38. Christ's Knowledge: Discursive and Habitual Knowing

Subscribe in Podcast App | Download Transcript

Lecture Notes

Main Topics #

Discursive Knowledge and Its Divisions #

Colatio (Bringing Together) and Discourse

• Colatio literally means “bringing together” and is essential to discursive reasoning
• One must bring together premises before reasoning to a conclusion
• The proper operation of a rational soul is to discourse—to move from one thing to another

Two Ways of Understanding Discursive Knowledge

1. As to the acquisition of knowledge: Knowledge acquired through investigation of reason, proceeding from one thing to another (through causes to effects, or effects to causes)
   • In this sense, Christ’s infused knowledge was NOT discursive, since it was given divinely, not acquired by investigation
2. As to the use of knowledge: The ability to conclude one thing from another already known, not learning something new but employing existing knowledge
   • In this sense, Christ’s knowledge CAN be called discursive, as demonstrated in Matthew 17 (the tax question) and Matthew 22 (David calling Christ Lord)

Counsel and Choice in Christ #

• Damascene’s statement: “In Christ we do not speak of counsel or choice”
• Clarification: This excludes counsel with doubt and choice resulting from deliberation with uncertainty
• What remains: The use of counseling is not excluded from Christ—He could employ reasoning and deliberation without doubt
• This distinction preserves Christ’s perfection while affirming the rational nature of His human soul

Conformity to Angels: Natural Difference Despite Supernatural Gifts #

• The blessed in heaven are conformed to angels as regards gratuitous (supernatural) gifts
• BUT a natural difference remains: Using colatio (discursive reasoning) is connatural to the souls of the blessed, but NOT to angels
• Therefore, Christ as viator could employ discursive knowledge in a way angels cannot
• Example: The blessed will still be “doing Euclid in heaven”—engaging in geometrical reasoning and proof

Habitual Knowledge in Christ #

The Problem:

• In God there is only actual knowledge, never habitual (which would imply potency)
• Objection: Would not actual knowledge always be more perfect than habitual?
• Objection: Would not a created habit be more noble than Christ’s soul, which seems unfitting?

Thomas’s Solution: Christ possessed a two-fold knowledge, each most perfect in its own way

1. Beatific Vision (exceeding human mode)

   • Seeing the essence of God and all things in that essence
   • Most perfect absolutely (simpliciter)
   • Always actual, never habitual
   • When achieved in heaven, perpetually actual (no habituality)

2. Infused Knowledge (proportioned to human nature)

   • Knowledge through species/forms poured in divinely
   • Most perfect in the genus of human knowledge (secundum quid), not absolutely
   • HABITUAL in nature
   • Not always in act, but reduced to act by the will as needed

Why Habitual Knowledge is Fitting for Human Nature:

• The mode of receiving knowledge in the human soul is naturally between pure potency and complete act
• That middle state is habit (ἕξις/habitus)
• The received is in the receiver according to the mode of the receiver
• Therefore, for the human soul, habitual knowledge is connatural

Habits Reduced to Act by the Will #

• A habit is that by which someone acts when he wants to
• The will relates itself to an infinity of things in an indeterminate way (not limited to one object)
• A habit is not rendered vain merely because not all things subject to it are always reduced to act
• So long as what is fitting to the suitable end of the will and the need of business is reduced to act, the habit serves its purpose
• Example: Christ need not always be considering Euclidean geometry; it suffices that He can when appropriate

Key Arguments #

First Objection: Discursive Knowledge Contradicts Comprehensor Status #

Objection:

• Christ’s knowledge had the manner of those who comprehend (i.e., the blessed/angels)
• Angels do not possess discursive or colative knowledge (per Pseudo-Dionysius)
• Therefore, Christ should not have such knowledge

Response:

• Thomas grants the premise but distinguishes two meanings of “discursive”
• Discursive as to acquisition (not in Christ)
• Discursive as to use (can be in Christ)
• The blessed conform to angels as to supernatural gifts but remain different by nature
• Discursive use remains connatural to human souls even in heaven

Second Objection: Christ Knows All Things, So No Need for Discourse #

Objection:

• Christ knew all things
• Discourse is ordered to acquiring knowledge one does not have
• Therefore, Christ had no need for discourse

Response:

• The argument concerns discourse insofar as it is ordered to acquiring knowledge
• Christ indeed had no need to use discourse to acquire new knowledge
• But He could use discourse for other purposes (instructing, reasoning through syllogisms, etc.)

Third Objection: Natural Powers Made Vain by Divine Knowledge #

Objection (from earlier articles on infused knowledge):

• If Christ had infused knowledge not requiring turning to images/phantasms, senses would be in vain

Response:

• Although Christ’s soul could understand without turning to images (via infused knowledge)
• He was also able to understand by turning to images
• Senses were not given to man only for understanding, but also for the necessity of animal life
• Christ’s dual capacity (infused + experiential) preserved the natural operation of sensation

Fourth Objection: Habitual Knowledge Less Perfect Than Actual #

Objection:

• In God there is only actual knowledge, no habitual knowledge
• Actual knowledge is more perfect than habitual
• Christ should have had supreme perfection in knowledge
• Therefore, Christ should not have had habitual knowledge

Response:

• Christ possessed two kinds of knowledge, each most perfect in its own order
• Beatific vision: actual, not habitual, most perfect absolutely
• Infused knowledge: habitual, most perfect in the genus of human knowledge
• The human mode of knowing is naturally habitual; actual perfection would violate the mode of the receiver

Fifth Objection: A Created Habit More Noble Than the Soul? #

Objection:

• Habits are assumed perfections of the knowing subject
• Perfection is more noble than the perfectible
• If habitual knowledge existed in Christ’s soul, a created thing would be more noble than Christ’s soul
• This is unfitting

Response:

• A habit does not make the habit more noble than the soul
• Rather, a habit is a disposition (hexis) that perfects the soul’s natural capacity
• The soul is the perfectible; the habit is the perfection
• The soul remains superior; the habit is an accidental form that enhances the soul’s operation
• This is not unfitting but proper to created nature

Important Definitions #

Colatio (ἡ σύγκρισις): Bringing together; the act of comparing or uniting premises to form a conclusion; essential movement in discursive reasoning

Simplex apprehensio: Simple apprehension; the first act of reason, grasping what something is without judging it true or false

Habitus (ἕξις): A disposition or state of the soul that inclines it toward a particular operation; the middle between potency and act; natural mode of human knowing

Viator/Comprehensor: The viator (one on the road) lacks the beatific vision; the comprehensor (one who grasps) possesses direct knowledge of God as He is

Infused Knowledge (Scientia Infusa): Knowledge supernaturally poured into the soul by God, not acquired through sensory experience or discursive reasoning

Beatific Vision (Visio Beatifica): Direct knowledge of God’s essence; the highest form of knowledge, always actual and never habitual

Phantasm (φάντασμα): The image or mental representation of a sensible thing; necessary for human discursive knowledge while the soul is in the body

Examples & Illustrations #

Gospel Examples of Christ Using Discursive Reasoning #

Matthew 17 (Tax Question)

• “From which do the kings of the earth take tribute? From their sons, or from aliens?”
• Peter answers: “From aliens”
• Christ concludes: “Therefore the sons are free”
• This is syllogistic reasoning used by Christ to make a point

Matthew 22 (David’s Son)

• “Whose son is the Christ?”
• Answer: “David’s”
• Christ reasoning: “Then how can David call him ‘Lord’?”
• Another example of Christ engaging in discursive reasoning to confound His questioners

Music and the Limit of Our Understanding #

Mozart and Incomparable Beauty

• Berquist ponders whether anything could be more beautiful than Mozart’s music
• Yet he is confident there must be more beautiful music in heaven
• This illustrates the limitation of our current imagining: we cannot picture what exceeds our experience
• The blessed, like Christ, will understand realities beyond their direct sensory experience through infused knowledge

John Paul II’s Musical Selection

• Requiem
• Grosse Messe (Great Mass)
• Ave Verum Corpus (incomparable motet)
• Mozart’s setting of the Eucharist has perfect musical structure

Geometry and Celestial Knowledge #

Euclid’s Theorems

• If you subtract an odd number from an even number, the result is odd
• If you subtract an odd number from an odd number, the result is even
• These theorems show that human reason can grasp abstract principles without sensing every instance
• The blessed in heaven will still be “doing Euclid”—engaging in such rational proof and contemplation
• This demonstrates that discursive reasoning remains connatural even to those with perfected understanding

Guardian Angels and Constant Attention #

• “See my guardian angel thinking about me, what? What are you turning the images all the time for?”
• A humorous reflection on the contrast between angelic knowledge (non-discursive, without images) and human knowledge (always involving images)
• Emphasizes the fundamental difference between human and angelic modes of knowing

Notable Quotes #

“But against this is that Christ had a rational soul. But the proper operation of the rational soul is to bring together, and to run from one thing to another. So Shakespeare defines it by discursive, because that implies that you can confer… Therefore, in Christ, there was a discursive or bringing together knowledge.” — Thomas Aquinas, quoted by Berquist

“In the soul of Christ there was a two-fold knowledge. And both in its own way was most perfect. One exceeding the mode of human knowledge by which he saw the essence of God… Another knowledge was in Christ according to the way proportioned to human nature insofar as he knew things through species or forms poured into him divinely.” — Thomas Aquinas, on habitual knowledge in Christ

“From that which is received in the receiver according to the mode of that receiver.” — Axiom from medieval philosophy explaining how knowledge is received according to the nature of the receiving subject

“I’ll still be doing Euclid there in heaven, huh?” — Berquist’s reflection on the connatural persistence of discursive reasoning even for the blessed

“So I can’t go to Euclid now. You guys, okay? Wouldn’t be appropriate for me to go to Euclid at this time, huh? Maybe a couple of minutes.” — Berquist, illustrating how habits are reduced to act according to what is fitting to time and circumstance

Questions Addressed #

Can Christ Possess Discursive Knowledge Without Diminishing His Comprehensor Status? #

Resolution: Yes. Discursive knowledge in the sense of using reason to move from one conclusion to another does not contradict the comprehensor status. Only discursive knowledge as acquiring knowledge contradicts His perfection. The human soul naturally possesses the power to reason discursively, and this power is not removed by the beatific vision or infused knowledge.

Does Habitual Knowledge Contradict Divine Perfection in Christ? #

Resolution: No. Habitual knowledge is not contradictory to perfection; rather, it is the natural and proper mode of human knowing. Christ’s beatific vision is always actual and non-habitual. But His infused knowledge, being supernatural knowledge poured into a human soul, is properly habitual. A habit is not rendered imperfect by not always being in act; it suffices that it can be actualized when suitable to the will and the business at hand.

How Does the Principle “Receptum in Recipiente” Apply to Christ’s Knowledge? #

Resolution: The received is in the receiver according to the mode of the receiver. Because Christ’s human soul is of the same nature as our souls, it naturally receives knowledge in the way suited to human nature—which is habitually. Even though the content of Christ’s knowledge exceeds ours (through infused and beatific knowledge), the mode of reception follows the nature of the human soul.

If Christ Could Know All Things Through Infused Knowledge, Why Affirm Habitual Knowledge? #

Resolution: Habitual knowledge is affirmed to preserve the operation of the agent intellect and the natural powers of the soul. Moreover, it allows Christ to use reason in a way connatural to human nature—to discourse, to reason through syllogisms, to teach through rational argumentation. The human intellectual powers remain operative and perfected, not idle.