Latest topics
» Rethink "Feeneyism"?
Fri Aug 11, 2017 6:02 pm by tornpage

» Brother Andre Marie MICM, the Prior at the St. Benedict Center does not correct Frs.Brian Harrison and Cekada,Bishops Sanborn,Pirvanus,Kelly and Fellay
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:24 pm by MRyan

» Revisiting Diocese/Parish Screening Policy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 4:03 pm by MRyan

» When sedes and trads can accept that Pius XII made a mistake then popes since John XXIII are no more in heresy
Wed Jun 28, 2017 3:08 pm by MRyan

» Doctrinal talks were conducted with Fr.Gleize on 'the other side'
Mon Jun 26, 2017 9:08 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Pope Benedict permitted Fr. Jean Marie Gleize to lead in doctrinal talks since he was a liberal ?
Mon Jun 26, 2017 8:59 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Padre Pio told Fr.Gabriel Amorth," It is Satan who has been introduced into the bosom of the Church and within a very short time will come to rule a false Church" -Bishop Richard Williamson
Sun Jun 25, 2017 9:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Mons. Brunero Gherardini misled the Slaves of the Immaculate Heart of Mary and many traditionalists
Sun Jun 25, 2017 7:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Official statement from SSPX awaited : Fr.Gleize and other theologians have got it wrong
Sat Jun 24, 2017 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Andre Marie MICM too is teaching error : Bishop Sanborn cannot report at the Chancery office
Sat Jun 24, 2017 8:50 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magsiterial Heresy ?
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:36 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Magisterium should apologise to the SSPX for the excommunication of Archbishop Lefebvre
Sat Sep 26, 2015 8:34 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Brother Francis MICM made a mistake on Vatican Council II
Sat Sep 26, 2015 5:14 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Legion of Christ universities in Rome adapt to leftist laws
Fri May 22, 2015 7:53 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» CM, SSPX, MICM deny the Faith to please superiors
Thu May 21, 2015 4:44 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» SSPX and Church Militant are using the same liberal theology and are unaware of it
Wed May 20, 2015 9:54 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Michael Voris uses liberal theology and yet critcizes Michael Coren
Tue May 19, 2015 10:10 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Fr.John Zuhlsdorf condones Mass for suicide
Tue May 19, 2015 9:18 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Vatican Council II is traditional or liberal depending on how you interpret the Letter of the Holy Office
Mon May 18, 2015 5:57 am by Lionel L. Andrades

» Church Militant unable to answer questions on extra ecclesiam nulla salus
Sun May 17, 2015 5:55 am by Lionel L. Andrades

Fr. Faber on the Incarnation

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Fr. Faber on the Incarnation

Post  Roguejim on Thu Aug 18, 2011 3:07 pm

I'm moving slowly through Fr. Faber's Precious Blood because he presents much to contemplate, in a style which I happen to like. Here's a little something which caught me by surprise because I had always considered the Incarnation strictly in terns of atonement/redemption. He presents a different view here (my emphasis added):

..."Moreover, it was always part of his
intention that the Creator should become as it
were part of his own creation, and that an Un
created Person should really and truly assume a
created nature and be born of a created mother.
This is what we call the mystery of the Incarna
tion. It is this which makes creation so magnifi
cent. It was not merely a beautiful thing which
God made as an artificer, and which he set outside
of himself, and kept at a distance from himself to
look at, to admire, to pity, and to love. He always
intended to be part of it himself in a very wonder
ful way. So that there would have been Jesus and
Mary, even if there had never been any sin
: only
Jesus would not have been crucified, and Mary
would not have had any dolors. But the sight
of sin was also with God from the beginning, that
is, through all his unbeginning eternity; and thus
the Precious Blood also, as the ransom for sin, was
with him from the beginning..."

While I did not question Fr. Faber's orthodoxy , nor brand him a heretic from my esteemed position as "hack internet theologian", I did run it by the "retired theology professor" for his comments, which ended up being interesting. Here they are, below my initial query:

Dear Theologian,

I've been reading Fr. Faber's Precious Blood. My question concerns the underlined/bolded part below. I was under the perhaps mistaken belief that the Incarnation was solely for the purpose of atonement and redemption, that if it hadn't been for the sin of Adam and Eve, there would have been no reason for it. Fr. Faber seems to say otherwise. Are his thoughts traditional Catholic thought? Is his view open to discussion, i.e., do orthodox theologians still discuss/debate this?

In Jesus and Mary,

Dear Roguejim,

"Both views are within the bonds of orthodoxy.
The dominant, Thomistic, view has been that the Incarnation took place only in view of sin and the need for Redemption. However, St. Thomas' Franciscan contemporary, St. Bonaventure, took the opposite view, and many or most Franciscan theologians have followed him, as does Fr. Faber.


Posts : 211
Reputation : 315
Join date : 2010-12-18
Location : southern Oregon

Back to top Go down

Re: Fr. Faber on the Incarnation

Post  Roguejim on Thu Aug 18, 2011 3:37 pm

Prof's reply should read "bounds of orthodoxy".

The EDIT feature here stinks.

Posts : 211
Reputation : 315
Join date : 2010-12-18
Location : southern Oregon

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum