SL 53 (2013), 67-103 R.D. HUGHES Ramon Llull’s gradualist solution to the hypothe- tical question: «Utrum Deus fuisset incarnatus, si non fuisset originale peccatum?»*1 Robert D. Hughes Centre de Documentació Ramon Llull, University of Barcelona
[email protected] Introduction I should first like to draw the reader’s attention to the fact that in order to give a full view of Ramon Llull’s—or, for that matter, of any (medieval) writer’s—Christology demands, at the very least: I) an examination of that author’s doctrine of God (both «theological» and «economical») and of whether this is logically prior to his or her consideration Rebut el 8 de febrer de 2013. Acceptat el 28 de juny de 2013. doi: 10.3306/STUDIALU- LLIANA.108.67. ISSN: 2340-4752. * I should like to thank Albert Soler Llopart, Celia López Alcalde and Alexander Fidora for provid- ing textual and bibliographical material for this article. I should also like to thank Anthony Bonner and Josep Maria Ruiz Simon for their present and past suggestions regarding some of the subject matter of this article and the consideration given thereto. 1 Ars ad faciendum et solvendum quaestiones (Lectura Artis inventivae et Tabulae Generalis) = LATG, MOG V, v, 313 (671). This question is also asked within the relevant medieval tradition under the form: «Utrum si homo/Adam non peccasset, Deus fuisset incarnatus?» See nn. 81-2 of the present article for bibliographical details concerning the hypothetical question and the solutions historically offered thereto, as well as concerning the «absurdity» of its «hypothetical» formulation.