yes, and I know he says he is not presenting a Nestorian Christ, the Christ that Fr Patrick presents is one that is not the Christ of the Fathers. the Person of the Word does not learn, since He is all knowing. and His human brain was one with, and fully submitted to, His Divine Mind. He revealed His Wisdom age appropriate.
what Fathers say that Christ was ignorant?
If Fr. Patrick said directly in his work "Christ was ignorant", then it'd be an issue. However, one cannot insist past what he stated in-depth in both interviews and the whole of his book (and others recently) that noted directly where he was coming from.
It never really helps, of course, if saying someone (like Fr. Patrick) is not presenting Christ of the Fathers when the Fathers themselves were never quoted/examined (or addressed as it concerns where they agreed with him). Fr. Patrick already said Christ was all-knowing, so anyone seeking to propose he said otherwise would require showing from the literal text - otherwise it'd be hearsay.
No one (in Orthodoxy at least) holds to the wide-sweeping claim/assumption that Christ was ignorant since the Orthodox position is much more complicated, noting that Christ was, by His OWN FREE Will/Divine volition, humanly ignorant....and at the same time, he was FULLY DIVINE/DIVINELY All Wise because of His being the Word/LOGOS. St. Athanasius lays this out many times....and Fr. Patrick has never claimed Christ was ignorant, as you claimed of him. He actually did a very in-depth interview on the issue with Ancient Faith Radio with Kevin Allen where this issue was discussed:
Kevin Allen interviewed Fr Patrick Henry Reardon his book, "The Jesus We Missed: The Surprising Truth About the Humanity of Christ" - and he specifically brought up kenosis in the Incarnation, as well as St Gregory the Theologian's famed quote,
"For that which He has not assumed He has not healed" - and the point was plain that Christ is truly who He has appeared to be before His transfiguration (a man) while He is truly who He has appeared to be during His transfiguration (the glorified Son of God, Luke 9) and He is both true God and true man. This is what Fr. Patrick noted when saying we take Christ for His word, and not assume he is merely 'putting on a show' with regards to His Human experience.
The main issue people have starts at the beginning of the text when Fr. Reardon says
"'there is no reason to suppose that the human mind of Jesus enjoyed access to the divine omniscience' and that 'if we accept the plain meaning of the biblical material, we are obliged to infer that Jesus did not know everything.'( pg. 80 of the book). But as he continued on with that and noted that enjoying access meant partaking on a REGULAR BASIS instead of doing the process of KENOSIS where he Emptied himself/did not consider equality with God something to be grasped (Philippians 2), reading past what he said to claim the man believes Christ to be ignorant is a HUGE leap. It'd not be fair to Fr. Reardon to make that claim - especially when he has been very careful to note what he meant in his written teachings and recorded.
Again, Fr. Reardon echoed well St Gregory the Theologian's famed quote,
"For that which He has not assumed He has not healed" ...and What St. Gregory the Theologian said (in regards to
St Gregory's Oration 30) has also been echoed by Fr John Behr in his
The Nicene Faith- Part 2 (p. 357):
"'no one except the Father knows the last day or hour, not even the Son Himself.' (Mk. 13:32). Gregory asks how anything can be unknown to Wisdom [ie Christ the Word], the creator of the world, Who perfects and transforms all created things? The immediate answer given by Gregory is...along the lines of his general principle: 'he does know as God, but that, as man, he does not.' However, rather than remaining content with this, Gregory suggests that in this case the first explanation is not sufficient and so proposes a second solution. This time he bases himself on the Son's dependence on the Father as cause, which implies that 'even the Son's knowledge of the day or hour is none other than His knowledge that the Father knows them.' The Son's very being and life is that of the Father, and so any knowledge that He has is also that of the Father. Not that the Son then possesses these things separately from the Father, but that He is the Mind, Word, and Life of the Father, still dependent upon Him as cause."
And of course, we also see where the late Fr. Thomas Hopko noted the same thing when it came to the fact that Christ as the Word was full of Divine Knowledge and yet in his HUMANITY he chose to be limited in how much he knew at a given time so that he could authentically experienced learning/growth. And again, we cannot go past the example of Christ. Fr. Hopko did a stellar job laying that out:
But in regards to what the Fathers actually stated in-depth, they have said PLENTY on how Christ could experience learning in one aspect of who He was just as He could know all due to the other aspect of his nature. Again, We can begin with St. Athanasius' account of Christ advancing in wisdom, as it is splitting hairs/difficult enough trying to make his words out as if he did not advocate an authentic advancement in wisdom. As another pointed out best,
St Athanasius' Third Oration of his Three Discourses against the Arians (
CHURCH FATHERS: Discourse III Against the Arians (Athanasius)) speaks plainly on the extent of Christs's human wisdom, with him appealing to the way that man's nature is limited in its capacity for wisdom and Christ truly took upon himself human nature - thus giving him a truly human limitation in wisdom. It was in establishing this that St. Athanasius proceeded to note the ways that Christ had a real, gradual advancement of His Human nature in the wisdom he had - matching the rate that his DIVINE Wisdom
manifested and connecting that back with the Deity of CHRIST.
It was not...the Word, considered as the Word, who advanced; who is perfect from the perfect Father, who needs nothing, nay brings forward others to an advance; but humanly is He here also said to advance, since advance belongs to man.
Hence the Evangelist, speaking with cautious exactness, has mentioned stature in the advance; but being Word and God He is not measured by stature, which belongs to bodies. Of the body then is the advance; for, it advancing, in it advanced also the manifestation of the Godhead to those who saw it...
...And as we said that He suffered in the flesh, and hungered in the flesh, and was fatigued in the flesh, so also reasonably may He be said to have advanced in the flesh; for neither did the advance, such as we have described it, take place with the Word external to the flesh, for in Him was the flesh which advanced and His is it called, and that as before, that man’s advance might abide and fail not, because of the Word which is with it.
Neither then was the advance the Word’s, nor was the flesh Wisdom, but the flesh became the body of Wisdom. Therefore, as we have already said, not Wisdom, as Wisdom, advanced in respect of itself; but the manhood advanced in Wisdom, transcending by degrees human nature, and being deified, and becoming and appearing to all as the organ of Wisdom for the operation and the shining forth of the Godhead. Wherefore neither said he, ‘The Word advanced,’ but Jesus, by which Name the Lord was called when He became man; so that the advance is of the human nature in such wise as we explained above.”
St. Athanasius was very explicit and harmonizes with what other fathers have already said. To not recognize genuine human limitation of knowledge in Christ is to divide Him into two subjects - similar to someone saying that admitting He experienced genuine human suffering/pain means we must divide up Christ and believe He's not God because he had hunger, pain, anguish, etc). It'd be taking impassibility to an extreme and ignoring scripture on several points....and St. Athanasius is plain when saying what Christ experienced was a true human experience. We know plainly from him/others that God the Word suffered in the flesh, yet remained impassible in His Divinity/perfectly satisfied in His Divinity.
Also, beyond that, St.Cyril advocated that Christ advancing in wisdom was able to serve a redemptive function. Patristic scholars like Susan Wessel have p
ointed this out rather directly in his words:
"And just as for our sake He humbled Himself, so too for our sake He admits advancement, in order that we again in Him might advance in wisdom."
St. Cyril of Alexandria also stated the following (as an example), from
Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on Luke:
2:40-52. And the Child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, being filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon Him. And again; But Jesus increased in stature and wisdom and grace with God and men.
TO say that the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, being filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was upon Him, must be taken as referring to His human nature. And examine, I pray you, closely the profoundness of the dispensation: the Word endures to be born in human fashion, although in His divine nature He has no beginning nor is subject to time: He Who as God is all perfect, submits to bodily growth: the Incorporeal has limbs that advance to the ripeness of manhood: He is filled with wisdom Who is Himself all wisdom. And what say we to this? Behold by these things Him Who was in the form of the Father made like unto us: the Rich in poverty: the High in humiliation: Him said to "receive," Whose is the fulness as God. So thoroughly did God the Word empty Himself! For what things are written of Him as a man shew the manner of the emptying. For it were a thing impossible for the Word begotten of God the Father to admit ought like this into His own nature: but when He became flesh, even a man like unto us, then He is born according to the flesh of a woman, and is said also to have been subject to the things that belong to man's state: and though the Word as being God could have made His flesh spring forth at once from the womb unto the measure of the perfect man, yet this would have been of the nature of a portent: and therefore He gave the habits and laws of human nature power even over His own flesh.
32 Be not therefore offended, considering perchance within thyself, How can God increase? or how can He Who gives grace to angels and to men receive fresh wisdom? Rather reflect upon the great skill wherewith we are initiated into His mystery. For the wise Evangelist did not introduce the Word in His abstract and incorporeal nature, and so say of Him that 33 in wisdom: for the divine nature is capable of increase in neither one nor the other; seeing that the Word of God is all perfect. And with good reason he connected the increase of wisdom with the growth of the bodily stature, because the divine nature revealed its own wisdom in proportion to the measure of the bodily growth.
Of course, more can be seen from th
e Fathers in the "Cantena Aurea" regarding Luke 2:52:
THEOPHYL. Not that He became wise by making progress, but that by degrees He revealed His wisdom. As it was when He disputed with the Scribes, asking them questions of their law to the astonishment of all who heard Him. You see then how He increased in wisdom, in that He became known to many, and caused them to wonder, for the showing forth of His wisdom is His increase. But mark how the Evangelist, having interpreted what it is to increase in wisdom, adds, and in stature, declaring thereby that an increase or growth in age is an increase in wisdom.
CYRIL; But the Eunomian Heretics say, “How can He be equal to the Father in substance, who is said to increase, as if before imperfect.” But not because He is the Word, but because He is made man, He is said to receive increase. For if He really increased after that He was made flesh, as having before existed imperfect, why then do we give Him thanks as having thence become incarnate for us? But how if He is the true wisdom can He be increased, or how can He who gives grace to others be Himself advanced in grace. Again, if bearing that the Word humbled Himself, no one is offended (thinking slightingly of the true God,) but rather marvels at His compassion, how is it not absurd to be offended at hearing that He increases? For as He was humbled for us, so for us He increased, that we who have fallen through sin might increase in Him. For whatever concerns us, Christ Himself has truly undertaken for us, that He might restore us to a better state. And mark what He says, not that the Word, but Jesus, increases, that you should not suppose that the pure Word increases, but the Word made flesh; and as we confess that the Word suffered in the flesh, although the flesh only suffered, because of the Word the flesh was which suffered, so He is said to increase, because the human nature of the Word increased in Him. But He is said to increase in His human nature, not as if that nature which was perfect from the beginning received increase, but that by degrees it was manifested. For the law of nature brooks not that man should have higher faculties than the age of his body permits. The Word then (made man) was perfect, as being the power and wisdom of the Father, but because something was to be yielded to the habits of our nature, lest He should be counted strange by those who saw Him, He manifested Himself as man with a body, gradually advancing in growth, and was daily thought wiser by those who saw and heard Him.
GREEK EX. He increased then in age, His body growing to the stature of man; but in wisdom through those who were taught divine truths by Him; in grace, that is, whereby we are advanced with joy, trusting at last to obtain the promises; and this indeed before God, because having put on the flesh, He performed His Father's work, but before men by their conversion from the worship of idols to the knowledge of the Most High Trinity.
THEOPHYL. He says before God and men, because we must first please God, then man.
GREG NYSS. The word also increases in different degrees in those who receive it; and according to the measure of its increase a man appears either an infant, grown up, or a perfect man.
Ultimately, as said before, the concept of Kenosis/emptying oneself to fully experience things by Divine Limitations is what the Early Church advocated at multiple points and it is what's present in the example of Christ repeatedly. This is what Fr. Reardon and multiple other priests have pointed out for sometime - and we can all see that with Christ being fully Revealed in his GODHOOD/Nature in the Transfiguration and yet still living life, as said before:
We don't see God in spite of his humanity, as if the humanity trades off with the God, so that when he's acting as God he's least human. Rather, the incarnation affects our idea of what God is. God for Christians is one whose nature is expressed in incarnat
Very true - we see who God is through the person of Christ and what humanity was meant to strive for in the example of Christ, who suffered all things man went through (outside of sin, of course) - but when we see Him acting as God, it's not so much a matter of him humanity trading off/being least human as much as it's a matter of him showing a side that mankind simply does not have.....the humanity taking a back-seat so that the other side of Christ that makes Him unique shines through.
Matthew 17:2-4 / Matthew 17
The Transfiguration
1 After six days Jesus took with him Peter, James and John the brother of James, and led them up a high mountain by themselves.
2 There he was transfigured before them. His face shone like the sun, and his clothes became as white as the light.
3 Just then there appeared before them Moses and Elijah, talking with Jesus.
4 Peter said to Jesus, Lord, it is good for us to be here. If you wish, I will put up three sheltersone for you, one for Moses and one for Elijah.
5 While he was still speaking, a bright cloud covered them, and a voice from the cloud said, This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased. Listen to him!
6 When the disciples heard this, they fell facedown to the ground, terrified.
7 But Jesus came and touched them. Get up, he said. Dont be afraid.
Luke 9:28-39/Luke 9:32-34 Luke 9
The Transfiguration
28 About eight days after Jesus said this, he took Peter, John and James with him and went up onto a mountain to pray.
29 As he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became as bright as a flash of lightning.
30 Two men, Moses and Elijah, appeared in glorious splendor, talking with Jesus. 31 They spoke about his departure,[a] which he was about to bring to fulfillment at Jerusalem.32.
The Transfiguration shows that His Passion was voluntary, that He ascended the Cross out of his own free will. For it was the v
eil being pulled back before the apostles as they saw Christ for WHO He really was..... In the Transfiguration, the fullness of who Jesus was had been demonstrated..as His glory was often veiled, with many times in light of His miraculous doings/actions (from calming the sea to multiplying food and turning water to wine) often not being understood and the disciples themselves choosing to harden their hearts ( Mark 8:16-18 Mark 8 Mark 6:51-53 / Mark 6 _...and this is something that must be acknowledged whenever people say that Christ was not both fully God and yet Man simultaneously whenever it comes to His identity.
But again, even if saying one feels God did not make the Humanity of Christ take a back-seat at times, there is still the reality of where kenosis occurred and aspects of who Christ were did not shine as strongly at times - Philippians 2 noting this when pointing out how Christ came as a servant and laid aside his FULL abilities for a time before being glorified.
[/LIST]
