Homily III. Colossians i. 15–18 “Who is the Image of the invisible God, the Firstborn of all creation: for in Him were all things created, in the heavens, and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers: all things have been created through Him, and unto Him; and He is before all things, and in Him all things consist. And He is the head of the body, the Church.” To-day it is necessary for me to pay the debt, which yesterday732 I deferred, in order that I might address it to your minds when in full force. Paul, discoursing as we showed of the dignity of the Son, says these words: “Who is the Image of the invisible God.” Whose image then wilt thou have Him be? God’s? Then he is exactly like the one to whom you assign Him. For if as a man’s image, say so, and I will have done with you as a madman. But if as God and God’s Son, God’s image, he shows the exact likeness. Wherefore hath no Angel anywhere been called either “image” or “son,” but man both? Wherefore? Because in the former case indeed the exaltedness of their nature might presently have thrust the many into this impiety733; but in the other case the mean and low nature is a pledge of security against this, and will not allow any, even should they desire it, to suspect anything of the kind, nor to bring down the Word so low. For this cause, where the meanness is great, the Scripture boldly asserts the honor, but where the nature is higher, it forbears. “The Image of the Invisible” is itself also invisible, and invisible in like manner, for otherwise it would not be an image. For an image, so far as it is an image, even amongst us, ought to be exactly similar, as, for example, in respect of the features and the likeness.734 But here indeed amongst us, this is by no means possible; for human art fails in many respects, or rather fails in all, if you examine with accuracy. But where God is, there is no error, no failure. But if a creature: how is He the Image of the Creator? For neither is a horse the image of a man. If “the Image” mean not exact likeness to the Invisible, what hinders the Angels also from being His Image? for they too are invisible; but not to one another: but the soul is invisible: but because it is invisible, it is simply on that account an image, and not in such sort as he and angels are images.735 732 See Hom. ii. § 3 fin. 733 Viz. Arianism. 734 χαρακτήρων καὶ ὁμοιώσεως. The argument is, that invisibleness being mentioned, the image must have it, as if one should say, “the picture of a venerable man,” one would understand a venerable expression in the features. Compare St. Athanasius against Arianism, Disc. 1, c. vi. § 20, Tr. and note d. [The argument is fine spun, and not convincing. The image must be of the same essence, or substance in this case; but an image cannot be invisible, otherwise it were not an image. Compare Meyer, and especially Lightfoot.—J.A.B.] 735 [The words, “and angels are images” are omitted by the common text, with several mss., but manifestly to escape an apparent difficulty, because it has been noticed above that angels are never called images.—J.A.B.] Colossians 1:15-18 476 Colossians 1:15-18