Page:Syrian Churches (Etheridge).djvu/155

Rh Jacobite divines with him, receded in this doctrine equally from the Eutychians and the Catholics:—From the old Eutychians, in maintaining that the flesh of the Saviour taken from the virgin was actual and real, and united with his Deity, without confusion, change, or division; but from the orthodox as well, in teaching that, after the union, the two natures were no longer two, but one, composed of two.

[The Eutychians, and Monophysites in general, had a manner of speaking of the human nature of our Lord, which implied that it had an actual existence prior to the incarnation of the Word. This was well animadverted upon by St. Leo, in his admirable letter to Flavian of Constantinople, at an early stage of the controversy; where he observes, that it was scarcely a less blasphemy to say, that before his advent the Redeemer had two natures, than to say, that after it he possessed but one.]

The view of Xenayas appears to be that still taken of this mysterious subject by the ecclesiastics of the Jacobite communion at the present day. The laity, as among the Nestorians, and all other fallen churches, enter but rarely into the examination of religious doctrines, content with passively receiving the instruction sparingly enough inculcated by their priests. On the topic in question, they have some imperfect idea that the Saviour is God and man in the same nature; a mystery which they indicate by making the sign of the cross with only the middle finger of their hand, holding the others so as to render them invisible.

The Jacobites believe in the personality and Deity of the Holy Spirit; but, in common with the Greek church, deny his procession from the Son. Yet there have been some among them who have asserted that truth. In the parts of their service-books which relate to the Holy Ghost, they say, in reference to that Divine Person,