Chapter 17: The Redeemer

1. Redeemed by a Divine Person with a Human Nature
   • Redemption by the Son of God
     • “Notice that it was the second person of the Blessed Trinity who became man, not the First, not the Third, not all Three” (242-3). This raises the question, Why the second person.
     • The Son is an infinite expression of the divine intellect (242-4, 138-3).
       • “For [Wisdom] is a reflection of eternal light, a spotless mirror of the working of God, and an image of his goodness” (Wis 7:26).
     • Creation is a finite expression of the divine intellect (242-4).
       • “From the greatness and the beauty of created things their original author, by analogy, is seen” (Wis 13:5 NAB).
     • In other words, the Son is a mirroring of the Father in that which is infinite, whereas creation is a mirroring of God in that which is finite (243-1; 139-3, 140-1, 2).
     • Given this special linking of the Son to the original plan for creation, it seems fitting that when creation suffered the damage of Adam’s sin, the Son would be called upon to repair the damage (243-1), so that just as at the time of creation, the universe was ordered through Him (Wis 8:1), so at its restoration (“recreation”) it should be re-ordered through Him (Eph 1:10).
       • “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him, and without him was not anything made that was made.” (Jn 1:1-4).
       • “[Wisdom] reaches mightily from one end of the earth to the other, and she orders all things well” (Wis 8:1).
       • “[The Father] has made known to us in all wisdom and insight the mystery of his will, according to His purpose which He set forth in Christ as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite [i.e., restore, re-establish] all things in Him, things in heaven and things on earth” (Eph 1:10).
     • “Thus it was the Word [the Son of God] who became Flesh and dwelt among us so that we, believing in His name, might be made the sons of God: as He was” 243-1).
   • The Human Nature of the Son of God
     • The Son took to Himself a human nature, and in doing so He became man (243-2).
       • His human nature was not merely a disguise (Docetism)
       • He was not merely an adopted human being (Adoptionism)
       • He was not merely a man with divine powers (Arianism)
     • To the question “what are you?” He could answer, without reservation, “I am a man” (243-2; also see 241-1).
       • This statement would be wholly true, but it would not be the whole of the truth. For in taking on a human nature, He gave up nothing of His divine nature (243-2).
       • “The relation between His nature as man and His [divine] person was as direct . . . as the relation between my nature and my person” (243-2).
     • He took on a real and complete human nature. His human soul was a direct creation of the Blessed Trinity, as is ours; His human body was conceived of a human mother, as is ours (243-3).
       • However, His conception took place without the contribution of a human father, unlike ours.
       • In this special case of human reproduction, the conceptive effect of the male element upon the female element that normally brings about a new human being was replaced with “a creative act of the will of God” (244-2).
     • From this special conception, it follows that:
       • He is a member of Adam’s race on His mother’s side (244-2).
         • Jesus’ body and soul could have been a direct creation of God but, if it were, Jesus would have had a human nature but He would not have been a member of the human race and He could not have been a representative of the human race.
       • He is a Jew on His mother’s side, having had no biological human father, His conception coming about as an act of the Holy Spirit (244-2).
         • “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God” (Lk 1:35).
         • “Now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph, before they came together she was found to be with child of the Holy Spirit” (Mt 1:18).
       • He is descended from Adam as we are, but not as much as we are, for His body was not fully derived from Adam (244-2).
         • “[The conception of Christ] was virginal and due to the operation of the Holy Ghost, so that Jesus did not descended from Adam by way of natural generation” (Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, “Mother of the Savior,” 35).
       • We are all related to Him, but only through His mother (244-2).
     • His human nature lacked nothing that human nature requires (244-3):
       • Sheed quotes Hebrews 4:15 to support this point, but modern translations (including the Douay Rheims) of this verse place the focus on Jesus’ likeness to us regarding temptation rather than nature.
         • “For we have not a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin” (Heb 4:15).
         • “He has been through every trial, fashioned as we are, only sinless” (Heb 4:15 Knox).
       • The point Sheed makes is clearly supported by Heb 2:14, 16-17
         • “Since therefore the children share in flesh and blood, he himself likewise partook of the same nature. . . . For surely it is not with angels that he is concerned but with the descendants of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brethren in every respect.”
       • We need to understand “like his brethren in every respect” to mean in every respect that concerns the essentials of human nature, or, as indicated on page 248, in every respect that carries a human obligation.
         • The facts that His personality was divine rather than human, that it was impossible for Him to sin and that He did not have a biological father in no way results in a finite nature that is something less than or other than human.
         • Sheed says later on that “He took upon Himself all the obligations that a person has to his nature” (248-1). So we can think of Jesus as being “like His brethren in every respect” by which human nature imposes an obligation on a person.
   • Jesus’ Humanity in Scripture
     • The stages of bodily development (244-3)
       • Conceived: “And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus” (Lk 1:31).
       • Born: “She gave birth to her first-born son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths” (Lk 2:7).
       • Adolescence: “And when he was twelve years old, they went up according to custom. . . . After three days they found him in the temple, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions; and all who heard him were amazed at his understanding and his answers” (Lk 2:42, 46-47).
       • Manhood: “And behold, some of the scribes said to themselves, ‘This man is blaspheming’” (Mt 9:3).
     • The needs of His human body (244-3)
       • Hunger: “And he fasted forty days and forty nights, and afterward he was hungry” (Mt 4:2).
       • Thirst: “After this Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the scripture), ‘I thirst’” (Jn 19:28).
     • Capacity for suffering and death (244-3):
       • Scourging: “Then Pilate took Jesus and scourged him” (Jn 19:1).
       • Crucifixion: “There they crucified him” (Jn 19:18).
       • Death: “When they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs” (Jn 19:33).
     • The human soul, intellect and will of Jesus (245-2)
       • Temptation: “And he was in the wilderness forty days, tempted by Satan” (Mk 1:13).
       • His soul was capable of experiencing human passions:
         • “My soul is very sorrowful, even to death” (Mk 14:34).
       • His human intellect could grow in wisdom:
         • “Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature, and in favor with God and man” (Lk 2:52).
       • His human will was distinct, yet completely united, with the Divine will. We have a clear witness in the Garden of Gethsemeni that He had two wills, human and divine:
         • “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me; nevertheless not my will, but yours be done” (Lk 22:42).
   • Jesus’ Dual will and Dual intellect
     • Between the dual will and the dual intellect, the latter seems more difficult to conceive (245-3).
     • A human intellect proceeds discursively (i.e., step by step) along the way to knowledge (245-3).
       • The external world impacts the bodily senses, which transmits sensory information to the intellect. The intellect, in turn, forms judgments and acquires knowledge from the judgments formed (245-3).
     • In the case of Jesus, His intellect proceeded discursively to acquire knowledge that He eternally possessed as the Son of God; this is difficult to conceive, but it is not inconceivable (245-3).
     • In Jesus, the one divine person could operate in both natures; He could lift a load by divine fiat, or by the effort of human muscles (245-3).
     • It follows that He could know with His human intellect as well as with His divine intellect, in the one case using his human nature and in the other His divine nature.
     • “His human senses and His human intellect were reality. His human senses could not do other than receive the impact of the external world; His human intellect could not do other than act upon their evidence to form concepts and judgments. The Godhead did not swallow up the manhood” (245-3).
       • If Jesus did not gain knowledge in the human manner, then He was not capable of moral acts as man, for human moral acts require knowledge of the act and consent of the will.
         • Just as one cannot sin unknowingly, one cannot perform a virtuous act unknowingly. An act could be objectively sinful or virtuous, but it cannot be subjectively so without the intellect’s knowledge and the will’s consent.
       • However, we know that he performed moral acts as man, for “He learned obedience through what he suffered” (Heb 5:8).
       • Had He not been capable of gaining knowledge in the human manner, then we would not have been redeemed, for the moral debt incurred through human nature had to be repaid through human nature, which necessarily includes the exercise of the human intellect and will as directed by His divine personality.
   • Infused Knowledge and the Beatific Vision
     • “It has been the steady teaching of theologians that Our Lord’s human intellect had both infused knowledge and the Beatific Vision” (246-2).
     • Consequently, Jesus had multiple sources of knowledge in His human nature. He had knowledge acquired discursively, knowledge infused directly by God, and the direct knowledge of God via the Beatific Vision.
     • “What it must have been like for the one human mind to move along so many roads at once we cannot well picture, but there is no contradiction in the idea of the mind moving by one road to a goal it has already reached by another (246-2).
     • Neither infused knowledge nor the Beatific Vision is beyond the capability of human nature.
       • Infused knowledge: Many saints and sinners have had an experience of infused knowledge.
         • The story of Andre Frossard, the atheist son of the man who founded the Communist Party in France, provides us with a good example of infused knowledge. His conversion is reminiscent of the conversion of St. Paul.
         • The following link is an excerpt from his book about the amazing experience he had, in which he, while still a devout atheist, received an instantaneous infusion of knowledge about the Catholic Faith. He didn’t recognize it as such until after he did some investigation. He became a committed Catholic soon thereafter.
           • http://www.basicincome.com/bp/godexistsihavemethim.htm
       • Beatific Vision: All the saved will have the experience of the Beatific Vision in heaven.
         • The direct experience of the reality of God, the seeing of God “face to face,” is called the Beatific Vision. For the person experiencing the Beatific Vision, God Himself takes the place, in the intellect, of any concept of God (176-1).
2. The Need of the Supernatural Life for Jesus
   • Sanctifying Grace and the Theological Virtues
     • As man, Jesus needed sanctifying grace, just as we do. He could not see God directly (i.e., in the Beatific Vision) by His unaided human powers alone (246-4).
       • However, He did not increase in sanctifying grace step by step, as we do; rather, as a consequence of the hypostatic union, He possessed “the . . . plenitude of sanctifying grace , with all the infused virtues and with all the gifts of the Holy Ghost . . . [in a manner] so perfect that it could not be augmented. By His successive deeds, says the Second Council of Constantinople, Christ Himself was not made better” (Garrigou-Lagrange, “Reality,” 220).
       • This is not in contradiction to Hebrews 5:8-10: “He learned obedience through what he suffered; and being made perfect he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him, being designated by God a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek.” Moral perfection was connatural to Him (Ibid), but the perfection of office was not. That is, His office was that of Redeemer of the World, which He could not be until He offered Himself to the Father on the Cross.
     • As God, He possessed all things; as man, He needed the indwelling of the Holy Spirit for the elevation of His human nature to the things of God, and for the special mission He was to carry out (247-1).
     • Jesus possessed the theological virtue of charity in His human nature to the greatest extent possible for a creature (247-1).
       • His soul necessarily possessed sanctifying grace and, thus, charity, the vital principle of sanctifying grace (CCC 1856), having been conceived immaculately and being incapable of sin.
     • This charity was, of course, love of God and love of neighbor, the two great commandments (see Lk 10:27), both of which are based on doing the will of God (247-2)
     • There is a tendency in our milieu to emphasize love of neighbor and de-emphasize love of God. The mind of Jesus was nothing like that. The will of the Father was paramount (247-2).
       • “Jesus said to them, ‘My food is to do the will of him [i.e., the Father] who sent me, and to accomplish his work’” (Jn 4:34).
       • “But he said, ‘Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and keep it!’” (Lk 11:28).
     • Note that Jesus did not possess the theological virtues of faith and hope; possessing the Beatific Vision He could see everything that faith presents to the intellect, and even more (247-1).
       • “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen” (Heb 11:1).
       • “Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees?” (Rom 8:24).
   • The Prayer of Jesus
     • “Readers of this book who may be making a serious study of the Gospels for the first time will almost certainly be startled by the place that prayer to the Father takes in Christ’s life” (247-2). Sheed mentions a few examples. There are many:
       • His first words: “How is it that you sought me? Did you not know that I must be in my Father’s house [ a house of prayer]?” (Lk 2:49).
         • “He said to them, ‘It is written, “My house shall be called a house of prayer”; but you make it a den of robbers’” (Mt 21:13).
       • His private prayer:
         • “And after he had dismissed the crowds, he went up on the mountain by himself to pray” (Mt 14:23; Mk 6:46).
         • “In these days he went out to the mountain to pray; and all night he continued in prayer to God” (Lk 6:12).
         • “Now about eight days after these sayings he took with him Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray” (Lk 9:28).
         • “He was praying in a certain place, and when he ceased, one of his disciples said to him, ‘Lord, teach us to pray, as John taught his disciples’” (Lk 11:1).
       • His exhortations to pray:
         • “Pray then like this: Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name” (Mt 6:9).
         • “Pray therefore the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into his harvest” (Mt 9:8).
         • “Bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you” (Lk 6:28).
         • “And he told them a parable, to the effect that they ought always to pray and not lose heart” (Lk 18:1).
         • “Watch and pray that you may not enter into temptation; the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak” (Mt 26:41).
       • His spontaneous prayer:
         • “In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit and said, ‘I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hidden these things from the wise and understanding and revealed them to babes’” (Lk 10:21).
         • “Father, I thank thee that you have heard me” (Jn 11:41).
         • “‘Father, glorify thy name.’ Then a voice came from heaven, ‘I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again’” (Jn 12:28).
         • “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will” (Mt 26:39).
       • His last words: “‘Father, into thy hands I commit my spirit!’ And having said this he breathed his last” (Lk 23:46).
     • An apparent problem: “If Christ was God, in what sense was He praying to God?” (247-3).
     • At the heart of the problem is the fact that what is done in one’s nature is done by the person, and Jesus is a divine person only. This means that the divine Person, Jesus, prayed as a creature! (248-1).
       • “Whatever is done in a rational nature or suffered in a rational nature or [in] any way experienced in a rational nature is done or suffered or experienced by the person whose nature it is” (93-1).
     • This prayer was necessary because He, being “made like his brethren in every respect” (Heb 2:17) necessarily “He took upon Himself all the obligations that a person has to his nature, and one such obligation is to express its creatureliness to its Creator” (248-1; also see 244-3).
       • Prayer serves to satisfy the impulses of the principal faculties of the soul, the intellect and the will, which are ordered to growth in knowing and loving. It is beneficial to both faculties, for they are capable of growth, even if they have already been perfected. Hence, it was natural that Jesus would spend time in prayer, and it was necessary for Him to do so for the growth of those faculties.
         • “He learned obedience through what he suffered; and being made perfect he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him” (Heb 5:8-9).
         • “We may say, in a true sense, that our will has a depth without measure” (Garrigou-Lagrange, “Life Everlasting,” 9).
     • Because the human prayer of Jesus was uttered by a divine person, we have in His prayer the perfect human prayer (248-1).
3. We Must Come to Know Him
   • Learning Christ
     • “In Christ, God is showing Himself to us. Not to look at that which is shown would leave the showing vain. Growth in the knowledge of Christ is growth in the knowledge of God, which He was; and of Man, which He was.” He is our best approach to the study of both (248-2, 249-1).
       • Of God, because He is our closest approach to God in this life.
       • Of man, because He is a perfect specimen:
         • The Virgin Mary is also a perfect specimen, but there is a difference between the two. In her case, we have the example of a human person’s perfect response to God’s commands, whereas in Jesus we have the example of human nature operating under the direct command of a divine person.
           • Recall from chapter six: Person commands and nature carries out the command.
         • In addition, Scripture gives us a much fuller view of perfection in human nature in her Son, for He is the focus of the Gospels.
     • “This growth in the knowledge of Our Lord is not simply a matter of learning texts and seeing the detail of this or that episode of His life. We must get to know Him, as we know a person” (249-2).
       • Knowledge of a person can only be personal, that is, it is unique to each person who knows (249-2).
         • There can be no abstract knowledge of a person, no universally held knowledge of a person. It must be person-to-person knowledge; knowledge based on a relationship between persons (249-2).
         • The intellects, wills, and emotions of various individuals will respond to the elements of a particular person in different ways and at different levels of intensity (249-2).
         • Hence, the knowledge of a particular person necessarily varies according to the knower. No two people will know a particular person in the same way (249-2).
         • This is all the more so with Christ “because of the very perfection of His human nature, its depth and universality. No one of us can see and respond to all that is there” (249-2).
     • What is vital for us is that each of us develops our own personal knowledge and personal relationship with Jesus. “The first place to meet Him is in the Gospels” (250-1, 250-2):
       • “Ignorance of the Scriptures is ignorance of Christ” (CCC 133, quoting St. Jerome).
       • “On the cross we find an example of all the virtues” (Aquinas, “Meditations for Lent,” p. 29)
     • The encounter with Christ deepens through the practice of Christian meditation:
       • “Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the LORD, and on his law he meditates day and night” (Ps 1:1-2).
       • “Whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God” (1 Cor 10:31).
   • The Modern View of Christ
     • There is a contemporary view of Christ that is common among a wide swath of the Christian population. This common view is also an erroneous view. Because one is likely to have his reading of the Gospels affected by this view, the mind must be purged of it (250-3).
     • “The error I have in mind is the picture of Christ as all love – ‘love’ in this context meaning an emotional or sentimental weakness about human beings. This error is carved into thousands of statues – one feels that the artists are not close or recent readers of the Gospels” (250-4).
     • “This attitude is enshrined in the line ‘Gentle Jesus, meek and mild’” (250-4).
       • This is the first line in a hymn by Charles Wesley (an Anglican reformer; d. 1788).
     • Meekness and mildness are intensely dynamic virtues. However due to changes in language, “meek and mild” today implies “passivity, a willingness to be pushed about, an amiable desire for niceness all around” (250-4).
     • Contrast the “meek and mild” Jesus with these two episodes in the Gospels:
       • Would the money changers he cast out of the Temple consider Him meek?
         • “Jesus entered the temple of God and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, “It is written, ‘My house shall be called a house of prayer’; but you make it a den of robbers’” (Mt 21:12-13).
       • Would the Canaanite woman to whom He referred to Canaanites as dogs consider Him to be mild?
         • “[The Canaanite woman] came and knelt before him, saying, ‘Lord, help me.’ And he answered, ‘It is not fair to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs’” (Mt 15:25-26).
   • A Corrective for the Modern View
     • No one who has read the Gospels will mistake Jesus for what is thought of today as a “meek and mild” person. A good way to purge one of this mistaken image of Jesus is to read His “terrifying attack on the scribes and Pharisees” in chapter 23 of Matthew’s Gospel (251-1, 2, 3, 4, 5).
     • Sheed lists half a dozen examples from Matthew 23 on page 251. Some of those are included in the following collection, which also takes examples from other parts of the Gospels.
       • To the Pharisees in Matthew 23:
         • “You are like white-washed tombs, beautiful to look at on the outside but inside full of filth and dead men’s bones” (Jesus to the Pharisees, Mt 23:27).
         • “Woe to you scribes and Pharisees, you frauds!” (Mt 23:29).
         • “Viper’s nest! Brood of serpents! How can you escape condemnation to Gehenna?” (Jesus to the Pharisees, Mt 23:33).
       • To other individuals and groups in the Gospels:
         • “What an unbelieving and perverse lot you are!” (Jesus to His disciples, Lk 9:41).
         • “Get out of my sight, you Satan!” (Jesus to Peter, Mk 8:33).
         • “You are filled with rapaciousness and evil” (Jesus to the Pharisees, Lk 39).
         • “You are like hidden tombs over which men walk unawares” (Jesus to the Pharisees, Lk 11:44).
         • “You hypocrites!” (Jesus to the crowds, Lk 12:56).
         • “O you hypocrites!” (Jesus to the chief of the synagogue and the congregation, Lk 13:15).
         • “The father you spring from is the devil, and willingly you carry out his wishes” (Jesus to the Jews, Jn 8:44).
         • “[Then] I would be no better than you, a liar!” (Jesus to the Jews, Jn 8:55)
     • These passages do not represent the whole Christ, but they do represent an element that is too often overlooked, and we must grasp that “it is an element in His love” (251-6), for Jesus is God, and God is love, so there can be no element in His life that is not permeated with charity.
     • Note that at the very end of His extended attack on the scribes and Pharisees, mentioned above, He utters a most perfect expression of tenderness (251-6):
       • “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets and stoning those who are sent to you! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not [be gathered]!” (Mt 23:37).
       • At the time of His entry into Jerusalem on the first Palm Sunday, He displays the same grief for Jerusalem that is shown in Mt 23:37: “As he came near and saw the city [i.e., Jerusalem], he wept over it” (Lk 19:41).
   • Harshness and Grief
     • Observe how the “harshness” of Jesus is combined with His grieving over the state of those who are the objects of His harshness in Mt 23 and in the two verses that follow:
       • At the time of the healing of the man with a withered hand: “And he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart” (Mk 3:5).
       • “When Jesus saw [Mary] weeping, and the Jews who came with her also weeping, he was deeply moved in spirit and troubled; and he said, ‘Where have you laid him?’ They said to him, ‘Lord, come and see.’ Jesus wept” (Jn 11:33).
         • It is often said that Jesus’ weeping in Jn 11:33 is a result of natural human emotion aroused by the death of a loved one. However, Jesus knew that He would be raising Lazarus from the dead, so the impact of Lazarus’ death upon Jesus would have been negligible, if not non-existent. The real motivation for His being troubled is the hardness of the hearts of those who witness or hear of the raising of Lazarus and still turn against Jesus:
           • “The great crowd of the Jews . . . came, not only on account of Jesus but also to see Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead. So the chief priests planned to put Lazarus to death also” (Jn 12:9-10).
     • “It is a curious phenomenon . . . that [our age] has effortlessly and . . . automatically sorted out the tenderer elements in Christ to the total ignoring of the fiercer” (252-2).
       • As an example of this, everyone is familiar with the “blest” phrases of the eight beatitudes (Mt 5:3-8), but almost no one remembers that in the sermon which follows Jesus “threatens His hearers with hell no fewer than six times” (252-2; Only four of these are explicit: Mt 5:20, 22, 29, 30).
     • “The plain truth is that we must bring to our meeting with Christ no preconceived ideas of what He ought to be, but a determination to learn what He is. He is not to be measured by our standard, for He is the God who made us. He is the standard” (252-3).
4. His Dual Utterance
   • His (Ontological) Personality and Natures
     • “The word personality as used today has got separated from the philosophical word person and only means the general effect of a person’s character and temperament” (252-4).
       • Garrigou-Lagrange refers to psychological personality (the common usage of personality) and ontological personality (the philosophical usage of personality). In His human nature, Jesus only possessed psychological personality.
     • “The person rightly ‘utters’ his nature; this one person who had two natures rightly utters each nature” (252-5).
     • Jesus can say, “I and the Father are one” (Jn 10:30).
       • In this utterance, the “I” totally possesses the divine nature and expresses a fact about that divine nature.
     • He can also say, “I go to the Father; for the Father is greater than I” (Jn 14:28).
       • In this utterance, the “I” totally possesses a human nature and expresses a fact about that human nature.
     • However, in both cases it is the Person, that is, the second Person of the Blessed Trinity, who makes the utterance (253-1).
     • Our task is to habituate ourselves to this “dual utterance” capability of Jesus and to recognize it in our reading of the Gospels.
   • Understanding Him as He Understood Himself
     • Our goal should be to come to some kind of comprehension of the man who was God (253-1).
     • We tend to focus on what it means to say that the Son of God took on a human nature. But we also need to consider what it meant to this man to know that He was God (253-1).
       • The fact of the Incarnation stunned the Apostles, when they finally became aware that this man was also God, and then it revitalized them with its glory (253-1).
       • “We must try to see also what it meant to Christ Himself to be aware that He was God; for it was with a human mind that He was aware of it” (253-1).
     • Try to conceive in your mind the “blaze of glory and the wonder of the knowledge” that was continuously held in the human intellect of Jesus. It is nearly inconceivable, but we must try to conceive it (253-2).
       • The Apostles saw Jesus acting and speaking as man, and they saw Him acting and speaking as God (253-2).
       • They were utterly bewildered because there was nothing in their experience that would enable them to reconcile the problem of a man acting and speaking as only God could act and speak (253-2).
     • This problem begets a deeper problem. They had to be uncertain of His virtue as man until they recognized that He was also God (254-1).
       • The reason being that if Jesus was not God, He was not a good man. Rather, if He was not God, He was an intolerable man, an arrogant man with an ego so monstrous that it could be properly described by “no word short of insanity” (254-1).
         • Consider one exam.Godple: Jesus said “He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me” (Mt 10:37).
   • Jesus: a Necessarily Different Sort of Man
     • Jesus was a man, but He was also different, and necessarily so because the Person was God (254-2).
     • His divine nature did not “spill over” into His human nature, yet there was a difference in the operations of His human nature because the operations had their origin in His divine personality. “He knew the difference, and they felt His difference” (254-2):
       • “He never asked for their advice” (254-2).
       • He never argued with them, or anyone else (254-2).
       • He never prayed with them (except in the synagogue or Temple) (254-2).
       • “He taught them how to pray, but His own prayer was alone with the Father” (254-2).
     • The Apostles loved Him, but not in the measure that He loved them. The Apostle John, as a result of his experience of Jesus, was able to express a profound truth about the nature of God:
       • “So we know and believe the love God has for us. God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him” (1 Jn 4:16; also v. 8).
       • Note that this is not stated explicitly in the Old Testament, though there are hints of it, such as in Ps 86:5, 15 and Ex 34:67.
         • “For you, O Lord, are good and forgiving, abounding in steadfast love to all who call on thee.” (Ps 85:6)
   • Excursus: When Did Jesus Know He Was God?
     • Recalling what was learned in chapter six, person commands and nature carries out the command. Person, in other words, is the center of moral attribution.
     • The act of knowing is carried out through a person’s intellect, and the intellect is a faculty of one’s nature. What is known by way of the intellect is known by the person.
     • Jesus, having two natures, can know through either the divine intellect or the human intellect. Nevertheless, it is the person, Jesus, who knows.
     • Because He is a divine person with a divine nature, there could never be a time when He did not know He was God; hence, there can be no question about when Jesus, the divine person, knew He was God.
     • There is a question as to when He knew He was God by way of His human intellect. But it would seem as though we can’t answer that question definitively.
     • However, Pope Pius XII, in his encyclical, “Mystici Corporis Christi,” writes, “. . . 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.”
       • The Beatific Vision is a gift to finite intellects. Hence, when Pius XII speaks of Jesus possessing the Beatific Vision, he is speaking with respect to His human nature.