|
Objection 1: It would seem that there was not in Christ another
infused knowledge besides the beatific knowledge. For all other
knowledge compared to the beatific knowledge is like imperfect to
perfect. But imperfect knowledge is removed by the presence of perfect
knowledge, as the clear "face-to-face" vision removes the
enigmatical vision of faith, as is plain from 1 Cor.
13:10,12. Since, therefore, in Christ there was the
beatific knowledge, as stated above (Article 2), it would seem
that there could not be any other imprinted knowledge.
Objection 2: Further, an imperfect mode of cognition disposes
towards a more perfect, as opinion, the result of dialectical
syllogisms, disposes towards science, which results from demonstrative
syllogisms. Now, when perfection is reached, there is no further
need of the disposition, even as on reaching the end motion is no
longer necessary. Hence, since every created cognition is compared to
beatific cognition, as imperfect to perfect and as disposition to its
term, it seems that since Christ had beatific knowledge, it was not
necessary for Him to have any other knowledge.
Objection 3: Further, as corporeal matter is in potentiality to
sensible forms, so the possible intellect is in potentiality to
intelligible forms. Now corporeal matter cannot receive two forms at
once! one more perfect and the other less perfect. Therefore neither
can the soul receive a double knowledge at once, one more perfect and
the other less perfect; and hence the same conclusion as above.
On the contrary, It is written (Col. 2:3) that in Christ
"are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge."
I answer that, As stated above (Article 1), it was fitting that
the human nature assumed by the Word of God should not be imperfect.
Now everything in potentiality is imperfect unless it be reduced to
act. But the passive intellect of man is in potentiality to all
intelligible things. and it is reduced to act by intelligible species,
which are its completive forms, as is plain from what is said De
Anima iii, 32,38. And hence we must admit in the soul of
Christ an infused knowledge, inasmuch as the Word of God imprinted
upon the soul of Christ, which is personally united to Him,
intelligible species of all things to which the possible intellect is in
potentiality; even as in the beginning of the creation of things, the
Word of God imprinted intelligible species upon the angelic mind, as
is clear from Augustine (Gen. ad lit. ii, 8). And therefore,
even as in the angels, according to Augustine (Gen. ad lit. iv,
22,24,30), there is a double knowledge---one the morning
knowledge, whereby they know things in the Word; the other the
evening knowledge, whereby they know things in their proper natures by
infused species; so likewise, besides the Divine and uncreated
knowledge in Christ, there is in His soul a beatific knowledge,
whereby He knows the Word, and things in the Word; and an infused
or imprinted knowledge, whereby He knows things in their proper nature
by intelligible species proportioned to the human mind.
Reply to Objection 1: The imperfect vision of faith is essentially
opposed to manifest vision, seeing that it is of the essence of faith
to have reference to the unseen, as was said above (SS, Question
1, Article 4). But cognition by infused species includes no
opposition to beatific cognition. Therefore there is no parity.
Reply to Objection 2: Disposition is referred to perfection in two
ways: first, as a way leading to perfection; secondly, as an effect
proceeding from perfection; thus matter is disposed by heat to receive
the form of fire, and, when this comes, the heat does not cease, but
remains as an effect of this form. So, too, opinion caused by a
dialectical syllogism is a way to knowledge, which is acquired by
demonstration, yet, when this has been acquired, there may still
remain the knowledge gained by the dialectical syllogism, following,
so to say, the demonstrative knowledge, which is based on the cause,
since he who knows the cause is thereby enabled the better to understand
the probable signs from which dialectical syllogisms proceed. So
likewise in Christ, together with the beatific knowledge, there still
remains infused knowledge, not as a way to beatitude, but as
strengthened by beatitude.
Reply to Objection 3: The beatific knowledge is not by a species,
that is a similitude of the Divine Essence, or of whatever is known
in the Divine Essence, as is plain from what has been said in the
FP, Question 12, Article 2; but it is a knowledge of the
Divine Essence immediately, inasmuch as the Divine Essence itself
is united to the beatified mind as an intelligible to an intelligent
being; and the Divine Essence is a form exceeding the capacity of any
creature whatsoever. Hence, together with this super-exceeding
form, there is nothing to hinder from being in the rational mind,
intelligible species, proportioned to its nature.
|
|