Page:Nestorius and his place in the history of Christian doctrine.djvu/66

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
54
THE TRAGEDY

composed in 431 at Ephesus, probably by Theodoret. The prolonged transactions which led to this union are even in their details sufficiently known to us. But I am glad not to have to treat them now; for the Treatise of Heraclides, although very often dealing with this union, adds nothing to our knowledge here, as far as I have been able to see.

I remark only, that Nestorius in his Treatise of Heraclides gives a sharp and right characterisation of the situation which preceded the union[1]. Cyril and John of Antioch had each two wishes in the event of peace. Cyril wished to see acknowledged, firstly his council and the condemnation of Nestorius, secondly his anathematisms; John on the other side wished as ardently that the first should not take place and secondly, that Cyril should recant his anathematisms. Cyril, in order to retain his power, let himself be bartered down to a great extent. He accepted the Antiochian confession of faith and was contented with the fact that his anathematisms were not condemned. But he did not give up the demand, that his council should be acknowledged and Nestorius be anathematised. He again set in play all his possible means for attaining this end. And here we are in a position to follow his actions by means of documents, which show clearly that he did not even hold himself back from bribery. These documents are a letter of Cyril's archdeacon

  1. Bedjan, pp. 395–403; Nau, pp. 254–259.