Page:Nestorius and his place in the history of Christian doctrine.djvu/78

66 only intelligible, if the Logos took on himself not a perfect man, that is body and animal soul and intellectual soul or intellect, but joined himself with a human body and a human soul in such a manner that he himself became the intellect, the moving principle, in the new and united being. This idea of a substantial unity between the Logos and the human nature which resulted in the new and composite nature of the e Logos seemed to the Antiochians to do away with the true manhood of Christ and with the possibility of his moral development. They taught, therefore, that the divine and the human nature in Christ were to be regarded as perfect each in itself, a human free will, too, having to be assumed in Christ. To maintain this, they laid stress on the assertion that the two natures in Christ were not altered by their union as substances which are chemically combined. Hence they did not think the union to be a substantial one.

Before going further I will make a short remark about the term nature, deferring discussion of the term substance till later. I can do it by quoting Professor. For this scholar is right in saying that the term nature at that time meant all the attributes or characteristics attached to a substance and as a whole always associated with it. Apollinaris saw in Christ but one substance, viz. the substance of