|
Objection 1: It would seem that in Christ there was no empiric and
acquired knowledge. For whatever befitted Christ, He had most
perfectly. Now Christ did not possess acquired knowledge most
perfectly, since He did not devote Himself to the study of letters,
by which knowledge is acquired in its perfection; for it is said
(Jn. 7:15): "The Jews wondered, saying: How doth this
Man know letters, having never learned?" Therefore it seems that in
Christ there was no acquired knowledge.
Objection 2: Further, nothing can be added to what is full. But
the power of Christ's soul was filled with intelligible species
divinely infused, as was said above (A. 3). Therefore no
acquired species could accrue to His soul.
Objection 3: Further, he who already has the habit of knowledge,
acquires no new habit, through what he receives from the senses
(otherwise two forms of the same species would be in the same thing
together); but the habit which previously existed is strengthened and
increased. Therefore, since Christ had the habit of infused
knowledge, it does not seem that He acquired a new knowledge through
what He perceived by the senses.
On the contrary, It is written (Heb. 5:8): "Whereas . .
. He was the Son of God, He learned obedience by the things which
He suffered," i.e. "experienced," says a gloss. Therefore
there was in the soul of Christ an empiric knowledge, which is
acquired knowledge.
I answer that, As is plain from Article 1, nothing that God
planted in our nature was wanting to the human nature assumed by the
Word of God. Now it is manifest that God planted in human nature
not only a passive, but an active intellect. Hence it is necessary to
say that in the soul of Christ there was not merely a passive, but
also an active intellect. But if in other things God and nature make
nothing in vain, as the Philosopher says (De Coel. i, 31; ii,
59), still less in the soul of Christ is there anything in vain.
Now what has not its proper operation is useless, as is said in De
Coel. ii, 17. Now the proper operation of the active intellect is
to make intelligible species in act, by abstracting them from
phantasms; hence, it is said (De Anima iii, 18) that the active
intellect is that "whereby everything is made actual." And thus it
is necessary to say that in Christ there were intelligible species
received in the passive intellect by the action of the active
intellect---which means that there was acquired knowledge in Him,
which some call empiric. And hence, although I wrote differently
(Sent. iii, D, xiv, Article 3; D, xviii, Article 3), it
must be said that in Christ there was acquired knowledge, which is
properly knowledge in a human fashion, both as regards the subject
receiving and as regards the active cause. For such knowledge springs
from Christ's active intellect, which is natural to the human soul.
But infused knowledge is attributed to the soul, on account of a light
infused from on high, and this manner of knowing is proportioned to the
angelic nature. But the beatific knowledge, whereby the very Essence
of God is seen, is proper and natural to God alone, as was said in
the FP, Question 12, Article 4.
Reply to Objection 1: Since there is a twofold way of acquiring
knowledge---by discovery and by being taught---the way of
discovery is the higher, and the way of being taught is secondary.
Hence it is said (Ethic. i, 4): "He indeed is the best who
knows everything by himself: yet he is good who obeys him that speaks
aright." And hence it was more fitting for Christ to possess a
knowledge acquired by discovery than by being taught, especially since
He was given to be the Teacher of all, according to Joel 2:23:
"Be joyful in the Lord your God, because He hath given you a
Teacher of justice."
Reply to Objection 2: The human mind has two relations---one to
higher things, and in this respect the soul of Christ was full of the
infused knowledge. The other relation is to lower things, i.e. to
phantasms, which naturally move the human mind by virtue of the active
intellect. Now it was necessary that even in this respect the soul of
Christ should be filled with knowledge, not that the first fulness was
insufficient for the human mind in itself, but that it behooved it to
be also perfected with regard to phantasms.
Reply to Objection 3: Acquired and infused habits are not to be
classed together; for the habit of knowledge is acquired by the
relation of the human mind to phantasms; hence, another habit of the
same kind cannot be again acquired. But the habit of infused knowledge
is of a different nature, as coming down to the soul from on high, and
not from phantasms. And hence there is no parity between these
habits.
|
|