image of God[1], viz. the Logos. So he renewed our nature in himself by means of a perfect obedience[2] till the death, to which he was condemned for us[3] and through which he, as being sinless, gained the victory over the devil[4]. By means of this renewal humanity received the form of the sonship of him who had created it[5]. And together with and by virtue of the gift of sonship there was given to the manhood also a share in the position of power and dominion of the son of God[6].
Now I come to the question: Did Nestorius really make the unity of the natures in the one person of Christ intelligible? As long as one starts by pointing to the Logos on the one side and the man on the other, it is comprehensible that a negative answer should have been given. The Antiochian formulas, which are found in Nestorius, e.g. διὰ τὸν φοροῦντα τὸν φορούμενον σέβω, διὰ τὸν κεκρυμμένον προσκυνῶ τὸν φαινόμενον[7] and: ὁμολογῶμεν τὸν ἐν ἀνθρώπῳ θεόν, σέβωμεν τὸν τῇ θείᾳ συναφείᾳ τῷ παντοκράτορι θεῷ συμπροσκυνούμενον ἄνθρωπον[8], seem again and again to force
- ↑ B. 96 = N. 62; comp. B. 102 = N. 66: La forme de serviteur l'a servi absolument comme il le voulait.
- ↑ B. 342 = N. 219.
- ↑ B. 102 = N. 66.
- ↑ Comp. B. 297 = N. 188; B. 299 = N. 189; Nestoriana, p. 344 6 ff.
- ↑ B. 299 = N. 189.
- ↑ Nestoriana, p. 361, 22; comp. above, p. 86 f., note 6.
- ↑ Nestoriana, p. 262, 3 f.
- ↑ l.c. p. 249, 2 ff.
