would not be in accord with recognized theological principles, according to which the worthier objective must be considered as primary in the intentions of God.
The Subtle Doctor did not express himself on the predestination of Mary, according to Father Balic, the eminent Scotist (”La Predestination de la Très Ste. Virge dans la Doctrine de Jean Duns Scot,’’ in La France Franciscainer Tom. XIV, 1936). It was the followers of Scotus, especially John of Bassolis and Angelus Volpi, who worked out a complete Marian predestination synthesis. This synthesis implies that the primacy of Christ’s predestination includes that of his Mother, since she would have been the predestined Mother of God even if Adam had not sinned. Hence she was simply predestined in the divine plan of creation to her primacy place of glory. This includes her Immaculate Conception, since in principle it precedes Adam’s fall.
In an article entitled "De Debito Peccati Originalis in Virgine Maria” in the Antonianum (Rome, 1941), Father Balic sums up these views as follows: "Whether we affirm or deny that Scotus taught that the Mother of God was subject to the need of original sin, our views will be in conformity with the teaching of the Bull Ineffabilis Deus, as long as we state the doctrine of Scotus in these words: ’Mary would have contracted original sin by reason of her natural descent from Adam had she not been preserved in the first instant of her conception in view of the merits of the passion of Christ.’ ”
26
