Fr. Richard Rohr's interpretation of Isaiah 50:4-9, Luke 23:40, Luke 2:40, and Hebrews 4:15

I saw this written in the bulletin of my parent’s parish, and I’d like some help from you guys in critiquing it:

How much did Jesus Really Know About His Cross?

The “Suffering Servant” song (Isaiah 50:4-9) portrays the protagonist as a human being just like you and me. He does not know the outcome ahead of time, or his confidence would be in himself to pull it off; but he puts all his trust in Another: a “vindicator” who will “come to his help” (Isaiah 50:7, 9). This is Jesus’ cry from the cross, “Into your hands I entrust my spirit” (Luke 23:46). We have done the believing community a mammoth dissergvice by so emphasizing Jesus’ divinity that his humanity was all but canceled out. Most Christians naively assume that Jesus did not really have to live faith or darkness as we do, that he knew everything from his youngest years. Yet Luke says “he grew in wisdom” (Luke 2:40). We cannot believe that his was a totally different brand of knowing than the rest of humanity. He was not just pretending to be human. Many scholars believe that it was only at the resurrection that Jesus’ human mind and divine consciouness became one. Until then, he “was like us in all ways, except sin” (Hebrews 4:15). Knowing this, you are much better prepared to walk through the sacred days ahead with a Jesus who shares, suffers, and trusts God exactly as you and I must learn to do. “He set his face like flint, trusting he would not be put to shame” (Isaiah 50:7). - Fr. Richard Rohr, written on retreat, Lent 2010

yes, I know all about Fr. Rohr’s dissenting teachings and actions that’s he’s been involved with throughout the years (Enneagram, blessing of same-sex unions, etc.), and I don’t want this tread to turn into a long discussion about that. Rather, I want this thread to be about just a critique of the passage I posted itself, so I can show it to my parents. Thanks guys!

You might want to give them a copy of the following section of the Catechism as a jumping off point for discussion. Note the parts I have bolded:

**Christ’s soul and his human knowledge **

471 Apollinarius of Laodicaea asserted that in Christ the divine Word had replaced the soul or spirit. Against this error the Church confessed that the eternal Son also assumed a rational, human soul.[100]

472 This human soul that the Son of God assumed is endowed with a true human knowledge. As such, this knowledge could not in itself be unlimited: it was exercised in the historical conditions of his existence in space and time. This is why the Son of God could, when he became man, “increase in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man”,[101] and would even have to inquire for himself about what one in the human condition can learn only from experience.[102] This corresponded to the reality of his voluntary emptying of himself, taking “the form of a slave”.[103]

**473 But at the same time, this truly human knowledge of God’s Son expressed the divine life of his person.[104] “The human nature of God’s Son, not by itself but by its union with the Word, knew and showed forth in itself everything that pertains to God.”[105] Such is first of all the case with the intimate and immediate knowledge that the Son of God made man has of his Father.[106] The Son in his human knowledge also showed the divine penetration he had into the secret thoughts of human hearts.[107]

474 By its union to the divine wisdom in the person of the Word incarnate, Christ enjoyed in his human knowledge the fullness of understanding of the eternal plans he had come to reveal**. [108] What he admitted to not knowing in this area, he elsewhere declared himself not sent to reveal.[109]

100 Cf. Damasus 1: (DS 149).
101 Lk 2:52.
102 Cf. Mk 6 38; 8 27; Jn 11:34; etc.
103 Phil 2:7.
104 Cf. St. Gregory the Great, “Sicut aqua” ad Eulogium, Epist. Lib. 10, 39 PL 77, 1097A ff.; (DS 475).
105 St. Maximus the Confessor, Qu. et dub. 66: PG 90, 840A.
106 Cf. Mk 14:36; Mt 11:27; Jn 1:18; 8:55; etc.
107 Cf. Mk 2:8; Jn 2 25; 6:61; etc.
108 Cf. Mk 8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34; 14:18-20, 26-30.
109 Cf. Mk 13:32, Acts 1:7.

And here is an article that discusses this topic that you can use for background for your end of the discussion:

A Grievous Distortion of The ‘Catechism of the Catholic Church’

thank you! this is a good answer

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit