10 He gives these two interpretations of this passage; again Cont. adv. leg. and Prop. ii. 5 (20).
10 Matt. xvi. 19 and xviii. 18.
11 Vid. Serm. 48 (98, Bened.) 6.
20 Ps. xvii. 4, Sept. (xviii. 3, English version).
21 Ps. xlix. 23, Sept. (l. English version).
22 Ps. cxxxix. 6, Sept. (cxl. 5, English version).
25 It was the doctrine of Paul of Samosata, that the man Christ was exalted to be the Son of God (prokoph,from Luke ii. 52), as if by merit. Origen seems to hold the same, at least as regards the (supposed) pre-existent soul of Christ (vid. Huet. Origen, ii. 3. § 6; vid. however De la Rue's note); and the Arians, at least implicitly (Socr. Hist. i. 6, Athan. Orat. contr. Arian, i. 35, iii. 51; and Leporius, Cassian. Incarn. i. 3, 4). The same heresy was imputed to the Nestorians (but falsely according to Garner, in Mar. Merc. pt. i. p. 431), and thereby connected them with the Pelagians, as if unassisted human nature could merit grace. The Church on the other hand, proceeding from Rom. i. 4, taught that the human nature which became the manhood of the Word was predestined to be such by grace before its creation, and became such in the moment of creation. St. Athanasius touches on this subject against the Arians (Orat. i. 46); St. Augustine enlarges on it against the Pelagians (De Praedest. Sanct. 23, 30; De Corrept. et Grat. 30): St. Cyril, against the Nestorians (Contra Nest. iii. p. 83); Vigilius, against the Monophysites (Contra Eutych. v. B. P. t. 4, p. 528, ed. 1624). When St. Augustine says "that man," he is speaking of our Lord's human nature as abstracted from that Divine Person in whom it actually existed, and not as if it ever existed as a separate hypostasis, This use of "homo" and a_nqrwpoj is very frequent with the Fathers; what is more startling is the expression "homo ille," yet vid. also Augustine, De Praed. Sanct. 30; Alcuim, De Trin. iii. i; Agobard, Cont. Felic. B. P. t. 9, p. 1194. However, this point is a subject of debate among theologians (vid. Petav. De Incarn. xi. fin.).