Chapter XVII.

Christ acted for our advantage in being unwilling to reveal the day of judgment. This is made plain by other words of our Lord and by a not dissimilar passage from Paul’s writings. Other passages in which the same ignorance seems to be attributed to the Father are brought forward to meet those who are anxious to know why Christ answered His disciples, as though He did not know. From these Ambrose argues against them that if they admit ignorance and inability in the Father, they must admit that the same Substance exists in the Son as in the Father; unless they prefer to accuse the Son of falsehood; since it belongs neither to Him nor to the Father to deceive, but the unity of both is pointed out in the passage named.

208. But we ask for what reason He was unwilling to state the time. If we ask it, we shall not find it is owing to ignorance, but to wisdom. For it was not to our advantage to know; in order that we being ignorant of the actual moments of judgment to come, might ever be as it were on guard, and set on the watch-tower of virtue, and so avoid the habits of sin; lest the day of the Lord should come upon us in the midst of our wickedness. For it is not to our advantage to know but rather to fear the future; for it is written: “Be not high-minded but fear.”1128    Rom. xi. 20.

209. For if He had distinctly stated the day, he would seem to have laid down a rule of life for that one age which was nearest to the judgment, and the just man in the earlier times would be more negligent, and the sinner more free from care. For the adulterer cannot cease from the desire of committing adultery unless he fears punishment day by day, nor can the robber forsake the hiding places in the woods where he dwells, unless he knows punishment is hanging over him day by day. For impurity generally spurs them on, but fear is irksome to the end.

210. Therefore I have said that it was not to our advantage to know; nay, it is to our advantage to be ignorant, that through ignorance we might fear, through watchfulness be corrected, as He Himself said: “Be ye ready, for ye know not at what hour the Son of Man cometh.”1129    S. Matt. xxiv. 44. For the soldier does not know how to watch in the camp unless he knows that war is at hand.

211. Wherefore at another time also the Lord Himself when asked by his Apostles (Yes, for they did not understand it as Arius did, but believed that the Son of God knew the future. For unless they had believed this, they would never have asked the question.)—the Lord, I say, when asked when He would restore the kingdom to Israel, did not say that He did not know, but says: “It is not for you to know the times or years, which the Father hath put in His own power.”1130    Acts i. 7. Mark what He said: It is not for you to know! Read again, “It is not for you.” “For you,” He said, not “for Me,” for now He spoke not according to His own perfection but as was profitable to the human body and our soul. “For you” therefore He said, not “for Me.”

212. Which example the Apostle also followed: “But of the times and seasons, brethren,” he says, “ye have no need that I write unto you.”1131    1 Thess. v. 1. Thus not even the Apostle himself, the servant of Christ, said that he knew not the seasons, but that there was no need for the people to be taught; for they ought ever to be armed with spiritual armour, that the virtue of Christ may stand forth in each one. But when the Lord says: “Of the times which the Father hath put in His own power,”1132    Acts i. 7. He certainly cannot be without a share in His Father’s knowledge, in whose power He is by no means without a share. For power grows out of wisdom and virtue; and Christ is both of these.

213. But you ask, why did He not refuse His disciples as one who knew, but would not say; and, why did He state instead that neither the angels nor the Son knew?1133    S. Mark xiii. 32. I too will ask you why God says in Genesis: “I will go down now, and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry that is come unto Me. And if not, that I may know.”1134    Gen. xviii. 21. Why does Scripture also say of God: “And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the sons of men builded.”1135    Gen. xi. 5. Why also does the prophet say in the Book of the Psalms: “The Lord looked down upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and that did seek God”?1136    Ps. liii. 2. Just as though in one place, if God had not descended, and in the other, if He had not looked down, He would have been ignorant either of men’s work or of their merits.

214. But in the Gospel of Luke also thou hast the same, for the Father says: “What shall I do? I will send My beloved Son; it may be that they will reverence Him.”1137    S. Luke xx. 13. In Matthew and in Mark thou hast: “But He sent His only Son, saying: they will reverence My Son;”1138    S. Matt. xxi. 37. In one book He says: “It may be that they will reverence My Son;”1139    S. Mark xii. 6. and is in doubt as though He does not know; for this is the language of one in doubt. But in the two other books He says: “They will reverence My Son;” that is, He declares that reverence will be shown.

215. But God can neither be in doubt, nor can He be deceived. For he only is in doubt, who is ignorant of the future; and he is deceived, who has predicted one thing, whilst another has happened. Yet what is plainer than the fact that Scripture states the Father to have said one thing of the Son, and that the same Scripture proves another think to have taken place? The Son was beaten, He was mocked, was crucified, and died.1140    S. Matt. xxvii. 29 ff. He suffered much worse things in the flesh than those servants who had been appointed before. Was the Father deceived, or was He ignorant of it, or was He unable to give help? But He that is true cannot make a mistake; for it is written: “God is faithful Who doth not lie.”1141    Tit. i. 2. How was He ignorant, Who knows all? What could He not do, Who could do all?

216. Yet if either He was ignorant, or had not power (for you would sooner agree to say that the Father did not know than own that the Son knows), you see from this very fact that the Son is of one Substance with the Father; seeing that the Son like the Father (to speak in accordance with your foolish ideas) does not know all things, and cannot do all things. For I am not so eager or rash in giving praise to the Son as to dare to say that the Son can do more than the Father; for I make no distinction of power between the Father and the Son.

217. But perhaps you say that the Father did not say so, but that the Son erred about the Father. So now you convict the Son not only of weakness, but also of blasphemy and lying. However if you do not believe the Son with regard to the Father, neither may you believe Him with regard to that. For if He wished to deceive us in saying that the Father was in doubt as though He knew not what would take place, He wished also to deceive us about Himself in saying that He did not know the future. It would be far more endurable for Him to stretch the veil of ignorance in front of that which He does of His own accord, than that He should seem to be deluded by a result contrary to what He had foretold in the things He had declared of His Father.

218. But neither is the Father deceived, not does the Son deceive. It is the custom of the holy Scriptures to speak thus, as the examples I have already given, and many others testify, so that God feigns not to know what He does know. In this then a unity of Godhead, and a unity of character is proved to exist in the Father and in the Son; seeing that, as God the Father hides what is known to Him, so also the Son, Who is the image of God in this respect, hides what is known to Him.

589 CAPUT XVII.

Quod Christus diem judicii revelare noluerit, in hoc nostrae utilitati consultum esse. Illud alia Domini sententia declaratur; nec non et Pauli loco plane simili. Urgentibus vero cur ita responderit discipulis ac si nescisset, alii loci quibus Patri eadem tribui videtur ignoratio, opponuntur: ex quibus si ignorantiam impotentiamve in Patre illi admittant, hinc in Filio eamdem quae in Patre substantiam admittendam esse contra ipsos arguit Ambrosius; nisi tamen malint mendacii accusare Filium; cum neque in hunc neque in Patrem cadat fallere, sed memoratis locis utriusque unitas designetur.

209. Sed quaerimus qua ratione designare momenta noluerit (Luc. XIX, 43). Si quaeramus, non 0691C ignorantiae inveniemus esse, sed sapientiae. Nobis enim scire non proderat; ut dum certa futuri judicii momenta nescimus, semper tamquam in excubiis constituti, et in quadam virtutis specula collocati, peccandi consuetudinem declinemus; ne nos inter vitia dies Domini deprehendat. Non enim prodest scire, sed metuere quod futurum est; scriptum est enim: Noli alta sapere, sed time (Rom. XI, 20).

216. Nam si diem designasset expresse, uni aetati hominum quae proxima erat judicio, videretur disciplinam praescripsisse vivendi; superioris temporis aut justus esset remissior, aut peccator securior. Namque adulter nisi quotidianam poenam metuat, non potest ab adulterandi cupiditate desinere: nec latro obsessorum saltuum secreta deserere, nisi 0691D sciat sibi momentis omnibus imminere supplicium. Plerumque enim quibus incentivum est impunitas, timor taedio est.

211. Ideo ergo dixi quia scire non proderat, immo proderat ignorare; ut ignorantes timeremus, ut observantes emendaremur, sicut ipse dixit: Estote parati, quia nescitis qua hora Filius hominis venturus est (Matth. XXIV, 44). Namque miles nisi bellum in 0692A manibus esse cognoscat, praetendere non novit in castris.

212. Unde alibi quoque ipse Dominus interrogatus ab apostolis, inquam, qui utique non sicut Arius intelligebant, sed Filium Dei futura scire credebant; nam nisi hoc credidissent, numquam interrogassent: interrogatus ergo quando restitueret regnum Israel, non se nescire dixit, sed ait: Non est vestrum scire tempora et annos, quae Pater posuit in sua potestate (Act. I, 7). Attende quid dixerit: Non est vestrum scire. Lege iterum: Non est vestrum. Vestrum dixit, non meum; jam enim non secundum perfectionem, sed secundum profectum humani corporis ac nostrae animae loquebatur. Vestrum ergo dixit, non meum.

213. Quod et Apostolus secutus: De temporibus 0692Bautem et momentis, fratres, non habetis, inquit, opus ut vobis scribamus (I Thess. V, 1). Itaque ne Apostolus quidem ipse Christi servus dixit se nescire momenta, sed non opus esse doceri populum 590 qui semper spiritalibus munimentis esse debet armatus; ut virtus Christi in unoquoque praetendat. Cum autem dicit Dominus: De temporibus quae Pater posuit in sua potestate, utique non potest exsors esse scientiae paternae, cujus nequaquam exsors est potestatis; cum potestas ex sapientia et virtute gignatur, quod utrumque Christus est.

214. Sed quaeritis qua causa non ita discipulis negaverit, quasi sciret et nollet dicere: sed neque Angelos, neque Filium scire memoraverit (Marc. XIII, 32)? Interrogabo vos et ego, qua causa in Genesi 0692C Deus dicat: Descendam itaque, ut videam secundum clamorem illorum venientem ad me, si consummabuntur: sin autem, ut sciam (Gen. XVIII, 21)? Qua causa etiam Scriptura de Domino dicat: Et descendit Dominus videre civitatem et turrim, quam aedificarent filii hominum (Gen. XI, 5)? Qua causa etiam dicat Propheta in Psalterio: Dominus respexit super filios hominum, si est intelligens, aut requirens Deum (Psal. LII, 3); quasi et illic si non descenderet Deus, et hic si non prospiceret Dominus, aut opera hominum ignoraret aut merita?

215. Sed etiam in Evangelio habes secundum Lucam, quia Pater dicit: Quid faciam? Mittam Filium meum dilectissimum, forsitan hunc verebuntur (Luc. XX, 13). Secundum Matthaeum, autem, et secundum 0692D Marcum habes: Quoniam misit unicum Filium suum, dicens: Verebuntur Filium meum (Matt. XXI, 37; Marc. XII, 6). In uno libro dicit: Forsitan verebuntur, et quasi nesciens dubitat; nam hic sermo dubitantis est: in duobus autem aliis libris: Verebuntur, inquit, Filium meum; hoc est, confirmat reverentiam deferendam.

216. Sed neque dubitare Dei est, neque falli; dubitat 0693A enim, qui ignorat quod futurum est: fallitur autem, qui aliud praedixit, et aliud est secutum. Quid autem evidentius, quam quod Scriptura habet aliud Patrem dixisse de Filio, et aliud accidisse eadem Scriptura testatur? Ille dixit: Verebuntur Filium meum: Filius autem vapulavit, illusus est, crucifixus est, mortuus est (Matth. XXVII, 29 et seq.); multoque illis servis qui prius fuerant destinati, graviora secundum carnem passus est. Fefellit igitur Pater, an ignoravit, vel subvenire non potuit? Sed verus nescit fallere; scriptum est enim: Fidelis Deus qui non mentitur (Tit. I, 2). Quomodo autem ignoravit, qui novit omnia (Dan. XIII, 42)? Aut quid non potuit, qui omnia potest?

217. Tamen si aut ignoravit, aut non potuit (facilius 0693B enim acquiescitis, ut dicatis Patrem ignorasse, quam confiteamini Filium scisse), videtis quia ex hoc ipso unius substantiae est Filius cum Patre; si quemadmodum Pater, ita et Filius, ut secundum vestram insipientiam loquar, aut non omnia novit, aut non omnia potest. Non sum enim avarus aut praeceps circa Filii laudes, ut plus audeam dicere Filium posse quam Patrem, qui nullam inter Patrem et Filium discretionem facio potestatis.

218. Sed fortasse dicatis, non ita dixisse Patrem, sed de Patre Filium fefellisse. Jam ergo 591 non solum infirmitatis Filium, sed etiam sacrilegii et mendacii arguitis. Verumtamen si non creditis de Patre Filio, nec de eo credatis; si enim fallere nos voluit, quia dixit dubitasse Patrem, quasi nesciret quod esset futurum: fallere ergo etiam de se nos 0693C voluit, quia futura nescire se dixit; multoque tolerabilius ad pudorem, si ignorantiam ante praetendit, quod de se facit, quam si contrario promissis lusus videatur effectu, quod de Patre praedicavit.

219. Sed neque fallitur Pater, neque fallit Filius: verum ea est in Scripturis consuetudo divinis, sicut et superiora, et multa alia exempla testantur, ut Deus dissimulet se nescire quod novit. Et in hoc ergo unitas divinitatis, et unitas dispositionis in Patre probatur et Filio, si quemadmodum Deus Pater cognita dissimulat, ita Filius etiam in hoc imago Dei, quae sibi sunt nota dissimulet.