SIXTH ARTICLE [II-II, Q. 8, Art. 6]

Whether the Gift of Understanding Is Distinct from the Other Gifts?

Objection 1: It would seem that the gift of understanding is not

distinct from the other gifts. For there is no distinction between

things whose opposites are not distinct. Now "wisdom is contrary to

folly, understanding is contrary to dulness, counsel is contrary to

rashness, knowledge is contrary to ignorance," as Gregory states

(Moral. ii, 49). But there would seem to be no difference between

folly, dulness, ignorance and rashness. Therefore neither does

understanding differ from the other gifts.

Obj. 2: Further, the intellectual virtue of understanding differs

from the other intellectual virtues in that it is proper to it to be

about self-evident principles. But the gift of understanding is not

about any self-evident principles, since the natural habit of first

principles suffices in respect of those matters which are naturally

self-evident: while faith is sufficient in respect of such things as

are supernatural, since the articles of faith are like first

principles in supernatural knowledge, as stated above (Q. 1, A. 7).

Therefore the gift of understanding does not differ from the other

intellectual gifts.

Obj. 3: Further, all intellectual knowledge is either speculative or

practical. Now the gift of understanding is related to both, as

stated above (A. 3). Therefore it is not distinct from the other

intellectual gifts, but comprises them all.

_On the contrary,_ When several things are enumerated together they

must be, in some way, distinct from one another, because distinction

is the origin of number. Now the gift of understanding is enumerated

together with the other gifts, as appears from Isa. 11:2. Therefore

the gift of understanding is distinct from the other gifts.

_I answer that,_ The difference between the gift of understanding and

three of the others, viz. piety, fortitude, and fear, is evident,

since the gift of understanding belongs to the cognitive power, while

the three belong to the appetitive power.

But the difference between this gift of understanding and the

remaining three, viz. wisdom, knowledge, and counsel, which also

belong to the cognitive power, is not so evident. To some [*William

of Auxerre, Sum. Aur. III, iii, 8], it seems that the gift of

understanding differs from the gifts of knowledge and counsel, in

that these two belong to practical knowledge, while the gift of

understanding belongs to speculative knowledge; and that it differs

from the gift of wisdom, which also belongs to speculative knowledge,

in that wisdom is concerned with judgment, while understanding

renders the mind apt to grasp the things that are proposed, and to

penetrate into their very heart. And in this sense we have assigned

the number of the gifts, above (I-II, Q. 68, A. 4).

But if we consider the matter carefully, the gift of understanding is

concerned not only with speculative, but also with practical matters,

as stated above (A. 3), and likewise, the gift of knowledge regards

both matters, as we shall show further on (Q. 9, A. 3), and

consequently, we must take their distinction in some other way. For

all these four gifts are ordained to supernatural knowledge, which,

in us, takes its foundation from faith. Now "faith is through

hearing" (Rom. 10:17). Hence some things must be proposed to be

believed by man, not as seen, but as heard, to which he assents by

faith. But faith, first and principally, is about the First Truth,

secondarily, about certain considerations concerning creatures, and

furthermore extends to the direction of human actions, in so far as

it works through charity, as appears from what has been said above

(Q. 4, A. 2, ad 3).

Accordingly on the part of the things proposed to faith for belief,

two things are requisite on our part: first that they be penetrated

or grasped by the intellect, and this belongs to the gift of

understanding. Secondly, it is necessary that man should judge these

things aright, that he should esteem that he ought to adhere to these

things, and to withdraw from their opposites: and this judgment, with

regard to Divine things belong to the gift of wisdom, but with regard

to created things, belongs to the gift of knowledge, and as to its

application to individual actions, belongs to the gift of counsel.

Reply Obj. 1: The foregoing difference between those four gifts is

clearly in agreement with the distinction of those things which

Gregory assigns as their opposites. For dulness is contrary to

sharpness, since an intellect is said, by comparison, to be sharp,

when it is able to penetrate into the heart of the things that are

proposed to it. Hence it is dulness of mind that renders the mind

unable to pierce into the heart of a thing. A man is said to be a

fool if he judges wrongly about the common end of life, wherefore

folly is properly opposed to wisdom, which makes us judge aright

about the universal cause. Ignorance implies a defect in the mind,

even about any particular things whatever, so that it is contrary to

knowledge, which gives man a right judgment about particular causes,

viz. about creatures. Rashness is clearly opposed to counsel, whereby

man does not proceed to action before deliberating with his reason.

Reply Obj. 2: The gift of understanding is about the first principles

of that knowledge which is conferred by grace; but otherwise than

faith, because it belongs to faith to assent to them, while it

belongs to the gift of understanding to pierce with the mind the

things that are said.

Reply Obj. 3: The gift of understanding is related to both kinds of

knowledge, viz. speculative and practical, not as to the judgment,

but as to apprehension, by grasping what is said.

_______________________

Summa Theologica, Part II-II (Secunda Secundae) Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province · 第 64 / 1128 题