ νοητῶς τοῦτο ὅπερ ἑαυτὸν εἶναί φησι, πῶς οὐκ ἀναγκαίως τῷ ἀληθινῷ Πατρὶ συγκαταταχθήσεται; καὶ αὐτὸς ὢν ἀλήθεια, οὐκοῦν εἰς ἀναίρεσιν τῶν μὴ κατὰ φύσιν, μηδὲ κατὰ ἀλήθειαν ὄντων ἢ καλουμένων θεῶν· εἴρηται, ἵνα γιγνώσκωσί σε τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεόν;","english":"Chapter 27. On the phrase: \"That they may know you as the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you sent.\" Another. If the Father has made all things through his own Word, and the blessed evangelist speaks truly saying: \"All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be,\" and again if all things spoken through the prophets are uttered through the Word and through no other, how is it not absurd to conceive that the Word of God himself uttered such words against himself? Therefore, does God and Father say such things through the Son for the refutation of falsely named gods? Another for the refutation of the doctrine of the Arians, overturning the power of the creature. When the Father says that he himself is one and only true God, he does not overturn the fact that the Son has been begotten from him and is true God, just as he himself is, but rather he casts out from divinity that one whom you might conceive for yourselves as God or son outside his essence; for this one is truly not true, but a product of the ignorance present in you. Another. If the Father is called true and only God, the Son will not reasonably be banished from likeness to him, nor will he be cast out from being true God. For if he does not lie when he says: \"I am the truth,\" and is intelligibly that which he says himself to be, how will he not necessarily be ranked together with the true Father? He himself being truth, therefore, is it said for the refutation of those gods that are not by nature nor in truth existing or called: \"That they may know you as the only true God\"?","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Κεφάλαιον ΚΖʹ","severity":"info","text":"The chapter number ΚΖʹ (27) and the repeated heading Ἄλλο indicate a series of distinct arguments or excerpts, a common structural feature in Cyril's polemical works.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Πάντα δι' αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο, καὶ χωρὶς αὐτοῦ ἐγένετο οὐδέν","severity":"info","text":"Cyril quotes John 1:3, adapting the verse to a Trinitarian context, emphasizing the role of the Word in creation.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἐγώ εἰμι ἡ ἀλήθεια","severity":"info","text":"Cyril cites John 14:6, attributing the words to Christ, to argue that the Son, as truth, must be ranked with the true Father.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἀρειανῶν","severity":"info","text":"The Arian controversy denied the full divinity of the Son; Cyril refutes this by arguing that the Father's statement of being the only true God does not exclude the Son, but only false gods outside the divine essence.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"ψευδωνύμων θεῶν","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'falsely named gods' refers to pagan deities or heretical conceptions of divinity, which Cyril contrasts with the true God and his Son.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἄλλο","severity":"caution","text":"The repeated 'Ἄλλο' may indicate that the text is a compilation of separate notes or excerpts, possibly from different sources or stages of composition, rather than a continuous argument.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The exact source of the initial phrase 'Ἵνα γιγνώσκωσί σε τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεὸν, καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν' is unclear; it may be a paraphrase of a biblical or liturgical text. The repeated 'Ἄλλο' suggests the passage is a collection of separate arguments, but the original context of each is not specified."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":2,"ref":"p2","source":"Ἄλλο. Εἰ μόνος ἐστιν ἀληθινὸς Θεὸς ὁ Πατὴρ, ὁ δὲ ἐξ αὐτοῦ Λόγος οὐ τοιαύτην ἔχει τὴν φύσιν ὁποίαν ὁ γεννήσας αὐτὸν, ἀλλ' ἔστι γενητῆς οὐσίας, κἂν τὸ ὑπερκεῖσθαι τὰ ἄλλα πάντα ποιήματα δέχηται παρ' ἡμῶν, πῶς ἑτερούσιος ὢν, καὶ οὐκ ἀληθινὸς, ὡς ὑμεῖς φατὲ, ἑαυτὸν συνάπτει τῷ κατὰ ἀλήθειαν ὄντι Θεῷ καὶ σὺν αὐτῷ γνωρίζεσθαι θέλει λέγων· Ἵνα γινώσκωσί σε τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεὸν, καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν; ποῖον γὰρ ἔχει λόγον τὸ κτίσμα, ὃν καθ' ὑμᾶς σὺν τῷ ἀκτίστῳ γνωρίζεσθαι, καὶ τὸ πεποιημένον, τῷ μὴ ποιηθέντι, μηδὲ γεγονότι συγκαταριθμεῖσθαι; Εἰ γὰρ δοίητε τοῦτο κρατεῖν, καὶ οὕτως ἔχειν δύνασθαι, τί κωλύσει καὶ ἕτερόν τι τῶν λογικῶν κτισμάτων τῇ τοιαύτῃ χρήσασθαι φωνῇ; εἰ δὲ οὐδενὸς ἑτέρου φέρεταί τι τοιοῦτον, μόνον δέ ἐστιν Υἱοῦ τὸ ῥῆμα, δῆλόν ἐστιν ὅτι περ οὐχ ἕνα τῶν πάντων ἑαυτὸν εἰδὼς, ἀλλ' αὐτὸ τῆς τοῦ Πατρὸς οὐσίας τὸ ἴδιον καὶ τῷ γεννήσαντι συγκατέταξε, καὶ σὺν αὐτῷ νοούμενος, καὶ ἡμῖν δέδωκεν εἰδέναι, ὅτι περ εἴη Πατρὸς ἀληθινοῦ γέννημα ἀληθινόν· ὅτι γὰρ ἀληθινός ἐστιν ὁ Υἱὸς, ἄκουε λέγοντος Ἰωάννου· Καὶ ἐσμὲν ἐν τῷ ἀληθινῷ Υἱῷ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Κεφάλαιον ΛΒ. Ἐκλογαὶ ῥητῶν μετὰ συλλογισμῶν ἐκ τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης, ὅτι Θεὸς κατὰ φύσιν ὁ Υἱὸς, εἰ δὲ τοῦτο, οὐ ποίημα, οὐδὲ κτίσμα. Ἄλλο. Ὅτι ἐκ τοῦ πληρώματος αὐτοῦ πάντες ἡμεῖς ἐλάβομεν εἰ μόνῃ τὸ παντέλειον τῇ θείᾳ τετήρηται φύσει, ἅτε δὴ καὶ δεομένῃ τῶν παρ' ἑτέρου μηδενὸς, πληροῦν δὲ μᾶλλον ἐχούσῃ τε καὶ ἰσχυούσῃ, τὰ ὅσα περ ἂν αὐτῆς ὑπάρχοι δεκτικά·","english":"Another. If the Father alone is the true God, and the Word from him does not have the same nature as the one who begot him, but is of a created substance, even if he is considered by us to surpass all other creations, how, being of a different substance and not true, as you say, does he join himself to the God who truly is, and wish to be known together with him, saying: \"That they may know you as the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you sent\"? For what reason does the creature, which according to you is to be known together with the uncreated, and the made thing to be numbered with the not-made and not-begotten? For if you were to allow this to hold, and that it can be so, what will prevent some other rational creature from using such a saying? But if no such thing is borne by any other, and the saying belongs only to the Son, it is clear that he does not know himself as one of all, but has ranked the very property of the Father's substance with the begetter, and being conceived together with him, he has given us to know that he is a true offspring of a true Father. For that the Son is true, hear John saying: \"And we are in his true Son Jesus Christ.\" Chapter 32. Selections of sayings with syllogisms from the New Testament, that the Son is God by nature, and if this is so, he is not a product nor a creation. Another. That we all have received from his fullness, and that the perfect fullness is preserved for the divine nature alone, since it needs nothing from another, but rather has and is able to fill whatever might be receptive of it.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἄλλο","severity":"info","text":"The passage begins with 'Ἄλλο' ('Another'), marking a new argument in a series of dialectical units against Arian subordinationism.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Ἵνα γινώσκωσί σε τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεὸν, καὶ ὃν ἀπέστειλας Ἰησοῦν Χριστόν","severity":"info","text":"Cyril quotes a variant of John 17:3, where Jesus prays that the Father be known as 'the only true God' and himself as 'Jesus Christ whom you sent'.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Καὶ ἐσμὲν ἐν τῷ ἀληθινῷ Υἱῷ αὐτοῦ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ","severity":"info","text":"Cyril cites 1 John 2:8 (variant reading) to support the claim that the Son is 'true' (ἀληθινός), not a creature.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"ἑτερούσιος","severity":"info","text":"The term 'ἑτερούσιος' ('of different substance') is a key anti-Arian polemical term, denying the Son's consubstantiality with the Father.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"γενητῆς οὐσίας","severity":"info","text":"The phrase 'γενητῆς οὐσίας' ('created substance') reflects the Arian position that the Son is a creature (κτίσμα), which Cyril refutes by arguing that the Son cannot be a creature if he is ranked with the uncreated Father.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"Κεφάλαιον ΛΒ","severity":"info","text":"The passage ends with a chapter heading ('Chapter 32'), indicating a new section of syllogistic arguments from the New Testament for the Son's divinity.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The Greek text has a minor textual issue: 'ἅτε δὴ' may be a scribal error for 'ἅτε δὴ' or 'ἅτε δέ'; the translation 'since it needs nothing' follows the sense of the passage.","The phrase 'ἐκ τοῦ πληρώματος αὐτοῦ' could be interpreted as 'from his fullness' or 'from his plenitude'; the translation adopts 'from his fullness'."],"confidence":"high","notes":[]},{"i":3,"ref":"p3","source":"τοῦτο δέ ἐστιν ἐν Χριστῷ, πῶς ἂν εἴη τῆς θείας οὐσίας ἀλλότριος, ὁ τὰ ἐκείνης ἐνεργῶν, καὶ τοῦτο ὕπαρχον, ὅπερ ἂν ἐκείνην ὁρισαίμεθα, κατά γε τὸν τῆς τελειότητος λόγον; πῶς ἂν οὖν δέχοιτο τὴν οὕτως ἔχουσαν τοῦ Υἱοῦ φύσιν εἶναι γενητὴν, ἀκούσεται γὰρ μεθ' ἡμῶν· Τί γὰρ ἔχεις ὃ οὐκ ἔλαβες! ὅπερ ἐστιν ἀσεβέστατον.\n\n41 Καλῶς ὁ μέγας ἔφησε Κύριλλος, ἀποδίδοσθαι Θεῷ τὰ Θεῷ χρεωστούμενα· δῆλον γὰρ ὅτι τὸ ἄρχειν καὶ βασιλεύειν καὶ ἡγημονεύειν τοῦ ἰδίου νοῦ, ὡς ὁ μέγας ἔφησεν Ἀθανάσιος. Καὶ μὴν καὶ τὸ ἄγειν δι' αὐτοῦ τὴν σάρκα καὶ τὰς σαρκικὰς κινήσεις θεϊκῶς ἅμα καὶ ἀναμαρτήτως, κατὰ τὸν θαυματουργὸν Γρηγόριον, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῇ σαρκὶ, φησὶ, τὰ αὐτῇ πρέποντα. Πρέπει δὲ τῇ σαρκὶ τοῦ Λόγου, καθὼς ὁ μέγας ἡρμήνευσεν Εὐστάθιος, ὁ γενόμενος ἐπίσκοπος Κυρυκοῦ, τὸ ἄγεσθαι καὶ ἐν πασὶν οἷς πέφυκε κινεῖσθαι τῷ πνεύματι καὶ τῇ βουλῇ καὶ τῇ δυνάμει καὶ ἐξουσίᾳ τῆς ἰδίας ὑποστάσεως, ταύτην δὲ εἰπεῖν τοῦ Λόγου, καὶ μηδὲν ἐξ οἰκείας ὁρμῆς καὶ καθ' ἑαυτὴν ἐνεργεῖν, ὅτι μηδὲ ὑφέστηκε καθ' ἑαυτὴν ὅλως τὸ σύνολον.","english":"This is in Christ: how could he be alien from the divine substance, who performs its works, and is that which we would define that substance to be, at least in respect of the perfection? How then could one admit that the nature of the Son, which is so constituted, is created? For he will hear with us: \"What have you that you did not receive?\" which is most impious.\n\n41 The great Cyril said well that what is owed to God should be rendered to God; for it is clear that ruling and reigning and governing one's own mind, as the great Athanasius said. And indeed also leading through himself the flesh and the fleshly movements both divinely and without sin, according to the wonder-worker Gregory, but also, he says, to the flesh what befits it. And what befits the flesh of the Word, as the great Eustathius, who became bishop of Cyricus, interpreted, is to be led in all things in which it is naturally moved by the spirit and will and power and authority of its own hypostasis—that is, of the Word—and to do nothing from its own impulse and by itself, because it does not subsist at all by itself in any way.","structure":"narrative","commentary":[{"unit":"scripture","kind":"scripture","basis":"text","lemma":"Τί γὰρ ἔχεις ὃ οὐκ ἔλαβες","severity":"info","text":"The phrase echoes a scriptural rebuke (cf. John 3:27 or similar) but is not a direct quotation; it is used rhetorically to challenge the Son's created status.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"term","kind":"term","basis":"text","lemma":"γενητὴν","severity":"info","text":"γενητὴν means 'created' or 'generated', a key term in Arian controversy; Cyril denies the Son is γενητός, asserting instead his consubstantiality.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"background","kind":"background","basis":"text","lemma":"Κύριλλος","severity":"info","text":"Cyril of Alexandria (c. 376–444) is the author; the passage cites his principle that what is owed to God must be rendered to God, a common patristic topos.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"reception","kind":"reception","basis":"text","lemma":"Εὐστάθιος","severity":"info","text":"Eustathius of Antioch (or of Cyricus) is cited for the view that the flesh of the Word is governed entirely by the Logos' hypostasis, reflecting later Chalcedonian debates.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"structure","kind":"structure","basis":"text","lemma":"41 Καλῶς","severity":"info","text":"The numeral 41 marks a new section; the passage shifts from rhetorical questions to a catena of patristic authorities (Cyril, Athanasius, Gregory, Eustathius).","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]},{"unit":"caution","kind":"caution","basis":"text","lemma":"Κυρυκοῦ","severity":"caution","text":"Κυρυκοῦ is likely a scribal error for 'Κυρρηκοῦ' (Cyrrhus) or 'Κυζίκου' (Cyzicus); the see of Eustathius is uncertain, and the text may be corrupt.","cites":[],"named_sources":[],"dropped_cites":[]}],"ambiguities":["The identity of 'the great Eustathius' is ambiguous: possibly Eustathius of Antioch or a bishop of Cyzicus; the text's 'Κυρυκοῦ' is likely a corruption.","The phrase 'Τί γὰρ ἔχεις ὃ οὐκ ἔλαβες' is not a verbatim scriptural citation; its source is unclear."],"confidence":"medium","notes":[]}]}