Page:Lesser Eastern Churches.djvu/82

60 politan of Tarsus in Cilicia (378–c. 394), he was a famous defender of Nicene orthodoxy during the Arian troubles. But in discussing the union of the consubstantial Logos with the man Jesus Christ, he evolved what we should describe as pure Nestorianism. There are two persons, the Logos (Son of God) and the Son of David. Not the Logos, but the Son of David, was born of Mary. The Son of David is the temple of the Son of God. The mystery of the Incarnation consists in the assumption of a perfect man by the Logos. The Logos dwells in this man as in a temple or a garment. These ideas then became the usual ones in this school of Antioch. Its greatest representative, Theodore, took them up and defended them. Theodore, an Antiochene by birth, became Bishop of Mopsuestia in 392, and died in 428. He was an old and faithful friend of St. John Chrysostom. His "Nestorianism" is open and avowed. The ideas of Diodore reappear in his works quite plainly: the man Jesus is only the temple of the indwelling Logos, and so on. He even anticipated the very point around which the quarrel of Nestorius turned, by objecting to the word. For all that, he is one of the greatest exegetes in Greek theology, and his influence, especially in Syria, was enormous.

We see then that, as often happens, Nestorius only gave his name to a heresy which existed before his time, which he himself had learned from his masters. His opponents knew this. Cyril sees Diodore and Theodore behind Nestorius clearly, and insists continually on their condemnation. So also the later Monophysites recognize in these doctors the source and origin of the doctrine (in its extreme form) which they abhor. On the other