tradition even if Nestorius did not know Marcellus' work. Besides it is perhaps remarkable, that Nestorius who so zealously anathematises all heretics never put Marcellus on such a black list.
Likewise it seems to me without doubt, that there is a kinship in tradition between Nestorius and the so-called Symbolum Sardicense[1]. In the beginning of this creed Ursacius and Valens, "the Arians," as they are called, are blamed because they pretended to be Christians, and nevertheless dared to say, that the "Logos or Spirit" was wounded, slain, died and rose again[2]. Correspondingly the creed declares at the end, that not the Spirit in Christ (i.e. the Logos) suffered, ἀλλ’ ὁ ἄνθρωπος, ὃν ἐνεδύσατο, ὃν ἀνέλαβεν ἐκ Μαρίας τῆς παρθένου, τὸν ἄνθρωπον τὸν παθεῖν δυνάμενον[3], and it asserts as to the resurrection that not ὁ θεὸς ἐν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ἀλλ’ ὁ ἄνθρωπος ἐν τῷ θεῷ ἀνέστη[4]. This conformity of views between the Sardicense and Nestorius is really not surprising, for the Sardicense is of western origin and we have already seen that since Tertullian's time the western tradition included a doctrine of the two natures of Christ, which resembled that of Nestorius[5].
- ↑ I quote the revised text I gave in Das Glaubensbekenntnis der Homousianer von Sardica (Abhandlungen der Berliner Akademie, 1909) pp. 7–11.
- ↑ 3, p. 7, 7–10.
- ↑ 11, p. 10, 53–55.
- ↑ ib. p. 10, 55 f.
- ↑ Comp. the references to western theologians I gave in the notes of Das Glaubensbekenntnis etc. (p. 11 ff.).
