9 The following from D. Mozley's profound work on the Augustineian Theory of Predestination may serve to illustrate the remarks in the text: "Scripture says that our Lord was in all points tempted like as we are. But the Church has not considered it consistent with piety to interpret this text to mean that our Lord had the same direct propension to sin that we have, or that which is called by divines concupiscence. Such direct appetite for what is sinful is the characteristic of our fallen and corrupt nature, and our Lord did not assume a corrupt, but a sound humanity. Indeed, concupiscence, even prior to and independent of its gratification has of itself the nature of sin; and therefore could not belong to a perfect Being. Our Lord had all the passions and affections that legitimately belong to man; which passions and affections, tending as they do in their own natures to become inordinate, constituted of themselves a state of trial; but the Church has regarded our Lord's trial as consisting in preserving ordinate affections from becoming inordinate, rather than in restraining desire proximate to sin from gratification "(p. 97).
17 Such is the heading which Gazet gives. Petschenig edits "De ira atque tristitia, quod inter accedentia vitia plerumque [non] inveniantur;" where "non" is his own insertion, and as he frankly tells us, the heading does not suit the chapter.
27 Pancarpus (pa/gkarpoj). The word originally applied to an offering of all kinds of fruit. Cf. Tertullian ad Valent. xii. It is also used in the general sense "of all sorts" by Augustine, Adv. Secund. xxiii. Cassian here speaks as if it had become the popular name for the conflicts of the gladiators with all kinds of beasts, though there is apparently no other authority for this.