was on the side of his opponents, Scotus chose a courteous polemical, rather than a direct didactical approach. He was intent upon fully answering the arguments of his opponents before establishing his own thesis in direct exposition. With a fine feeling for psychological procedure he cleared the ground by removing the arguments of his opponents, and only then offered his own solid and luminous appeal to the honor and merits of Christ and of His Blessed Mother, on behalf of her great prerogative of the Immaculate Conception.
Among the reasons appealed to by his opponents, the leading one was the dignity of Christ as Universal Redeemer and Mediator. This was irreconcilable, they asserted, with Mary’s exemption from original sin. Scotus restates the objection as follows: ’’One reason is the excellence of her Son, Who as Universal Redeemer opened the gate of heaven to all. But if the Blessed Virgin had not contracted original sin, she would not have needed a Redeemer. Nor would He have opened the gate to her, because it would not have been closed to her. For it is not closed except on account of sin, and more especially, original sin.” 33
The Paris commentary repeats the objection in these words: ’’The Son of God was the Universal Redeemer. He was, then, the Redeemer of everyone besides Himself. Therefore, the Blessed Virgin was in sin, since only a person who has been in sin can be redeemed. For else she would not have been redeemed. Ennobling the Mother in the way suggested, would imply dishonoring the Son. Again, Christ by His death opened the gate of heaven to all. But if the Blessed Virgin had not contracted original
14
