different species of the same nature. Just as the Gentiles, having deified images, served, as he says, the creature rather than the Creator, 39 instituting many gods and goddesses, dissimilar among themselves and even warring against one another—of whom not one was, or is, or shall be God. Nor were they reproved simply because they fashioned images, since even Moses, to omit others, represents also the Serpent and the Cherubim; and, when he was about to construct the whole tabernacle, he received from God the image of the entire work. For He says: "See that you make all things according to the pattern shown to you on the mount." 40 But it is because they considered and revered the very thing that was imaged as God, having established an infinite swarm of polytheism through ignorance of the only truly existing, one God, incorruptible and invisible. To them the divine Apostle says: "Being then the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and device of man." 41 This is what is meant by the aforementioned people making gods out of images. But for those B for whom there is one God the Father, of whom are all things, and one Lord Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and one Holy Spirit, in whom are all things, 42 it is not, O men, making gods to set up the image of the bodily form of Christ; God forbid! Rather, it is to confess that He appeared in a form like our own, as it is written: "Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God; but emptied Himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and found in fashion as a man. He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross." 43 Whose image is indeed not in the likeness of a corruptible man, which is what is condemned by the Apostle, but in the likeness of a man—as he himself has stated—but not C corruptible, rather incorruptible. For His soul was not left in hell, as the great Peter says, "neither did His flesh see corruption." 44 For Christ is not a mere man, but God become man, circumscribed indeed according to the form of the body, insofar as He was in the likeness of man, but remaining uncircumscribed according to the essence of His divinity, insofar as with the Father and the Spirit He is incomparable to all others.
For how shall the Word in the Economy appear, if He does not have, beyond His filial property, over and above the Father and the Spirit, a bodily character in which Christ may be imaged? So, those who fashion and adore the image of Christ are by no means to be judged as making gods out of images; God forbid, D good friend! For we do not say that we have a created god, but God incarnate; nor do we speak of two gods, but one in three persons. Nor, when we adore the image, do we impiously think to adore the matter in which it is imprinted; but rather that very likeness which, when it is imprinted in matter like a seal, exists by nature in Christ. For the impressions would be devoid of nature
A For images made by art do not have the same nature as their archetypes, but represent only the likeness of those things from which they are expressed, as if in a mirror. Otherwise, in the image of the cross, since it is exhibited in every kind of matter, we would be truly adoring any matter whatsoever. But away with this insanity! There is one power, one glory, and one adoration in both, as the great Basil cries out: since the likeness of the image and the archetype is not of two hypostases, but of one. For, apart from the difference of substance, the archetype and the image are one and the same, says the most wise Dionysius. So also in the case of the Theotokos. For we do not, when we fashion and adore her image, confess that we possess and worship a goddess in the manner of the Gentiles, but the Theotokos. And likewise also regarding the saints: we do not honor and worship many gods and goddesses, but one God and the servants of the one God, from whom proceeds and to whom returns the honor of all things. Do you not think that the holy ointment was poured out so that it might be a type of Christ? The holy table for His life-giving tomb? The shroud that is placed upon the table for the shroud in which He was wrapped and consigned to the tomb? The priestly lance for that with which His divine side was pierced? The sponge for that with which He was given drink when He was made to taste gall? The image of the cross for the life-giving wood? Take away all these, and if there is anything else by which divine things are represented; since you say that the very act of adoring anything, in addition to its being made an image for the type and honor of Christ, is the making of a god by those who fashion and adore it. But truly, those who say this are equal in impiety to the Gentiles, to whom that insanity is characteristic. For they indeed did not doubt that they were circumscribing God before the incarnation, when He was uncircumscribed; but to these people, after the incarnation, it is an obstinate [position] not to circumscribe Him, when He is circumscribed in body. C
II. To those who inquire why there is nothing written in the Gospel concerning the image of Christ.
These cavilers seem to me to be ignorant of the fact that, in the Gospels, some things are stated and declared directly, others obliquely; the Spirit having dispensed it thus, so that the acquisition of useful things might not be easy for the many, but that through the diligence and labor of inquiry we might gather more abundant fruits, which, being solid, may not be easily lost thereafter; and this is reasonably so. For if there were no searching, there would be no finding. We shall therefore demonstrate the point in question by a similar case. D There, somewhere, Peter says to Jesus: "Lord, if it be you, command me to come to you upon the waters." And He said: "Come." And Peter, descending from the boat, walked upon the waters to come to Jesus. But seeing the wind strong, he was afraid; and beginning to sink, he cried out saying: "Lord, save me." And immediately Jesus, extending His hand, took hold of him; and says to him: "O you of little faith, why did you doubt?" And when they had gone up into the boat, the wind ceased. [1] Peter is not said to have walked upon the waters again
after Jesus had taken hold of him; but indeed this has been indicated obliquely. For no one of sound mind would say that he was carried through the air, or dragged along by Jesus, until they both went up into the boat. A Come then, let us return to our subject, and consider with understanding what is being said. "There came," it says, "those who received the didrachma to Peter, and said: Does not your master pay the didrachma? He says, Yes." And when they had entered the house, Jesus prevented him, saying: "What seems best to you, Simon? The kings of the earth, from whom do they take taxes or tribute? From their sons, or from outsiders? Peter says to him, From outsiders. Jesus said to him, Then the sons are free. But lest we should scandalize them, go to the sea, and cast a hook; and take the first fish that comes up; and having opened its mouth you will find a stater; that taking, give to them for me and thee." The words, therefore, "for me and thee," B obliquely signify: for the image of me and thee. Not only because these pronouns are demonstrative of persons—for persons are images—but because each of the tax-payers, in addition to his own image, offers an imperial image for the census to Caesar, which is called a capitation tax. For a head is nothing other than an image. And this is manifest from the Lord's words: "Why do you tempt me? Bring me a denarius, that I may see." And they brought it; and he says to them: "Whose is this image and inscription? And they said, Caesar's." And Jesus answering said to them: "Render the things of Caesar to Caesar, and the things of God to God." And He, having set himself C among those under the hand as a man, paid the didrachma just as every other person did for his own image; that is, with Peter, the stater. For the stater is two didrachmas. But whether it is a stater, or a didrachma, or a denarius, it bears the image of him whose inscription it bears and has. As then we said that it is stated there by implication that Peter walked again upon the waters, and it cannot but have been so; so in this place, when He says "for me and thee," it is possible for those who are not completely dull to understand, even though it is not stated, the image of Christ, just as also of Peter. I omit to say that the image is naturally present in Christ D everywhere. For where there is the prototype, there, by reason of correspondence, there is also the derivative. For these things are relative, and conjoined to one another. But that must be said by me in addition to what has been said above: that the image which He paid to Caesar as tribute, He Himself also secretly fashioned. How? That it was not automatically, or rather by happenstance—for this is human—that the fish swallowed the stater, but rather that it is more pious to believe that by the nod of God, to whom nothing is impossible, the stater was created within the belly of the fish at the same moment He commanded it. For this is worthy of God. For He said, it says, and they were generated; He commanded, and they were created.
A
III.
To those who say that, since there is no image of man in heaven, but only the figure of the cross, this alone ought to be worshipped.God, who knows all things before they come to be, showing forth the mystery of His dispensation in the flesh before the foundation of the world, represented the cross in heaven through the stars, and Himself on earth through the formation of Adam, who, according to the word of the blessed Paul, is the type of Him who was to come. For it was fitting, it was fitting that He who is from heaven should be represented on earth, and he who is from the earth should be represented in heaven, so that it might appear to those who contemplate them that heavenly things would henceforth be one with earthly things. Otherwise, it would not have been right for the image of man to be seen in heaven; since, even though there was none, men still worshipped the stars in error; how much more so, if they had seen a human form there. Wherefore the great B Moses says: *Lest, looking up to heaven and seeing the sun and the moon and the stars, and all the host of heaven, you should be seduced and worship them and serve them* (Deut. iv, 19). Therefore, before the advent of Christ, the figure of the cross, among the other stellar configurations, was in no way to be worshipped. For if the prototype was at that time despised, surely the image could not be otherwise. But from the time that Christ suffered for the sake of men in the archetype of the cross, the image of the cross is venerable and life-giving, even that which is seen in heaven; just as the image of the Sufferer Himself, which is seen everywhere on earth, was venerable wherever it had been expressed before, unless perhaps in some place a hand of an Iconoclast, anticipating their heresy, imitated the Jews. Therefore, the figure of the cross should not be honored C because it existed in heaven, but because of the life-giving wood which was sanctified when Christ hung upon it; just as the image of Christ is not worshipped because it was expressed beforehand in Adam, but because He Himself assumed human nature from the Virgin.
D
IV.
To those who object that the priest, when he signs the infants offered to him, does not use an image, but the figure of the cross.The priest, standing as a mediator between God and men, in his priestly invocations, is a representation of Christ. For the Apostle says: *For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus* (I Tim. ii, 5). Since, therefore, he is an image of Christ, he necessarily uses not an image (for how could an image use an image of its own archetype?), but the figure of the cross, imitating Christ, to be sure. For just as He *stripped the principalities and powers, exposing them confidently, triumphing over them* (Coloss. ii, 15) in the cross, as it is written: so also this one, by the figure of the cross, as a type of Christ (for type and image are the same in regard to representation), effects the salvation of the child. Wherefore here, too, an image of Christ—namely, the priestly dignity—is employed.
[V]
Against those who object that every one, by using the type of the cross and not an image, drives away both sickness and the demon.
The present problem has the same answer as the preceding one. How and in what way? Because every one of the faithful, through the laver of regeneration and the renewal of the Holy Spirit, becomes conformed to the image of Jesus of God, according to what was said by the Apostle. And in another place: "A man ought not to cover his head, for he is the image and glory of God." To which the chief of the Apostles adds: "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation." So that each one may become a minister of holy things for himself, according to conscience, unto those things which are of salvation. Yet, because the believer is an image, it does not follow that it is useless for the image of Christ to be depicted on a tablet. For the image and likeness which exists through divine generation pertains to the inner man. For how could Christ be similar in the form of His body to men, who are infinitely dissimilar to one another in form? Only that which is made by art, and which bears the proper marks of the bodily species or form, and all other recognizable exterior signs, is and is called an image of Christ. This same thing one may see in the type of the life-giving cross. For when the Apostle says, "I have been crucified with Christ," he clearly does not mean that he has crucified himself in a sensible way, nor by employing a sensible type of the cross; but rather according to the inner man, and by an intelligible cross—I mean, the mortifying activity of the passions. And this becomes clearer from the Lord’s saying: "Take up your cross and come, follow me." Therefore, just as here both the cross and the crucifixion are twofold, so also is it in the image of Christ: there is the artificial one, and that which the believer receives in himself according to the inner man.
[VI]
Against those who bring forward against the image of Christ that saying of the Theologian: "That which is to be worshiped is in no way circumscribed."
Those who say this, say it because they do not know the force of ambiguous terms, or rather, because they have not wished to understand, so as to act rightly. For this term, "worshiped," is equivocal, pertaining to different meanings; just as, for example, the name "light" is indeed taken of the sun’s radiance, but is also said of man. For a man is called light. If, therefore, I say, "The light is not a man," it is true. For I have taken it to mean the sun. But if again I say, "The man is light," it is also true; for I have taken it to mean the man. And in neither case is there a lie, because of the different acceptance in those two. Thus, therefore, even regarding the term "worshiped," the word is equivocal and is understood in two ways: at one time concerning the uncircumscribed, and at another time concerning the circumscribed. Therefore, it was said by the Father, when discoursing on the divine nature: "That which is to be worshiped is in no way circumscribed," for the refutation of those who attempted to limit the Divinity within circumscription. And this is true. It was not, however, his intention to speak about the dispensation.
they include, he would refute; and he spoke truly. Nor indeed was the discourse at that time about the economy; for another is the reason of theology, another of the economy, nor is it permitted to determine the same thing in both cases. Indeed, the divine Cyril uses the word "hypostasis" now for nature, now for person, for there is a twofold acceptance of that word. And because he is not ignorant that what is circumscribed can be worshipped, he says: “Adore the manger, in which, when you were devoid of reason, you were nourished by the Word.” But that which is worshipped is, assuredly, worthy of veneration. I omit to speak of the Lord’s body: is it not circumscribed? What discourse could contradict [this]? Or how could it not be worthy of veneration? The very stones might proclaim it. What, then, will you say of the life-giving cross? Of the antitype? Of the altar? Of the divine table? Of the undefiled Gospel, or any other sacred instrument? Are not the relics of the saints themselves all circumscribed? They are, indeed; and yet they are to be venerated, just as is the image of Christ, as the Fathers of the sixth holy synod attest with one voice in certain writings where they treated of sacred images. B
Ⅶ. Concerning those who proffer against the image of Christ that which was said by Saint Gregory: “If anyone worships a creature, even if he does it in the name of Christ, he commits idolatry.”
This saying was directed against the Arians, who maintained that the Son of God was a creature. But we, since in worshipping the image of Christ we have in mind, according to the orthodox opinion, the worship of Christ Himself, with one adoration common to both, not differing due to a diversity of substance, but unified on account of the unity of person: we do not worship a creature, God forbid! C Since Christ is not a creature, even if there is in Him something created; because this is overcome, as they say, by that which is more excellent. Do not look anymore at the matter from which it has been separated by thought, even if it is seen in it as in a mirror (and I say this again) through the image. But if you say that you do not grasp this, O, you who have only the eyes of the body, you are like that blind pig to which God and Reason have forbidden casting the pearls of the words of truth.