Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae

Objection 1: It would seem that in Christ there was not the knowledge of the blessed or comprehensors. For the knowledge of the blessed is a participation of Divine light, according to Ps. 35:10: "In Thy light we shall see light." Now Christ had not a participated light, but He had the Godhead Itself substantially abiding in Him, according to Col. 2:9: "For in Him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead corporeally." Therefore in Christ there was not the knowledge of the blessed.

Objection 2: Further, the knowledge of the blessed makes them blessed, according to Jn. 17:3: "This is eternal life: that they may know Thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ Whom Thou hast sent." But this Man was blessed through being united to God in person, according to Ps. 64:5: "Blessed is He Whom Thou hast chosen and taken to Thee." Therefore it is not necessary to suppose the knowledge of the blessed in Him.

Objection 3: Further, to man belongs a double knowledge---one by nature, one above nature. Now the knowledge of the blessed, which consists in the vision of God, is not natural to man, but above his nature. But in Christ there was another and much higher supernatural knowledge, i.e. the Divine knowledge. Therefore there was no need of the knowledge of the blessed in Christ.

On the contrary, The knowledge of the blessed consists in the knowledge of God. But He knew God fully, even as He was man, according to Jn. 8:55: "I do know Him, and do keep His word." Therefore in Christ there was the knowledge of the blessed.

I answer that, What is in potentiality is reduced to act by what is in act; for that whereby things are heated must itself be hot. Now man is in potentiality to the knowledge of the blessed, which consists in the vision of God; and is ordained to it as to an end; since the rational creature is capable of that blessed knowledge, inasmuch as he is made in the image of God. Now men are brought to this end of beatitude by the humanity of Christ, according to Heb. 2:10: "For it became Him, for Whom are all things, and by Whom are all things, Who had brought many children unto glory, to perfect the author of their salvation by His passion." And hence it was necessary that the beatific knowledge, which consists in the vision of God, should belong to Christ pre-eminently, since the cause ought always to be more efficacious than the effect.

Reply to Objection 1: The Godhead is united to the manhood of Christ in Person, not in essence or nature; yet with the unity of Person remains the distinction of natures. And therefore the soul of Christ, which is a part of human nature, through a light participated from the Divine Nature, is perfected with the beatific knowledge whereby it sees God in essence.

Reply to Objection 2: By the union this Man is blessed with the uncreated beatitude, even as by the union He is God; yet besides the uncreated beatitude it was necessary that there should be in the human nature of Christ a created beatitude, whereby His soul was established in the last end of human nature.

Reply to Objection 3: The beatific vision and knowledge are to some extent above the nature of the rational soul, inasmuch as it cannot reach it of its own strength; but in another way it is in accordance with its nature, inasmuch as it is capable of it by nature, having been made to the likeness of God, as stated above. But the uncreated knowledge is in every way above the nature of the human soul.

Articulus 2

Argumentum 1

Ad secundum sic proceditur. Videtur quod in christo non fuerit scientia beatorum vel comprehensorum.

Scientia enim beatorum est per participationem divini luminis, secundum illud Psalmi, in lumine tuo videbimus lumen.

Sed christus non habuit lumen divinum tanquam participatum, sed ipsam divinitatem in se habuit substantialiter manentem, secundum illud Coloss. II, in ipso habitat omnis plenitudo divinitatis corporaliter.

Ergo in ipso non fuit scientia beatorum.

Argumentum 2

Praeterea, scientia beatorum eos beatos facit, secundum illud Ioan. XVII, haec est vita aeterna, ut cognoscant te, verum deum, et quem misisti, iesum christum.

Sed homo ille fuit beatus ex hoc ipso quod fuit deo unitus in persona, secundum illud Psalmi, beatus quem elegisti et assumpsisti.

Non ergo oportet ponere in ipso scientiam beatorum.

Argumentum 3

Praeterea, duplex scientia homini competit, una secundum suam naturam; alia supra suam naturam. Scientia autem beatorum, quae in divina visione consistit, non est secundum naturam hominis, sed supra eius naturam. In christo autem fuit alia supernaturalis scientia multo fortior et altior, scilicet scientia divina. Non igitur oportuit in christo esse scientiam beatorum.

Sed Contra

Sed contra, scientia beatorum in dei visione vel cognitione consistit. Sed ipse plene cognovit deum, etiam secundum quod homo, secundum illud Ioan. VIII, scio eum, et sermonem eius servo.

Ergo in christo fuit scientia beatorum.

Corpus

Respondeo dicendum quod illud quod est in potentia, reducitur in actum per id quod est actu, oportet enim esse calidum id per quod alia calefiunt. Homo autem est in potentia ad scientiam beatorum, quae in visione dei consistit, et ad eam ordinatur sicut ad finem, est enim creatura rationalis capax illius beatae cognitionis, inquantum est ad imaginem dei. Ad hunc autem finem beatitudinis homines reducuntur per christi humanitatem, secundum illud Heb. II, decebat eum propter quem omnia et per quem omnia, qui multos filios in gloriam adduxerat, auctorem salutis eorum per passionem consummari.

Et ideo oportuit quod cognitio ipsa in dei visione consistens excellentissime christo homini conveniret, quia semper causam oportet esse potiorem causato.

Ad 1

Ad primum ergo dicendum quod divinitas unita est humanitati christi secundum personam, et non secundum naturam vel essentiam, sed cum unitate personae remanet distinctio naturarum. Et ideo anima christi, quae est pars humanae naturae, per aliquod lumen participatum a natura divina perfecta est ad scientiam beatam, qua deus per essentiam videtur.

Ad 2

Ad secundum dicendum quod ex ipsa unione homo ille est beatus beatitudine increata, sicut ex unione est deus. Sed praeter beatitudinem increatam, oportuit in natura humana christi esse quandam beatitudinem creatam, per quam anima eius in ultimo fine humanae naturae constitueretur.

Ad 3

Ad tertium dicendum quod visio seu scientia beata est quodammodo supra naturam animae rationalis, inquantum scilicet propria virtute ad eam pervenire non potest. Alio vero modo est secundum naturam ipsius, inquantum scilicet per naturam suam est capax eius, prout scilicet ad imaginem dei facta est, ut supra dictum est.

Sed scientia increata est omnibus modis supra naturam animae humanae.