Page:Lesser Eastern Churches.djvu/88

66 exactly the same thing as the later Monophysite heresy. Then, it is alleged, the real reason of all this controversy was Cyril's jealousy of Nestorius; it is one incident in the long rivalry between Alexandria and Constantinople (and Antioch). Nestorius's disgrace and deposition is merely a point gained for Alexandria. Cyril deposing Nestorius is a parallel case to Theophilus deposing St. John Chrysostom at the Oak Tree Synod in 403, and again to Dioscor of Alexandria deposing Flavian of Constantinople at Ephesus in 449 (p. 174); only, the first and third times Alexandria failed.

These ideas are not new: indeed, the defence of Nestorius has long been almost a commonplace of Protestant Church history. They have received a new impetus, and have become one of the questions of the day, by the discovery and publication of Nestorius's apology. In exile at the end of his life he wrote this and called it The Book of Heraklides of Damascus. Why Heraklides? Because Nestorius's own name was dangerous; his works were to be destroyed or burnt. He hoped, then, under this pseudonym to pass his apology. He wrote in Greek. The original is lost; but a Syriac version is preserved in the house of the Nestorian Patriarch. This is what has lately been published. The first we heard of it was in a book by Mr. Bethune Baker, Nestorius and his Teaching, a fresh examination of the evidence. In this he did not publish the whole text, but used a copy procured by Mr. D. Jenks, formerly of the Anglican Mission at Urmi (translated by a friend), from which he makes extracts. On the strength of this, Mr. Baker produces an apology of Nestorius. Admitting the dogmatic decrees of Ephesus, he claims that Nestorius did not hold anything really opposed to them. What Nestorius attacked was