I’m looking for Church documents which explicitly state the Jesus had knlwedge of all things past, present, and future. I’m trying to refute some people who are in a place of teaching authority at a local parish, who are spreading the idea that Chirst did not know the hour of His death, that He was God, etc.
To claim that Christ didn’t know [any given thing] would necessarily result in rejecting the Trinity. Christ knows all because He is God. The unique thing about Christ, however, is that He has both Divine and Human natures. His human nature may not have known…but His Divine does.
The Catechism will help you, but it will be LOTS of reading and digging. Look up “Christ” in the index of the Catechism, and hone in on sub-topics about the “Trinity” and “eternal Son of God” and the sub-headings within those, like “assuming human nature”, “nature of Christ”, etc…
Hi Ora, the scriptures are full of references, but one that I like is in John 4, the meeting with the Samaritan woman. Verse 25-26:
The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming and when he comes he will tell us all things. Jesus said to her, I who speak with thee am he.”
Jesus continuously referred to Himself as the Son of Man, prophesied by Daniel.
“As my vision continued that night, I saw someone like a son of man coming with the clouds of heaven. He approached the Ancient of Days and was led into his presence. He was given authority, honor, and sovereignty over all the nations of the world, so that people of every race and nation and language worshiped him. His rule is eternal—it will never end. His kingdom will never be destroyed.” Daniel 7:13-14
So, following the saintly fathers, we all with one voice teach the confession of one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ: the same perfect in divinity and perfect in humanity, the same truly God and truly man, of a rational soul and a body; consubstantial with the Father as regards his divinity, and the same consubstantial with us as regards his humanity; like us in all respects except for sin; begotten before the ages from the Father as regards his divinity, and in the last days the same for us and for our salvation from Mary, the virgin God-bearer as regards his humanity; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, only-begotten, acknowledged in two natures which undergo no confusion, no change, no division, no separation; at no point was the difference between the natures taken away through the union, but rather the property of both natures is preserved and comes together into a single person and a single subsistent being; he is not parted or divided into two persons, but is one and the same only-begotten Son, God, Word, Lord Jesus Christ, just as the prophets taught from the beginning about him, and as the Lord Jesus Christ himself instructed us, and as the creed of the fathers handed it down to us.
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 favour 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
Some docs are referenced here. https://www.ewtn.com/faith/teachings/incaa3.htm
…I remember a huge discussion from Theology classes (Christology) about how much did Jesus know about Himself and when did He know it?
I will say, that it was advanced by the priest teaching the class, that as a child, Jesus did not exhibit what other children would have deemed “magical powers” so his next conclusion was that although Jesus was God, He didn’t necessarily understand it in His child’s mind…
Which, of course drew all kinds of heated arguments…
Nevertheless, here’s a link to an interesting article…
If I misunderstood the question, I apologize…
The above mentioned conversation was baffling, confusing, and a bit troubling at the time…glad you asked.
Denzinger (43rd edition) 419:
Constitution (I) Inter innumeras sollicitudines on the “Three Chapters” to Emperor Justinian
- If anyone says that the one Jesus Christ, the true Son of man and the true Son of God, was ignorant of future events or the day of the Last Judgment and that he was able to know only as much as was revealed to him by the divinity dwelling in him, as though in another person, let him be anathema.
Denzinger (43rd edition) 474-476 (Pope Gregory I’s letter, Sicut aqua, to Patriarch Eulogius of Alexandria, August 600)
…This can also, therefore, be understood in a more subtle way by saying that the only begotten Son incarnate, made perfect man for us, knew the hour and the day of judgment* in *his human nature but did not know it from his human nature. What he knew, therefore, in his humanity he did not know from it, because it is by the power of his divinity that God-made-man knew the day and the hour of judgment…
Thus it is that he denied having the knowledge that he did not have from the human nature by which he was a creature as the angels are, as he also denied it to the angels because they are creatures. The God-man knows therefore the day and the hour of judgment, but precisely because God is man.
SYLLABUS CONDEMNING THE ERRORS OF THE MODERNISTS
- It is impossible to reconcile the natural sense of the Gospel texts with the sense taught by our theologians concerning the conscience and the infallible knowledge of Jesus Christ.
33 Everyone who is not led by preconceived opinions can readily see that either Jesus professed an error concerning the immediate Messianic coming or the greater part of His doctrine as contained in the Gospels is destitute of authenticity.
- The critics can ascribe to Christ a knowledge without limits only on a hypothesis which cannot be historically conceived and which is repugnant to the moral sense. That hypothesis is that Christ as man possessed the knowledge of God and yet was unwilling to communicate the knowledge of a great many things to His disciples and posterity.
- Christ did not always possess the consciousness of His Messianic dignity.
Denzinger (43rd edition) 3645-3647: Decree of the Holy Office, June 5, 1918 (AAS 10 (1918): 282).
75… But the knowledge and love of our Divine Redeemer, of which we were the object from the first moment of His Incarnation, exceed all that the human intellect can hope to grasp. For hardly was He conceived in the womb of the Mother of God, when He began to enjoy the Beatific Vision, and in that vision all the members of His Mystical Body were continually and unceasingly present to Him, and He embraced them with His redeeming love.
(Denzinger (43rd edition) 3812)
Many thanks to all those answering!!!
Jesus did not know when the Jerusalem Temple was to be destroyed.
But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only. (Matthew 24:36)
The Father had not revealed this to him.
So basically, Jesus only knew in His human nature those “supernatural facts” that pertained to His mission (i.e., His hour; knowing what was in the hearts of others; etc.).
How is it then that some (for example, on the blog New Theological Movement) maintain that Jesus knew EVERYTHING in His human nature?
JM3 's quote answers this:
By the way, this is more fully quoted in the Companion to the Catechism of the Catholic Church. #473. I wanted to scan in the full text , but my scanner is not working.
KofC used to have full text of Companion on their website, but not now.
Is it available elsewhere ?
I think you are trying to seperate things too much. Try this;
The Church teaches that Jesus, the person, knew everything in his human nature. He did not know it from His human nature. He knew it in and from His divine nature.
(I hope I have that right.)
CCC 474 474 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
109 Cf. ⇒ Mk 13:32, ⇒ Acts 1:7.
Acts 1:7 He said to them, "It is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has fixed by his own authority.
Here’s what Pope Gregory I said (an older translation).
248 (But) concerning that which has been written: That neither the Son, nor the angels know the day and the hour [cf. Mark 13:32], indeed, your holiness has perceived rightly, that since it most certainly should be referred not to the same son according to that which is the head, but according to his body which we are . . . . He [Augustine] also says . . . that this can be understood of the same son, because omnipotent God sometimes speaks in a human way, as he said to Abraham: Now I know that thou fearest God [Gen. 22:12], not because God then knew that He was feared, but because at that time He caused Abraham to know that he feared God. For, just as we say a day is happy not because the day itself is happy, but because it makes us happy, so the omnipotent Son says He does not know the day which He causes not to be known, not because He himself is ignorant of it, but because He does not permit it to be known at all. Thus also the Father alone is said to know, because the Son (being) consubstantial with Him, on account of His nature, by which He is above the angels, has knowledge of that, of which the angels are unaware. Thus, also, this can be the more precisely understood because the Only-begotten having been incarnate, and made perfect man for us, in His human nature indeed did know the day and the hour of judgment, but nevertheless He did not know this from His human nature. Therefore, that which in (nature) itself He knew, He did not know from that very (nature), because God-made-man knew the day and hour of the judgment through the power of His Godhead. . . . Thus, the knowledge which He did not have on account of the nature of His humanity-by reason of which, like the angels, He was a creaturethis He denied that He, like the angels, who are creatures, had. Therefore (as) God and man He knows the day and the hour of judgment; but On this account, because God is man. But the fact is certainly manifest that whoever is not a Nestorian, can in no wise be an Agnoeta. For with what purpose can he, who confesses that the Wisdom itself of God is incarnate say that there is anything which the Wisdom of God does not know? It is written: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . All things were made by him [John 1:13]. If all, without doubt also the day of judgment and the hour. Who, therefore, is so foolish as to presume to assert that the Word of the Father made that which He does not know? it is written also: Jesus knowing, that the Father gave him all things into his hands John 13:3]. If all things, surely both the day of judgment and the hour. Who, therefore, is so stupid as to say that the Son has received in His hands that of which He is unaware?
As for the blog reference, if you are referring to the one dated November 16, 2012, it appears to me to be completely correct.