Page:Nestorius and his place in the history of Christian doctrine.djvu/108

96 their part tied to the Cyrillian tradition. Without doubt, however, there is no real harmony between these different standards of faith. For Leo's letter declares: Agit utraque forma cum alterius communione, quod proprium est, verbo scilicet operante quod verbi est et carne exequente quod carnis est; unum horum coruscat miraculis, alterum succumbit injuriis, but Severus of Antioch, the well-known later monophysite, was right, when he said: , and for Cyril the human nature of Christ was a , as is shown by his understanding of the. Nay, in his epistola synodica to Nestorius he even anathematised the and required a union of the natures. This disharmony between the Cyrillian tradition and that of the western church represented by Leo showed itself also during the proceedings of the council in a very distinct manner, when the wording of the creed was deliberated. The first draft of this creed contained the words, which corresponded to the