|
Reply. This proposition must be avoided, because it favors
Nestorianism and can be taken in a false sense. For if the word
"man" taken exactly in its reduplicative sense, so that the particle
as in its reduplicative sense, gives the formal reason why Christ is a
person, then this assertion is false, because it would signify that in
Christ there would be a created person, as the Nestorians said.
However, this proposition could be accepted if interpreted in a good
sense, if the term "man, ' were taken for the suppositum or for the
specific nature, because it belongs to the human nature to be in a
person. Hence this proposition is equivocal and as such must be
avoided.
This terminates the question concerning the manner of speaking about
Christ.
|
|
