FIRST ARTICLE [I-II, Q. 14, Art. 1]

Whether Counsel Is an Inquiry?

Objection 1: It would seem that counsel is not an inquiry. For

Damascene says (De Fide Orth. ii, 22) that counsel is "an act of

the appetite." But inquiry is not an act of the appetite. Therefore

counsel is not an inquiry.

Obj. 2: Further, inquiry is a discursive act of the intellect: for

which reason it is not found in God, Whose knowledge is not

discursive, as we have shown in the First Part (Q. 14, A. 7). But

counsel is ascribed to God: for it is written (Eph. 1:11) that "He

worketh all things according to the counsel of His will." Therefore

counsel is not inquiry.

Obj. 3: Further, inquiry is of doubtful matters. But counsel is given

in matters that are certainly good; thus the Apostle says (1 Cor.

7:25): "Now concerning virgins I have no commandment of the Lord: but

I give counsel." Therefore counsel is not an inquiry.

_On the contrary,_ Gregory of Nyssa [*Nemesius, De Nat. Hom. xxxiv.]

says: "Every counsel is an inquiry; but not every inquiry is a

counsel."

_I answer that,_ Choice, as stated above (Q. 13, A. 1, ad 2; A. 3),

follows the judgment of the reason about what is to be done. Now

there is much uncertainty in things that have to be done; because

actions are concerned with contingent singulars, which by reason of

their vicissitude, are uncertain. Now in things doubtful and

uncertain the reason does not pronounce judgment, without previous

inquiry: wherefore the reason must of necessity institute an inquiry

before deciding on the objects of choice; and this inquiry is called

counsel. Hence the Philosopher says (Ethic. iii, 2) that choice is

the "desire of what has been already counselled."

Reply Obj. 1: When the acts of two powers are ordained to one

another, in each of them there is something belonging to the other

power: consequently each act can be denominated from either power.

Now it is evident that the act of the reason giving direction as to

the means, and the act of the will tending to these means according

to the reason's direction, are ordained to one another. Consequently

there is to be found something of the reason, viz. order, in that act

of the will, which is choice: and in counsel, which is an act of

reason, something of the will--both as matter (since counsel is of

what man wills to do)--and as motive (because it is from willing the

end, that man is moved to take counsel in regard to the means). And

therefore, just as the Philosopher says (Ethic. vi, 2) that choice

"is intellect influenced by appetite," thus pointing out that both

concur in the act of choosing; so Damascene says (De Fide Orth. ii,

22) that counsel is "appetite based on inquiry," so as to show that

counsel belongs, in a way, both to the will, on whose behalf and by

whose impulsion the inquiry is made, and to the reason that executes

the inquiry.

Reply Obj. 2: The things that we say of God must be understood

without any of the defects which are to be found in us: thus in us

science is of conclusions derived by reasoning from causes to

effects: but science when said of God means sure knowledge of all

effects in the First Cause, without any reasoning process. In like

manner we ascribe counsel to God, as to the certainty of His

knowledge or judgment, which certainty in us arises from the inquiry

of counsel. But such inquiry has no place in God; wherefore in this

respect it is not ascribed to God: in which sense Damascene says (De

Fide Orth. ii, 22): "God takes not counsel: those only take counsel

who lack knowledge."

Reply Obj. 3: It may happen that things which are most certainly good

in the opinion of wise and spiritual men are not certainly good in

the opinion of many, or at least of carnal-minded men. Consequently

in such things counsel may be given.

________________________

Summa Theologica, Part I-II (Pars Prima Secundae) From the Complete American Edition · 第 104 / 746 题