Scotus Academicus, Tomus quintus: De Creaturarum Corporalium et de Homine

Note 1. From the Seraphic Doctor in 2. dist. 16. art. 1. qu. 1., there are four kinds of likeness among things: The first is by an agreement of every sort in nature: and thus one Person in the Trinity is like another. The second, by participation of some universal nature: as man and ass are assimilated in animal. The third indeed, according to proportion, as a Pilot and a Charioteer agree by comparison with those things which they govern. The fourth is a likeness by agreement of order, as the exemplified is assimilated to the exemplar. Now it is certain that by the two prior modes no creature can be assimilated to God: but it can be made like Him by the two posterior modes; and that either imperfectly and remissly, and so it is a vestige; or proximately and perfectly, and so it is an image.

Note 2. That this is the difference between the notion of Image and of likeness: that an image, says the Doctor in 1. dist. 3. qu. 4. num. 2., is representative of the whole: but a vestige is representative only of a part: For if, he says, the whole body were impressed upon dust, as the foot is impressed, there would be left there the image of the whole, as a footprint is the image of the foot, and the vestige of the whole. Yet that expressive conformity of the whole does not suffice for the notion of image, but imitation is required, because according to Augustine book 83. questions q. 74., whichever two things are alike, one is not the image of the other, because it is not born to imitate it: and likewise it is required that the image be born to imitate that of which it is the image. Therefore it is necessary that something be truly said to be the image of another when it bears in itself that thing's likeness expressed from that very thing; I say likeness, either according to species, as the image of a King is in his son: or certainly according to some accident proper to that species: especially indeed according to figure, as the image of a King is said to be either depicted on a tablet, or expressed in silver, or any other matter whatever. But the likeness of species ought to be regarded according to the last grade and difference of the thing. Things therefore destitute of reason and intelligence can indeed be assimilated to God according to existence, life, and the lowest mode of knowing, which is through the senses: but they in no wise attain the supreme grade of mind and intelligence, in which grade nevertheless the notion of the likeness between God and man properly consists.

Note 3. Those words of Genesis chapter one: Let us make man to our own image and likeness, according to the genuine signification of the Hebrew tongue designate a shadowy likeness, that is, a deficient and passing likeness: for the words Selem and Demuth, which the Hebrews use to signify the notion of image and likeness, also signify shadow and defect. Therefore God willed by these words to signify that man was made like unto God, as great a likeness as there can be between a craftsman and such a work: but because God is of infinite perfection, therefore it was necessary that the likeness of God which is in man be by infinite degrees inferior in beauty and excellence to the divine Archetype. Even as a shadow is indeed a likeness and image of the body whose shadow it is, yet obscure and imperfect. Whence man in Sacred Scripture is said to vanish away after the manner of a shadow. Thus Psalm 38: Surely man passeth in the image, that is, quickly passes away after the manner of a shadow swiftly vanishing: and that place of Psalm 101: My days are declined like a shadow, and I am withered like grass: and that of Psalm 108: I am taken away as with a shadow when it declineth.

These things premised, two things are to be resolved in the present Question: First indeed, that the rational soul was formed to the image and likeness of God: Second, it must be opened up whether, and what be the difference between the notion of the image and of the likeness of God.

First Conclusion. — TRULY MAN IS FORMED TO THE IMAGE AND LIKENESS OF GOD. This truth is most constant in Sacred Scripture, in which nothing is handed down more often than that man was formed to the image and likeness of God: especially indeed in the first and second chapters of the book of Genesis.

The Seraphic Doctor praised in the first place cited proves this conclusion, from the twofold agreement, namely of order and of proportion, which man has with God. — First indeed, concerning the agreement of order he thus speaks: God wrought all things for His own sake, in such wise that, since He made all things for His praise: since He is the highest light, He made all things for His manifestation: since He is the highest goodness, He made all things for His communication. But praise is not perfect unless he who approves be present: neither is manifestation perfect unless he who understands be present: nor the communication of goods perfect unless he who can use them be present. And since to approve praise, to know truth, to assume gifts into use belongs to none but the rational creature alone, therefore the irrational creatures themselves have not to be ordered immediately to God, but through the medium of the rational creature. But the rational creature itself, because of itself it is born to praise, and to know, and to assume other things into the faculty of the will, is likewise born to be ordered into God immediately. Moreover, since the more immediately anything is ordered to anything, the more it agrees with it in the agreement of order; therefore the rational soul, and any rational creature whatsoever, because it is capable of God and can be a partaker of Him, is ordered immediately into Him, and agrees most of all with Him in the agreement of order. And furthermore, because the greater the agreement, the more expressive is the likeness: hence it is that with respect to this genus of likeness, the rational creature is the expressed likeness of God; and therefore it is an image. And this is what St. Augustine says in book 11. De Trinitate, So far is the soul the image of God, as it is capable of Him, and can be a partaker of Him; for because it is ordered to Him immediately, therefore it is capable of Him, or conversely: because it is capable, it is born to be conformed to Him; and therefore it bears in itself from its origin the light of the divine countenance; and therefore with respect to the likeness, which is attended to with respect to the agreement of order, it is perfectly called the image of God, because in this it is assimilated to Him expressly. — Second, the same proves it concerning the agreement of proportion; for the agreement of proportion, he says, is attended to according to a like manner of being disposed; but to be similarly disposed can come about in a twofold way: either in comparison with extrinsics: or in comparison with intrinsics. Then is the likeness expressed, when there is not only a like mode of being disposed in comparison with extrinsics; but also in comparison with intrinsics; but the irrational creature is compared to God only extrinsically, namely by comparison of effect to cause from which it is produced: but the rational creature is compared also with respect to intrinsics, namely with respect to spirituality in entity, the power of understanding and of willing in faculty, etc.; and therefore it has a greater proportion with God, and so is His image.

But why God brought forth man to His own image and likeness, various moral reasons are adduced by various Authors; which Pererius gathers together and explains expressly lib. 1. in Genesim quaest. 8. Of these the First is, that it might be evident how great is the interval between the goodness and benignity of God and the malice and envy of man. For if a man excel in some respect, as riches, power, nobility, honors, and wisdom, no one would wish any other men to be equal to him in that respect, or even similar: but the goodness of God is so great, and so utterly devoid of envy, that in those things wherein He excels He made man himself capable and partaker of them, and in whatsoever ways man could be like unto God, in all these He made man like unto Himself: for He made him like unto Himself according to nature, advancing him to the highest grade of nature in which He Himself is, namely by giving him a partaker of reason. Then secondly as to supernatural and divine goods, by making him by His grace, wisdom, and felicity a partaker and consorter. Finally by joining the nature of man to the Word in the unity of the divine person: so that not only is man like unto God, but God is even named and is.

Second cause: that all bodily things might reverence man, as bearing in himself so illustrious and express an image of God, the Maker and Dominator of all: thus God said Genes. 9.: Your fear and dread shall be upon all the beasts of the earth, and upon all the fowls of the air, etc. Lest Heaven and the stars should disdain to serve man, or even the Angels to minister to him. Finally lest the demons should dare to injure man, and lest all creatures should rise up against him on account of man's rebellion against God, God willed to mark and adorn man with His own image. The figure of this thing was that which is read in the book of Genesis cap. 4., that God set a sign upon Cain, lest anyone finding him should see the sign of God in him and dare to kill him. And as the Egyptians honored, nay worshipped Joseph the Patriarch, and the Persians and Medes Mardocheus the Jew, because the one bore the insignia of the kings of Egypt, and the other of the Persians and Medes, so all creatures worship and reverence man marked and adorned with the effigy of God.

Third cause: God had given all things to man, yet He willed man Himself nonetheless to belong to the divine right and possession: wherefore that it might be acknowledged that man is something proper and peculiar to God, He sealed him with the seal of His own image so deeply and throughout his whole course, that without prejudice to the nature of man that signet could by no means be taken away. Even as that most noble Phidias is said to have made the Shield of Minerva, and to have enclosed his own effigy in it with such art, that it could not be taken out while the Shield remained whole. Man therefore bears the image of God as the son of his Father, to whom he owes love and piety: as the bondslave of his Lord, whom he ought to fear and revere: as the soldier of his Leader and emperor, to whom he ought to render faith and obedience: finally as the minister and dispenser of the goods of his heir and lord, to whom he ought to exhibit the right use of the creatures which are committed to his dispensation.

Fourth cause: even as, because no animal was found like unto Adam with which he could have society, friendship, and familiarity, God created Eve as his companion; so, all bodily things having been created, none of which was like unto God, and with which God could enter into society and familiarity, He made man like unto Himself, that he might be one whom God would love, and by whom He would in turn be loved with the love of friendship. And indeed concerning other things, when God discerned them made by Himself, He is said to have approved them; God saw, says Scripture, all the things that He had made, and they were very good: but of man God spoke far otherwise by Solomon Proverbs 8., saying: My delights were with the sons of men. Therefore God praised and approved the rest as good; but the unique man He willed to love as a friend, and as it were to hold familiarity with him, and to be his consorter in His own felicity. Therefore deservedly Job cap. 7., admiring so great a benevolence and benignity of God toward man, exclaimed: What is man, that thou dost magnify him, and again settest thy heart toward him? Thou visitest him early in the morning, etc. That visiting denotes the society, conversation, and familiarity of God with man: but that setting thy heart toward him signifies the love of friendship whereby God deigns to embrace man. Truly we can rightly answer Job's admiration, that God visits man, and sets His heart toward him, because God made man to His own image and likeness: for likeness conciliates love, and glues together friendship.

Fifth cause: all things created by God and contained within the compass of the world lead man contemplating them as is fitting, to the knowledge of God their maker. For the invisible things of God, as Paul testifies, from the creation of the world are seen, being understood by the things that are made, His eternal power also and divinity. But lest man should be compelled to seek and ask the knowledge of God outside himself and from afar, God placed within man, in his very mind, the most beautiful effigy and image of Himself, which alone would declare more expressively than all other things together the power and nature of God. Man therefore contemplating within himself this image of God, knows through it what manner of being God is; for because the mind of man is like unto God, such as the mind is imperfectly, such one ought to judge God to be perfectly, with imperfection removed. And therefore as our mind is, so is God intelligent, endued with free will, full of virtue, grace, and wisdom, preserving, ruling, and containing the world, even as the mind its own body.

Sixth cause: therefore was man made to the image of God, that man might in a manner be capable as it were of eternity, infinity, and Divinity: and never should there be so great a good that man would not dare to ask it of God, and hope that he should obtain it from Him; for we can confidently say to God: Lord, fill with Thy goods the boundless capacity of our mind and will, which Thou hast given us: for if Thou sufferest not anything to be empty in nature, but willest all places to be occupied and filled with bodies, how much less is it to be thought that Thou wouldest have anything empty in our mind? Do Thou therefore who alone canst fulfill our desire with good things, fill our will, which nothing besides Thee alone can fulfill and satisfy. Therefore even as a vessel endowed with round figure cannot be filled on every side except by a body similarly rounded, so neither can the mind of man fashioned to the image of God be filled and satisfied except by God alone, to whom it is like.

Seventh cause: even as a King, when a city has been founded by him, places his image in a celebrated spot in the midst thereof, wrought out of some choice and precious material, that it may be manifest to all beholding it who was the founder of that city: so God, when the world had been fabricated by Him, placed His effigy in the midst of this, that is, man, who is a certain medium between the things created by God, that from the aspect and contemplation of him it may lie open and manifest to all what manner of maker and craftsman the fabricator of this world was. And as Apelles, overtaken by death, could not finish the statue of Venus which he had begun, nor afterward was any painter found who could succeed to the work according to the prescribed lineaments; for the beauty of the face took away the hope of imitating the rest of the body, as Cicero relates in the exordium of book 3. De Officiis, and Pliny book 35. c. 10.; in like manner God gave to man His own image by creation, but imperfect, which nevertheless no other thing besides God, not even man himself, nor even an Angel, could polish and finish. For this is proper to God, who polishes and adorns that image which He began by creation, through justification, and finishes and consummates it through glorification. Therefore as he would be held guilty of lèse-majesté, and worthy of the extreme penalty, who should cast down and injuriously treat the king's image placed in a public and celebrated spot: so he who by crimes defiles and stains the image of God placed and expressed in himself, and destroys and blots it out as far as lies in him, merits most grievous punishments as it were injurious and contumelious toward God. — Here St. Chrysostom lucidly weighs all things homil. 42. on caput. 22. Matth., where weighing those words: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, he says: The image of God is not depicted in gold, but figured in men. The coin of Caesar is gold: the coin of God is man. Wherefore let us always render our image unblemished to God. Not swollen with the pride of haughtiness, not enfeebled with the fury of anger, not inflamed with the blasts of avarice, not devoted to the allurements of gluttony, not contracted with the duplicity of hypocrisy, not contaminated with the filth of luxury, not fierce with the extension of elation, not maddened by the trumpet of envy, not bereft of mutual charity by discord, not pestiferous with the bitingness of detraction, not vain with the emptiness of much speaking: but preeminent in charity, most sure in faith and hope, most strong in the virtue of patience, tranquil in humility, purpled in chastity, sober in frugality, pleasing in tranquillity, adorned with hospitality. He adds: As he who renders to Caesar an adulterine image is commanded to be scourged by torturers and subjected to atrocious punishments: so God omnipotent will deliver the corruptors of His image to perpetual death, and commands infernal punishments to be paid. Whoever therefore desires to avoid horrendous destructions, let him study to preserve incorrupt the image of his maker: so that when God shall require His image which He formed, seeing it sated and immune from the infestations of the enemy, He may place him in His bosom, mingling him with the choirs of Angels, and make him enjoy the everlasting joys of heaven.

You will object 1. Wherever there is an image, there is likeness; and wherever there is likeness, there is some identity: but wherever there is identity, there is agreement in some third thing; therefore if God and creature do not agree in some third thing, the creature cannot be the likeness of God, and so neither the image. — The Seraphic Doctor answers, that the likeness which is in an image is not attended to through identity, or participation of the same nature, but through agreement in order and proportion: which likeness does not require communication in a third, because in the agreement of order one is the likeness of the other; but in the agreement of proportion there is not likeness in one, but in two comparisons.

You will object 2. Whatever is an image is a figuration: for an image is attended to in figure: but the divine essence is by no means figurable: therefore it is by no means representable by any image: therefore no creature is the image of God. — The same Seraphic Doctor answers, that figure is twofold: one proper and corporeal; another spiritual and metaphorical: whence as a corporeal image requires corporeal configuration, so a spiritual one is accomplished by spiritual configuration. This, he says, consists not in quantity of bulk, but in quantity of virtue, namely in the powers: so that as the triangular figure has three termini and three lines, so likewise in the spiritual image the powers correspond to the motion of termini, and the emanation of one from another, as to act, corresponds to the motion of the connecting line.

You will object 3. In this an image differs from a vestige, that a vestige represents according to part; but an image according to the whole: therefore since God is infinite, and every creature finite, no creature can be the image of God. — The same Seraphic Doctor answers, that the Major is true of the image which has perfection of every kind, and thus only the Son is the image of the Father: but not of that which represents the whole simply, but only according to the notion of whole: whence as the rational creature and intellect is in a manner all things, and all things are born to be written and impressed therein, and likenesses of all things to be depicted: therefore as the whole Universe represents God in a certain sensible totality, so the rational creature represents Him in a certain spiritual totality: but every other irrational creature represents Him only in part, because according to itself only, since it is not born to contain other things spiritually in itself, so that there is nothing which it is not born to know: this I say on account of the sensitive soul, which although it knows some things, is nevertheless not born to know all things.

Second Conclusion. — THE NOTION OF IMAGE CHIEFLY RESPECTS THE SUBSTANCE AND FACULTIES OF THE SOUL: BUT THE NOTION OF LIKENESS SEEMS PLACED IN THE GRATUITOUS GIFTS WHEREBY MAN EXPRESSES THE DIVINE SANCTITY. The holy Fathers establish and express this distinction of likeness and image. First of all St. Basil, who Homilia 10. in Genesim, says: Through the image impressed upon my soul I obtained the use of reason; but being made Christian I am certainly made like unto God. And St. Jerome on Ezechiel 28.: Thou art the seal of likeness, thus speaks: It must be noted that the image was then made in creation only; the likeness is completed in baptism. And St. Chrysostom Homilia 9. in Genesim: The image, he said, on account of the reason of principality; the likeness that so far as human powers allow we may become like unto God in mildness, lenity, etc., which Christ also said: Be ye like your Father who is in heaven. St. Bernard Serm. 1. De Annuntiatione adds: for the image may burn in hell, yet not be consumed; it may glow, but not be erased. Not so the likeness; but it either remains in good, or if the soul sin, it is miserably changed, made like to the senseless cattle. — The same think St. Ambrose lib. 6. in Hexameron cap. 7. and 8., St. Nyssenus in the Homily on the creation of man, and many others, who are all of this sentiment, that man was made to the image of God according to natural gifts, I say mind, will, memory, and free will, and that this is the natural image of God commonly expressed in all men, whereby we excel the beasts, and which by no sin can be erased and lost: for this does not hang upon us, but hangs wholly upon God. But the likeness of God to which man is said to be made, they think is regarded in gratuitous and supernatural gifts, such as justice, sanctity, innocence: and this image depends not only upon God, but exacts also our study, endeavor, and cultivation; herein good men differ from and excel the reprobate.

But St. Augustine in the book of Questions upon Deuteronomy quaest. 4., treating those words, Lest perhaps deceived ye make to yourselves a likeness or sculptured image, attacks this distinction of image and likeness, writing: What is the difference between likeness and image is wont to be asked: but here I do not see what difference he wished there to be, unless perchance one thing were signified by those two words.... Thence that which in Genesis cap. 1. is written, God made man to the image of God, is manifestly so said, that the image which was made is not of the same substance: for if it were of the same substance, it would be called begotten, not made. But that He adds, and likeness, when above it had been said, Let us make man to our image and likeness, means that the likeness of the same thing is somewhat more than the image; which was reserved for man afterwards, in being refashioned through the grace of Christ. Hence moreover, if He did not afterwards will to commemorate the image alone, because where there is image, straightway there is also likeness. Whence here Moses related both likeness and image as made, according perhaps to that reason which we mentioned. — The sentiment of St. Augustine is confirmed herein, First, because as man is said in this place to be made to the image and likeness of God, so likewise below cap. 5. it is read that Adam begat his son Seth to his image and likeness. Where, since those two words, image and likeness, are posited, nevertheless the distinction handed down by the aforementioned Authors finds no place between them. — Next, Paul more than once usurps the word of image for the likeness which consists chiefly in gratuitous and supernatural gifts, since in the former Epistle to the Corinthians, cap. 15.: As we have borne, he says, the image of the earthly, let us bear also the image of the heavenly. And to the Colossians 3.: Stripping yourselves of the old man with his deeds, and putting on the new, which is renewed unto the knowledge of God, according to the image of Him that created him. — Finally Scripture sometimes puts both names, image and likeness, in the same case, as here: Let us make man, to our image and likeness. Sometimes it puts both names, but in different cases, as in the second chapter of the book of Wisdom: God created man incorruptible: He made him the image of His own likeness. But sometimes the name of likeness is omitted, only the word of image being posited: so shortly after is read cap. 9 For man was made to the image of God. And in the book of Ecclesiasticus, cap. 17.: God created man of the earth, and made him according to His own image. Therefore it is manifest from what we have said, that these words, image and likeness, have the same force and signification; and that in this place they are posited to declare the same thing more significantly, more expressively, and more illustriously.