SECOND ARTICLE [III, Q. 12, Art. 2]

Whether Christ Advanced in Acquired or Empiric Knowledge?

Objection 1: It would seem that Christ did not advance in this

knowledge. For even as Christ knew all things by His beatific and His

infused knowledge, so also did He by this acquired knowledge, as is

plain from what has been said (A. 1). But He did not advance in these

knowledges. Therefore neither in this.

Obj. 2: Further, to advance belongs to the imperfect, since the

perfect cannot be added to. Now we cannot suppose an imperfect

knowledge in Christ. Therefore Christ did not advance in this

knowledge.

Obj. 3: Further, Damascene says (De Fide Orth. iii, 22): "Whoever say

that Christ advanced in wisdom and grace, as if receiving additional

sensations, do not venerate the union which is in hypostasis." But it

is impious not to venerate this union. Therefore it is impious to say

that His knowledge received increase.

_On the contrary,_ It is written (Luke 2:52): "Jesus advanced in

wisdom and age and grace with God and men"; and Ambrose says (De

Incar. Dom. vii) that "He advanced in human wisdom." Now human wisdom

is that which is acquired in a human manner, i.e. by the light of the

active intellect. Therefore Christ advanced in this knowledge.

_I answer that,_ There is a twofold advancement in knowledge: one in

essence, inasmuch as the habit of knowledge is increased; the other

in effect--e.g. if someone were with one and the same habit of

knowledge to prove to someone else some minor truths at first, and

afterwards greater and more subtle conclusions. Now in this second

way it is plain that Christ advanced in knowledge and grace, even as

in age, since as His age increased He wrought greater deeds, and

showed greater knowledge and grace.

But as regards the habit of knowledge, it is plain that His habit of

infused knowledge did not increase, since from the beginning He had

perfect infused knowledge of all things; and still less could His

beatific knowledge increase; while in the First Part (Q. 14, A. 15),

we have already said that His Divine knowledge could not increase.

Therefore, if in the soul of Christ there was no habit of acquired

knowledge, beyond the habit of infused knowledge, as appears to some

[*Blessed Albert the Great, Alexander of Hales, St. Bonaventure], and

sometime appeared to me (Sent. iii, D, xiv), no knowledge in Christ

increased in essence, but merely by experience, i.e. by comparing the

infused intelligible species with phantasms. And in this way they

maintain that Christ's knowledge grew in experience, e.g. by

comparing the infused intelligible species with what He received

through the senses for the first time. But because it seems unfitting

that any natural intelligible action should be wanting to Christ, and

because to extract intelligible species from phantasms is a natural

action of man's active intellect, it seems becoming to place even

this action in Christ. And it follows from this that in the soul of

Christ there was a habit of knowledge which could increase by this

abstraction of species; inasmuch as the active intellect, after

abstracting the first intelligible species from phantasms, could

abstract others, and others again.

Reply Obj. 1: Both the infused knowledge and the beatific knowledge

of Christ's soul were the effects of an agent of infinite power,

which could produce the whole at once; and thus in neither knowledge

did Christ advance; since from the beginning He had them perfectly.

But the acquired knowledge of Christ is caused by the active

intellect which does not produce the whole at once, but successively;

and hence by this knowledge Christ did not know everything from the

beginning, but step by step, and after a time, i.e. in His perfect

age; and this is plain from what the Evangelist says, viz. that He

increased in "knowledge and age" together.

Reply Obj. 2: Even this knowledge was always perfect for the time

being, although it was not always perfect, simply and in comparison

to the nature; hence it could increase.

Reply Obj. 3: This saying of Damascene regards those who say

absolutely that addition was made to Christ's knowledge, i.e. as

regards any knowledge of His, and especially as regards the infused

knowledge which is caused in Christ's soul by union with the Word;

but it does not regard the increase of knowledge caused by the

natural agent.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part III (Tertia Pars) From the Complete American Edition · 第 99 / 654 题