Page:Nestorius and his place in the history of Christian doctrine.djvu/130

118 position of power which is given back to man. Finally it is deserving of notice, that Marcellus, when applying the terms, and  only to the Christ of history, is, as regards the two latter terms, in perfect harmony with Nestorius, and that further, as regards the first, Nestorius, too, applied the term after the incarnation only to the undivided historical person of Christ. I have, therefore, no doubt that there existed a kinship in tradition between Marcellus and Nestorius. I do not mean that Nestorius had necessarily read Marcellus' work. It is probable—if a conjecture as to the text is right—that he once named him, opposing his idea, that the Logos, when going at the end of all things to be reabsorbed into the Father, would put off his flesh; but he could have learned this idea through hearsay. Marcellus and Nestorius could have a kinship in