Supralapsarianism in Post Vatican II RCC? The Franciscan Thesis, The Incarnation, Further Exaltation of Mary, Infallible Decrees.......

[Papa Smurf]

Greetings Everyone I'm not quite sure what to make of all of this (though I admit to being both interested and stunned by some of it, especially the focus on Mary and the idea that is put forth about the Incarnation). So, what do all of you think of it (generally .. and specifically, concerning the text in bold)? (Just FYI, I copied this from the Catholic board on a different Christian forum and brought it here so that we could discuss it, something that I'm not supposed to do over there, being a Protestant)

The two links below are short and informative if you'd care to check them out.

The Absolute Primacy of the Incarnation is the view that Christ’s Incarnation was planned to occur with or without Adam’s sins and the entire creation was created in view to Christ himself. This contrasts with St. Thomas Aquinas’ view that Christ’s Incarnation was due to the fact that Adam sinned from which is derived the necessary fault sung in the Easter Liturgy.​

​

Vatican II and the Franciscan Thesis​

The Franciscan Thesis is that Mary was predestined to be the Mother of God in one and the same decree with Christ’s Incarnation and the Absolute Primacy of the Incarnation. The absolute primacy o…​

​

~Vatican II and the Franciscan Thesis​

​

The Franciscan Thesis maintains that the primary motive of the Incarnation is to glorify the triune God in the person of Jesus Christ: though Christ atones for human sins, His coming isn't relative to our need for redemption but rather has an absolute primacy.​

​

~https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-2265.2008.00469.x​

Thanks!

God bless you!!

--David

 

[Carbon]

Greetings Everyone I'm not quite sure what to make of all of this (though I admit to being both interested and stunned by some of it, especially the focus on Mary and the idea that is put forth about the Incarnation). So, what do all of you think of it (generally .. and specifically, concerning the text in bold)? (Just FYI, I copied this from the Catholic board on a different Christian forum and brought it here so that we could discuss it, something that I'm not supposed to do over there, being a Protestant)

The two links below are short and informative if you'd care to check them out.

The Absolute Primacy of the Incarnation is the view that Christ’s Incarnation was planned to occur with or without Adam’s sins and the entire creation was created in view to Christ himself. This contrasts with St. Thomas Aquinas’ view that Christ’s Incarnation was due to the fact that Adam sinned from which is derived the necessary fault sung in the Easter Liturgy.​

​

​

The Franciscan Thesis maintains that the primary motive of the Incarnation is to glorify the triune God in the person of Jesus Christ: though Christ atones for human sins, His coming isn't relative to our need for redemption but rather has an absolute primacy.​

​

~https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1468-2265.2008.00469.x​

Thanks!

God bless you!!

--David

Mary was predestined to be the Mother of God?
Just about every forum I have been on really emphasizes Mary. I think she is the main God in their religion, as everything seems built around her. What would they do without her?

 

[Papa Smurf]

Mary was predestined to be the Mother of God?
Just about every forum I have been on really emphasizes Mary.

Hello Brother, the Library of the Fathers details some of the cult-like behavior that people were demonstrating towards Mary while she was still alive, and it's gotten far worse over the years. It seems that each passing year brings a new or increased heresy of some kind concerning her in the RCC.

For instance, I happened upon a special service at a Basilica in St. Louis years ago. There was a statue of Mary that I believe was being taken from Basilica to Basilica for people to see as it was purported to "cry" at times. I'd always wondered why the statue of Mary cried (or at least appeared to do so, at times ... it did not do so that day), until I saw this service and, particularly, what happened after the service was over (as the entire congregation pressed in to see the statue, reaching their arms towards the statue while praying and sobbing).

It seemed to me that if it was crying (this statue of Mary) that it was surely crying for the people who attended the service, all whose focus and worship was clearly and wholly aimed at Mary, instead of towards her Son.

I think she is the main God in their religion, as everything seems built around her.

My Catholic friends tell me that's not what's going on, even though it clearly looks like it is. They also tell me that they aren't bowing down and worshipping a statue, but the woman who the statue represents.

The thing is, isn't that exactly what the people of Israel believed that they were doing when they built and worshipped the Golden Calf (that they were worshipping the God, YHWH, who they believed it represented), and yet, they found themselves in some VERY hot water nevertheless.

What would they do without her?

I'm not really sure, but they'd certainly have a lot of time on their hands to figure it out

God bless you!!

--David

 

[Papa Smurf]

The Absolute Primacy of the Incarnation is the view that Christ’s Incarnation was planned to occur with or without Adam’s sins and the entire creation was created in view to Christ himself. This contrasts with St. Thomas Aquinas’ view that Christ’s Incarnation was due to the fact that Adam sinned from which is derived the necessary fault sung in the Easter Liturgy.​

My first question (about the text above in bold) is why

The Incarnation was absolutely necessary BECAUSE Adam sinned, yes? If he had not, sin and death would have never entered our realm, and the Earth would have continued to be the paradise that it began as with all of us living in it with God.

No sin, no death, no need for redemption.

So, why would The Franciscan Thesis want us to believe otherwise?

Is it possible that this Franciscan Thesis idea is about Mary, alone After all, no need for redemption would mean no need for the Incarnation, which would also mean no need for Mary (as the mother of our Redeemer).

I may be WAY off track here (and I certainly hope that I am ).

Thoughts?

Thanks

God bless you!!

--Papa Smurf (David)