F
Freeda
Guest
I don’t know if you need to know or not. Anymore than you know if I need to know.
- Status
G
Gregory_I
Guest
Focus: THe Church says don’t do it. THe debate is ended. 
R
rap1962
Guest
We most certainly do know that we do NOT need to know. If we NEEDED to know, God would make sure we knew. Everything we NEED to know is revealed to us through Sacred Tradition or Sacred Scripture.
Where in Tradition or Scripture do you see anything about needing to know the name of your guardian angel? Did Jesus know the name of the angel sent to him while he prayed in the garden? There is no indication in scripture that he referred to the angel by name. Yet the angel’s work was successful.
If Jesus did not NEED to call his guardian angel by name why should you?
N
NeedImprovement
Guest
If all things were made through Jesus, then He not only knew the name of the strengthening Angel sent to Him in the garden of Gethsemane , it would be safe to say that Jesus also participated in actually giving that Angel his name . Yet we ourselves are not told the Angel’s name - only his function.
J
Jaelithe
Guest
Frankly, if you needed to know, I speculate that it be revealed to you in such a way that said knowledge would be unmistakably from God.
If that’s happened or does in the future, then God bless. I certainly wouldn’t preclude the possibility, if such is somehow necessary in your personal salvation. Our Father is pretty well equipped to handle such requests appropriately, I’d wager. He doesn’t need my help making those decisions.
If not, though … seeking the name when you know the Church has discouraged the practice seems, in my opinion, problematic.
B
BKulash_eski
Guest
This is great to know. Thanks for this thread. That people are out there trying to seek their guardian angel, is rather disturbing, but if they were in the appropriate setting, say at church, not during mass mind you, but before or after, or perhaps if they were devout catholics, by this I mean they have a holy water font in their home etc, etc, Would it still open doors that perhaps are better left closed. If someone in that desperate of need, they should probably just go and talk to their Priest huh…
N
NeedImprovement
Guest
There’s a big difference between seeking one’s guardian Angel and seeking the name of one’s guardian Angel.
Each time we pray the prayer “Angel of God , my Guardian dear…” we are , in effect, seeking our guardian Angel.
I often invoke mine just before Mass, telling him all the intentions I wish to place on the paten, asking him to present them to our Blessed Mother so that she may place my requests there. (Although the Mass is also a sacred mystery, I’m willing to bet that my guardian Angel has a much better grasp on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass than I do - because he constantly beholds the face of God the Father).
Sometimes , we forget that our thinking is limited , particularly here on earth. God, on the other hand is infinite - He has no limits unless He chooses to impose or grant them … such as when He gives us our free will - God gives it to us to own completely.
It helps to remember that God created angels, which are so surpassing in beauty that some saints have posited if we were to see an angel in all its glory , we might possibly die from joy.
Several quotes from here in green below. If one were to dig around a little, they would be able to compile pages… most likely books, on what the saints have said about angels.
Each of the three Angels’ names which are revealed to us in sacred scripture has a meaning , and that meaning finds its identity in God:
(St. ) Michael : Who is like unto God ?
(St.) Gabriel : Strength or Power of God.
(St.) Raphael : Remedy or Medicine of God ; or, God heals .
These are three Angels , through whom, by their names we invoke God’s favour . The names of the others - even the angels we invoke during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, remain mysterious.
Each time we pray the prayer “Angel of God , my Guardian dear…” we are , in effect, seeking our guardian Angel.
I often invoke mine just before Mass, telling him all the intentions I wish to place on the paten, asking him to present them to our Blessed Mother so that she may place my requests there. (Although the Mass is also a sacred mystery, I’m willing to bet that my guardian Angel has a much better grasp on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass than I do - because he constantly beholds the face of God the Father).
Sometimes , we forget that our thinking is limited , particularly here on earth. God, on the other hand is infinite - He has no limits unless He chooses to impose or grant them … such as when He gives us our free will - God gives it to us to own completely.
It helps to remember that God created angels, which are so surpassing in beauty that some saints have posited if we were to see an angel in all its glory , we might possibly die from joy.
Several quotes from here in green below. If one were to dig around a little, they would be able to compile pages… most likely books, on what the saints have said about angels.
- “If we saw an angel clearly, we should die of pleasure.”-St. Bridget of Sweden
- “Holy Angels, our advocates, our brothers, our counselors, our defenders, our enlighteners, our friends, our guides, our helpers, our intercessors-pray for us”- Blessed Mother Teresa
Each of the three Angels’ names which are revealed to us in sacred scripture has a meaning , and that meaning finds its identity in God:
(St. ) Michael : Who is like unto God ?
(St.) Gabriel : Strength or Power of God.
(St.) Raphael : Remedy or Medicine of God ; or, God heals .
These are three Angels , through whom, by their names we invoke God’s favour . The names of the others - even the angels we invoke during the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, remain mysterious.
R
rap1962
Guest
My point precisely, we are not given his name and Jesus does not use his name. Pretty solid evidence that we DO NOT need to know his name. Jesus doesn’t use the name even though he may presumably know the name. I say, “Presumably” he knew the name but we don’t know for sure. He may not have known. Either way, he had no reason to use the name so we should not either. If we don’t need to use it, we don’t need to know it.
You say, since Jesus is God he knows everything. This is not true but the theological explanation of why is complex. For brevety I will refer you to one passage of scripture. Mat 24:36 “But of that day and hour no one knows, neither the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.” Jesus, speaking about the end of time.
I think this clearly shows that Jesus does not know EVERYTHING. This does not mean Jesus is less than God like some religions profess, but it does show there is an important distinction between each member of the Trinity.
R
rap1962
Guest
Your thoughts make a great deal of sense. It is disturbing that people seek the name of their guardian angel, or worse yet, just go ahead and assign one to him on their own. Like I said in another post, naming your angel would be like your dog naming you.
There is absolutely no reason we need to know the name of our angel. They were assigned to us by God and they know who they are. They know their job which is to help to guide us in our effort to resist sin and temptation to stray from God. They are aleardy praying for us night and day, all we really need to do is thank them for their effort or perhaps ask them to join their prayers to ours for a special petition. Other than that, just know they are your special teammate in your personal war against evil that is waged in the battleground of your soul.
N
NeedImprovement
Guest
Blue in quotes added by me , for emphasis]
To confirm again for everyone here : Jesus **did **know the name of the strengthening Angel sent to Him in the garden of Gethsemane … not maybe – for sure !
To say otherwise is to either deny the Divinity of Christ or to deny the omniscience of God. That is an error.
This is the same oversight we can easily commit when reading the passage of scripture you quoted [Mat 24:36]. We are indeed looking at the words Christ said, but when we do not consider them within the context of the Hypostatic Union , we make the same erroneous assertion : either that Christ was not God, or, again, that God is not omniscient.
That is not the view of the Fathers of the Church.
There is a really good short article right here at Catholic Answers entitled Was Jesus a Know-It-All? which I’d encourage everyone to have a look at. I found some very valuable insights given by some of the Fathers of the Church on that very passage of scripture - Mat 24:36. There are excellent commentaries from :
Athanasius
Gregory of Nazianz
John Chrysostom
Jerome
Augustine
Cyril of Alexandria
Fulgentius
Gregory the Great
… alll in that one little article … a very edifying read for all of us.
No, those aren’t my words. My words were …
The conclusion that “since Jesus is God he knows everything” however, is correct.
To confirm again for everyone here : Jesus **did **know the name of the strengthening Angel sent to Him in the garden of Gethsemane … not maybe – for sure !
To say otherwise is to either deny the Divinity of Christ or to deny the omniscience of God. That is an error.
This is the same oversight we can easily commit when reading the passage of scripture you quoted [Mat 24:36]. We are indeed looking at the words Christ said, but when we do not consider them within the context of the Hypostatic Union , we make the same erroneous assertion : either that Christ was not God, or, again, that God is not omniscient.
That is not the view of the Fathers of the Church.
There is a really good short article right here at Catholic Answers entitled Was Jesus a Know-It-All? which I’d encourage everyone to have a look at. I found some very valuable insights given by some of the Fathers of the Church on that very passage of scripture - Mat 24:36. There are excellent commentaries from :
Athanasius
Gregory of Nazianz
John Chrysostom
Jerome
Augustine
Cyril of Alexandria
Fulgentius
Gregory the Great
… alll in that one little article … a very edifying read for all of us.
R
rap1962
Guest
1)To confirm for everyone??? What exactly are you confirming??? That YOU are the unltimate authority or everyone to listen to." If you are, then show me in scripture or tradition something that shows we NEED to know the name of our Guardian angel. You certainly can’t site Church teaching because it is quite the contrary. So where exactly does you expertise or authority come from?Blue in quotes added by me , for emphasis]
No, those aren’t my words. My words were …
The conclusion that “since Jesus is God he knows everything” however, is correct.
To confirm again for everyone here : Jesus **did **know the name of the strengthening Angel sent to Him in the garden of Gethsemane … not maybe – for sure !
To say otherwise is to either deny the Divinity of Christ or to deny the omniscience of God. That is an error.
2)There are only 7 passages of scripture that have been interpreted by the magesterium, Mat 24:36 is not one of them so regardless of what your interpretation is I think your are a little bit self absorbed to say you have the only true interpretation.
3)Jesus is not by himself God. He is one in the being with the Father, not separate and apart. When God humbled himself and took on human form he subjected himself to all human frailty except attachment to sin (sin is impossible even for God). He was able to suffer hunger, loneliness, pain, sorrow, fear. None of these things is the Father in heaven subject to. That does not mean Jesus did not really suffer, he most certainly did. So just as he physically suffered in a way that God does not and can not, he had likely had less than the absolute knowledge that the Father posseses. (again, simply the the physical limitation of his human form) See Luke 2:52 as another example. If Jesus, simply by being God, knew everything, then how is it possible that he “advanced in wisdom and favor before God and man.”? You can not advance unless you move from lesser to greater or higher. Therefore we clearly see that Jesus did advance so he must have gained wisdom over time. i.e he gained more wisdom as he grew yet he was God from the moment of conception, yes?
- I do not deny the omniscience of God. Please don’t tell ME what I do and do not believe. When God humbled himself and became man he did not leave heaven. God the Father remained in heaven and is omniscienient and omnipotent. While taking human form he had to reliquish all but his divinity in order to accomplish his mission. Otherwise he would not have been able to be crucified to death. I have absultely no problem reconciling Jesus as being fully God and fully man while at the same time understanding that Jesus had to willingly take on the weakness of man while he was in the flesh.
O
odile53
Guest
Maybe the rank and file guardian angels don’t even have names?
I pray while asking my guardian angel’s protection frequently. I don’t know my guardian angel’s name or gender (if it is possible for a purely spiritual being to even have a gender,) and since I’ve never seen this angel, I have no clue about appearances. However, there are just too many examples from my impulsive and foolhardy youth where I had naively or willfully blundered into spiritually and physically dangerous situations to doubt that this angel exists. I am sure this angel is very relieved that middle age has finally conferred some prudence on me, because I know I gave him a run for his money when I was younger. If as previously noted this being;s name denoted his function, my angel’s name would be something like “Stuck running after this stubborn moron!” In fact, if there was such a thing as an Angels’ Union, I’m sure he would have filed a grievance about unfair working conditions!
On the serious side, I am reassured by and grateful for the protection of my guardian angel, and praise the Lord that He has seen fit to assign these divine beings for our spiritual, and sometimes temporal, welfare.
I pray while asking my guardian angel’s protection frequently. I don’t know my guardian angel’s name or gender (if it is possible for a purely spiritual being to even have a gender,) and since I’ve never seen this angel, I have no clue about appearances. However, there are just too many examples from my impulsive and foolhardy youth where I had naively or willfully blundered into spiritually and physically dangerous situations to doubt that this angel exists. I am sure this angel is very relieved that middle age has finally conferred some prudence on me, because I know I gave him a run for his money when I was younger. If as previously noted this being;s name denoted his function, my angel’s name would be something like “Stuck running after this stubborn moron!” In fact, if there was such a thing as an Angels’ Union, I’m sure he would have filed a grievance about unfair working conditions!
On the serious side, I am reassured by and grateful for the protection of my guardian angel, and praise the Lord that He has seen fit to assign these divine beings for our spiritual, and sometimes temporal, welfare.
N
NeedImprovement
Guest
As far as I can tell rap 1962 , this all began because you asked the question in post # 103
A lot of people struggle with that passage of scripture. It’s pretty normal. Where I might object is when someone asserts and posts an error which could give rise to new doubts for someone else already struggling with the same passage. That doesn’t appear very fair to me.
Since it seems to upset you , I won’t post any more on this thread apart from a citation from the Catechism of the Catholic Church in the ensuing post.
Now in previous post # 111], how is it that you can ask for more citations from scripture and tradition, but totally ignore the substantiation already provided by the Fathers of the Church ? I’m not any kind of an authority at all rap 1962 , but the Fathers of the Church are – they are tradition. And they say Jesus Christ had full knowledge.
The Catechism , which is a sure norm for teaching the faith also says it in the next post.
Perhaps this will help you or anyone else who may have a doubt to see why I’m so sure Jesus knew the name of the strengthening Angel sent to Him in the garden of Gethsemane (although , your post is the first time I’ve ever seen or heard that particular Angel referred to as Jesus’ guardian Angel ).
The Nicene Creed says of Jesus :
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
one in Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
That means that through Him Angels were created , or, if you prefer the passage from the Gospel of John on which that tract of the Creed is based [1:3; DRV] “All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.”
If I consider that along with Matt 16:27 [NAB] “For the Son of Man will come with his angels in his Father’s glory, and then he will repay everyone according to his conduct.”
It just becomes so obvious to me what is written there. If they are His Angels, and He created them, then how could He not know their names ?
John 8:58
Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham came to be, I AM.”
Again, sorry if I’d troubled you or offended you somehow rap 1962 , I just didn’t want anyone else having any additional unnecessary doubts that are opposed to the Fathers of the Church and/or the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
I wish you the best.
God Bless.
And I replied in post # 104
Then you implied in post # 108 that what I said wasn’t true ( that doesn’t appear authoritative to you at all ?) – although you weren’t totally quoting words written by me [post # 108]:
Certainly , I am permitted to reply , particularly if you are saying that what I said is “not true” and you aren’t quoting me accurately. I should think that in fair debate, I have every right to address and defend it at that point. But when I did substantiate by referring fellow members to the Fathers of the Church , who, all disagree with your interpretation of [Matt 24:36] , you seem to have been offended. I truly apologize. There was never any intention to offend you.
A lot of people struggle with that passage of scripture. It’s pretty normal. Where I might object is when someone asserts and posts an error which could give rise to new doubts for someone else already struggling with the same passage. That doesn’t appear very fair to me.
Since it seems to upset you , I won’t post any more on this thread apart from a citation from the Catechism of the Catholic Church in the ensuing post.
Now in previous post # 111], how is it that you can ask for more citations from scripture and tradition, but totally ignore the substantiation already provided by the Fathers of the Church ? I’m not any kind of an authority at all rap 1962 , but the Fathers of the Church are – they are tradition. And they say Jesus Christ had full knowledge.
The Catechism , which is a sure norm for teaching the faith also says it in the next post.
Perhaps this will help you or anyone else who may have a doubt to see why I’m so sure Jesus knew the name of the strengthening Angel sent to Him in the garden of Gethsemane (although , your post is the first time I’ve ever seen or heard that particular Angel referred to as Jesus’ guardian Angel ).
The Nicene Creed says of Jesus :
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
one in Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
That means that through Him Angels were created , or, if you prefer the passage from the Gospel of John on which that tract of the Creed is based [1:3; DRV] “All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.”
If I consider that along with Matt 16:27 [NAB] “For the Son of Man will come with his angels in his Father’s glory, and then he will repay everyone according to his conduct.”
It just becomes so obvious to me what is written there. If they are His Angels, and He created them, then how could He not know their names ?
John 8:58
Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, before Abraham came to be, I AM.”
Again, sorry if I’d troubled you or offended you somehow rap 1962 , I just didn’t want anyone else having any additional unnecessary doubts that are opposed to the Fathers of the Church and/or the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
I wish you the best.
God Bless.
N
NeedImprovement
Guest
Excerpts 471-474; Catechism of the Catholic Church
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.
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”, and would even have to inquire for himself about what one in the human condition can learn only from experience. This corresponded to the reality of his voluntary emptying of himself, taking “the form of a slave”.
473 But at the same time, this truly human knowledge of God’s Son expressed the divine life of his person. “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.” Such is first of all the case with the intimate and immediate knowledge that the Son of God made man has of his Father. The Son in his human knowledge also showed the divine penetration he had into the secret thoughts of human hearts.
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. What he admitted to not knowing in this area, he elsewhere declared himself not sent to reveal.
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.
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”, and would even have to inquire for himself about what one in the human condition can learn only from experience. This corresponded to the reality of his voluntary emptying of himself, taking “the form of a slave”.
473 But at the same time, this truly human knowledge of God’s Son expressed the divine life of his person. “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.” Such is first of all the case with the intimate and immediate knowledge that the Son of God made man has of his Father. The Son in his human knowledge also showed the divine penetration he had into the secret thoughts of human hearts.
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. What he admitted to not knowing in this area, he elsewhere declared himself not sent to reveal.
K
karoleck
Guest
I liked your humour—mine own guardian angel --on your calculations who be “one who weaps”(for my sins!)Maybe the rank and file guardian angels don’t even have names?
I pray while asking my guardian angel’s protection frequently. I don’t know my guardian angel’s name or gender (if it is possible for a purely spiritual being to even have a gender,) and since I’ve never seen this angel, I have no clue about appearances. However, there are just too many examples from my impulsive and foolhardy youth where I had naively or willfully blundered into spiritually and physically dangerous situations to doubt that this angel exists. I am sure this angel is very relieved that middle age has finally conferred some prudence on me, because I know I gave him a run for his money when I was younger. If as previously noted this being;s name denoted his function, my angel’s name would be something like “Stuck running after this stubborn moron!” In fact, if there was such a thing as an Angels’ Union, I’m sure he would have filed a grievance about unfair working conditions!
On the serious side, I am reassured by and grateful for the protection of my guardian angel, and praise the Lord that He has seen fit to assign these divine beings for our spiritual, and sometimes temporal, welfare.
I never knew that IT IS FORBIDDEN to name my guardian angel but the Churches reasoning behind this discouragement makes a lot of sense.(for the very reasons that the poster to this thread gives).A long time ago I too heard about people who prayed to their guardian angels just before they went to sleep and the supposed result was that when you wake up–you are given the name!!I never did this as “the faith of the people” in me thought that it was testing my Guardian Angel a little bit.Though in my memory from school days,I recall the teacher telling us that Angels were pure spirits and not human like us–so they did not need to have a (christian name);though he said that if it help our devotion to pray to our guardian angel that we could give "it"a name.(that was in the pre vatican two days!)
Here is what Pope Saint Gregory The Great preached (Homily-- 34,8-9)–
"It must be realized that the word “angel” is the name of an office,and not of a nature.For these holy spirits of our homeland in heaven are always spirits,but in no way can they be called “angels"or “messengers” since they are only angels only when something is announced through them,those who make minor announcements are called angels,those who make important ones are called archangels.”-----
–“Angels are known by proper names as well,to indicate their powers and their work.In that holy city where perfect knowledge is derived from the vision of Almighty God,if proper names are assigned to them,it is not that their persons could not be identified without names.But when angels come to minister to us,even the names by which we know them are taken from their ministry–Michael means “who is like God”,Gabriel “Strength of God”,Raphael"Healing of God”—end of Quote
So maybe your funny name of “Stuck running after this stubborn moron!” is close to the money!!
R
rap1962
Guest
N
NeedImprovement
Guest
N
NeedImprovement
Guest
There appears to be to be a misunderstanding, at least in part rap 1962 . Please permit me this one final post to try and clarify. Then I’ll give you the last word .
To this part of your post –
). Actually in an earlier post # 57] I cited Jacob asking the angel (in Genesis 32:29-30) with whom he wrestled what his name was, and the angel replying, “Why should you want to know my name ?” , in support of your same opinion.
If you look at several more of my earlier posts , you’ll see that I’m always in favour of what the Church recommends – the topic of the thread posted by the OP and linked by Edmundus 1581 [post# 13] here
Excerpt:
217. “ … The practice of assigning names to the Holy Angels should be discouraged, except in the cases of Gabriel, Raphael and Michael whose names are contained in Holy Scripture.”
I follow that counsel as if it comes from a parent. My issue was more with the way that particular counsel was presented on the thread (not by you – but earlier in the thread) – as if it were meant to preclude all communication and intimacy with one’s guardian Angel. As posted previously, there is a way to foster all of that devotion without ever needing to go into trying to know our guardian Angel’s name.
I think I can see how you may have believed I thought differently though, because my post in question came directly after your reply to Freeda who’d posted
The unfortunate part that I’ve seen happen with some interpretations: Although that passage of Matt 24:26 almost appears to be a type of debate “magnet” (which can be a healthy thing in and of itself), a lot of people who begin by using it as a rationale that “Jesus did not know everything” , often don’t know where or how to stop . Some purportedly intellectual theologians have even regressed to the point where they posit that Jesus didn’t actually know He was God (which is why I tucked in that passage “Amen, amen, I say to you: Before Abraham came to be, I AM.” at the end ).
In my limited mind, I can’t see anything about a claim of Jesus not actually knowing He was God as being even minutely healthy nor helpful from a Catholic perspective.
Thanks for replying rap 1962 . You’ve allowed me to see where part of our differences are merely a misunderstanding. To try and make it clearer:
I agree with you that :
“No where in Scripture or Tradition or in any teachings of the church is it necessary to know the name of our guardian angel, so based on this, we can therefore be very sure that it is absolutely not necessary.”
The last word is yours if you wish. I’ve already unsubscribed to the thread but will certainly be glad to read anything you wish to post here. I’m grateful you posted what you did. It shows me that we actually agree on more than we disagree on. I apologize again for any misunderstanding.
God Bless
To this part of your post –
Please understand that I agree 100% with what you’re saying above … no beefs at all ! (I guess it wouldn’t have hurt me to include that in my reply -
). Actually in an earlier post # 57] I cited Jacob asking the angel (in Genesis 32:29-30) with whom he wrestled what his name was, and the angel replying, “Why should you want to know my name ?” , in support of your same opinion.If you look at several more of my earlier posts , you’ll see that I’m always in favour of what the Church recommends – the topic of the thread posted by the OP and linked by Edmundus 1581 [post# 13] here
Excerpt:
217. “ … The practice of assigning names to the Holy Angels should be discouraged, except in the cases of Gabriel, Raphael and Michael whose names are contained in Holy Scripture.”
I follow that counsel as if it comes from a parent. My issue was more with the way that particular counsel was presented on the thread (not by you – but earlier in the thread) – as if it were meant to preclude all communication and intimacy with one’s guardian Angel. As posted previously, there is a way to foster all of that devotion without ever needing to go into trying to know our guardian Angel’s name.
I think I can see how you may have believed I thought differently though, because my post in question came directly after your reply to Freeda who’d posted
The only part of your reply I didn’t see eye to eye with was the question of whether Jesus knew the name of the Angel who came to Him in the garden of Gethsemane. In my mind, there is no question. As you may have gathered from my most recent post, I didn’t consider Matt 24:26 relevant to any of my personal proofs as to whether our Blessed Lord knew that particular Angel’s or any Angel’s name. And I would continue thinking that way unless someone were to try and point out a place in scripture where Jesus himself says something along the lines of, “No one knows the names of the other Angels, not even the Son, but only the Father .” You see, I can’t even get over the thought that St. Michael , as prince of the Heavenly Hosts, would know all the Angels’ names but that Jesus who created both them and St. Michael, wouldn’t.
The unfortunate part that I’ve seen happen with some interpretations: Although that passage of Matt 24:26 almost appears to be a type of debate “magnet” (which can be a healthy thing in and of itself), a lot of people who begin by using it as a rationale that “Jesus did not know everything” , often don’t know where or how to stop . Some purportedly intellectual theologians have even regressed to the point where they posit that Jesus didn’t actually know He was God (which is why I tucked in that passage “Amen, amen, I say to you: Before Abraham came to be, I AM.” at the end ).
In my limited mind, I can’t see anything about a claim of Jesus not actually knowing He was God as being even minutely healthy nor helpful from a Catholic perspective.
Thanks for replying rap 1962 . You’ve allowed me to see where part of our differences are merely a misunderstanding. To try and make it clearer:
I agree with you that :
“No where in Scripture or Tradition or in any teachings of the church is it necessary to know the name of our guardian angel, so based on this, we can therefore be very sure that it is absolutely not necessary.”
The last word is yours if you wish. I’ve already unsubscribed to the thread but will certainly be glad to read anything you wish to post here. I’m grateful you posted what you did. It shows me that we actually agree on more than we disagree on. I apologize again for any misunderstanding.
God Bless
R
robbmiller
Guest
hmmmm
F
FCEGM
Guest
No, this is not an example pertaining to the distinction of Divine Persons. There can be nothing that any of the Persons of the Godhead lacks in their knowledge.
On this question of Christ’s knowledge, especially relating to “that day and hour” one must remember that Christ is not only in the Nature of God, but of Man, and so in His human nature He is able to (and does) grow in the knowledge and wisdom that pertains to being a Man. So when addressed about “the End” we see Him limiting His answer to what He knows as Man, because this is information that is not for mankind to know, only to be prepared for. As St. Augustine said, “It was no part of His teaching duty to make it [the day of the General Judgment] known to us.”
- Status