CHAP. XIIII. Of Nestorius and his heresie.
NEstorius Bishop of Constantinople, albeit hee denied not Christ to be god as Arrius did,* 1.1 yet he affirmed pure man to be borne of the blessed virgin, & that she therefore ought not to be called 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, the mother of God. Whose heresie was condemned in the Ephesine councell, vnder Theodosius iunior then Emperour of Rome.
Nestorius his heresie consisted in this, that since the bles∣sed virgin was a woman, God could not be borne of her, and consequently she ought not to be called the mother of God. For although he neither denied in Christ, the deitie nor the huma∣nitie, yet did hee place two persons in Christ together with the two natures: and consequently he denied the wonderful hypo∣staticall vnion, which our christian faith acknowledgeth.
Arrius held, that Christ was only man, wholly voide of the nature and person of God: but Nestorius helde, that Christ had both the nature and person of God, as also both the nature and the person of man: which last was the formalitie of his heresie, and therefore ought well to be obserued of the reader. For albeit there be two natures in Christ, the nature of God, and the nature of man, yet is the••re but one onely person in Christ, which is the person or subsistence of God: for in that diuine person by vnspeakeable hypostaticall vnion, the true nature of man subsisteth, without the person of man. By rea∣son hereof it is truely saide, and christianly beleeued, the sonne of God was borne of the blessed virgin, the sonne of God did suffer torments, the sonne of God was crucified, the sonne of God rose againe the third day; the sonne of God ascen∣ded into heauen: All which Nestorius denied, because hee