Genesis 1:26

In previous times man, it is true, was said to have been made according to the image of God, but he was not revealed as such. For the Word according to whose image man was made was still invisible. Therefore also man easily lost the likeness. But when the Word of God was made flesh, he confirmed both image and likeness. For on the one hand he truly showed the image by becoming what his image was. On the other hand he firmly established the likeness by the co-assimilation of man to the invisible Father through the visible Word.

For the image of God is His Word, the genuine Son of Mind, the Divine Word, the archetypal light of light; and the image of the Word is the true man, the mind which is in man, who is therefore said to have been made "in the image and likeness of God," assimilated to the Divine Word in the affections of the soul, and therefore rational.

If the number of the Trinity also offends you, as if it were not connected in the simple Unity, I ask you how it is possible for a Being who is merely and absolutely One and Singular, to speak in plural phrase, saying, "Let us make man in our own image, and after our own likeness;" Genesis 1:26 whereas He ought to have said, "Let me make man in my own image, and after my own likeness," as being a unique and singular Being? In the following passage, however, "Behold the man is become as one of us," Genesis 3:22 He is either deceiving or amusing us in speaking plurally, if He is One only and singular. Or was it to the angels that He spoke, as the Jews interpret the passage, because these also acknowledge not the Son? Or was it because He was at once the Father, the Son, and the Spirit, that He spoke to Himself in plural terms, making Himself plural on that very account? Nay, it was because He had already His Son close at His side, as a second Person, His own Word, and a third Person also, the Spirit in the Word, that He purposely adopted the plural phrase, "Let us make;" and, "in our image;" and, "become as one of us." For with whom did He make man? and to whom did He make him like? (The answer must be), the Son on the one hand, who was one day to put on human nature; and the Spirit on the other, who was to sanctify man. With these did He then speak, in the Unity of the Trinity, as with His ministers and witnesses. [Against Praxeas 12]
Since then he is the image of the Creator (for He, when looking on Christ His Word, who was to become man, said, "Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness" Genesis 1:26 ), how can I possibly have another head but Him whose image I am? For if I am the image of the Creator there is no room in me for another head. [Against Maricon 5.7]

In recording the first creation of man, Moses before all others says, “And God said, Let us make man in our own image and likeness.” Then he adds afterwards, “And God made man; in the image of God made he him; male and female made he them, and he blessed them.” Now the fact that he said “he made him in the image of God” and was silent about the likeness points to nothing else but this, that man received the honor of God’s image in his first creation, whereas the perfection of God’s likeness was reserved for him at the consummation. The purpose of this was that man should acquire it for himself by his own earnest efforts to imitate God, so that while the possibility of attaining perfection was given to him in the beginning through the honor of the “image,” he should in the end through the accomplishment of these works obtain for himself the perfect “likeness.”

We do not understand, however, this man indeed whom Scripture says was made “according to the image of God” to be corporeal. For the form of the body does not contain the image of God, nor is the corporeal said to be “made” but “formed,” as is written in the words that follow. For the text says, “And God formed man,” that is fashioned, “from the slime of the earth.” But it is our inner man, invisible, incorporeal, incorruptible and immortal, that is made “according to the image of God.” For it is in such qualities as these that the image of God is more correctly understood. But if anyone supposes that this man who is made “according to the image and likeness of God” is made of flesh, he will appear to represent God himself as made of flesh and in human form. It is most clearly impious to think this about God.

In order that the unity itself of the threefold majesty and imprint should encounter our understanding, the invisible majesty itself states so: “Let us make man in our image and according to our likeness.” Look! He has demonstrated what we believe. God has engraved his image on the face of the human and has said “in our image.” The knowledge of Father and Son is impressed upon the face of man; and the very features of his face, by means of the clay by which we are formed, revealed in the human original model how the Father and the Son were, so that man could admire God in man.

Moses says what was said by God: “Let us make man according to our image and likeness.” God says that. He says “let us make” to a co-operator, necessarily to Christ. And he says “according to the image.” Therefore man is not the image of God, but he is “according to the image.” For Jesus alone is the image of God, but man is “according to the image,” that is, image of the image. But he says “according to our image.” Therefore both Father and Son are one image.

Yet the love of God for humanity is such that by grace He becomes Father of those in relation to whom he had previously only been Maker. He becomes their Father when created beings receive ‘into their hearts the Spirit of the Son crying out, ‘Abba, Father’ [Gal 4.6]., as the apostle says. These are the ones who, by receiving the Word, receive authority from him ‘to become the children of God’ (John 1.12). Being creatures by nature, they would not become ‘sons’ except by receiving the Spirit of the natural and true Son. So it was in order to bring this about and to make humanity receptive of divinity that ‘The Word became flesh’ (John 1.14)… Accordingly, the Father calls ‘sons’ those in whom He sees His own Son and He says, ‘I begot’ since ‘begetting’ signifies ‘sons’ while ‘making’ is indicative of the works. Therefore we are not begotten first but made [created], for it is written, ‘Let us make humanity’ [Gen 1.26]. But when we later receive the grace of The Spirit, we are henceforth said to also be begotten. - "Against the Arians, 2.59"

After Moses spoke about the reptiles, the cattle and the beasts that were created on the sixth day, he turned to write about the creation of that man who was fashioned on the sixth day, saying, "And God said [Let us create man. . .]" [ Gen1:26 ] But to whom was God speaking? Here as well as in every place where He creates, it is clear that He was speaking to His Son. The Evangelist said about Him that "everything came to be through Him and without Him not one thing came to be." [ John1:1 ] Paul also attests to Him saying, "In Him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, all that is visible and all that is invisible." [ Col1:15 ]

"And God said, 'Let us make man in our image." [ Gen1:26 ] According to what has been said up to this point, he is able, as it pleases him, to interpret for us: Moses explains ["in our image"] as follows "Let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds, and over the cattle, and over all the earth." [ Gen1:26 ] It is the dominion that Adam received over the earth and over all that is in it that constitutes the likeness of God who has dominion over the heavenly things and the earthly things.

Does not the light of theology shine, in these words, as through windows; and does not the second Person show Himself in a mystical way, without yet manifesting Himself until the great day? Where is the Jew who resisted the truth and pretended that God was speaking to Himself? It is He who spoke, it is said, and it is He who made. Let there be light and there was light. But then their words contain a manifest absurdity. Where is the smith, the carpenter, the shoemaker, who, without help and alone before the instruments of his trade, would say to himself; let us make the sword, let us put together the plough, let us make the boot? Does he not perform the work of his craft in silence? Strange folly, to say that any one has seated himself to command himself, to watch over himself, to constrain himself, to hurry himself, with the tones of a master! But the unhappy creatures are not afraid to calumniate the Lord Himself. What will they not say with a tongue so well practised in lying? Here, however, words stop their mouth; And God said let us make man. Tell me; is there then only one Person? It is not written Let man be made, but, Let us make man. The preaching of theology remains enveloped in shadow before the appearance of him who was to be instructed, but, now, the creation of man is expected, that faith unveils herself and the dogma of truth appears in all its light. Let us make man. O enemy of Christ, hear God speaking to His Co-operator, to Him by Whom also He made the worlds, Who upholds all things by the word of His power. But He does not leave the voice of true religion without answer. Thus the Jews, race hostile to truth, when they find themselves pressed, act like beasts enraged against man, who roar at the bars of their cage and show the cruelty and the ferocity of their nature, without being able to assuage their fury. God, they say, addresses Himself to several persons; it is to the angels before Him that He says, Let us make man. Jewish fiction! A fable whose frivolity shows whence it has come. To reject one person, they admit many. To reject the Son, they raise servants to the dignity of counsellors; they make of our fellow slaves the agents in our creation. The perfect man attains the dignity of an angel; but what creature can be like the Creator? Listen to the continuation. In our image. What have you to reply? Is there one image of God and the angels? Father and Son have by absolute necessity the same form, but the form is here understood as becomes the divine, not in bodily shape, but in the proper qualities of Godhead. Hear also, you who belong to the new concision Philippians 3:2 and who, under the appearance of Christianity, strengthen the error of the Jews. To Whom does He say, in our image, to whom if it is not to Him who is the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, Hebrews 1:3 the image of the invisible God? Colossians 1:15 It is then to His living image, to Him Who has said I and my Father are one, John 10:30 He that has seen me has seen the Father, John 14:9 that God says Let us make man in our image. Where is the unlikeness in these Beings who have only one image?

This was to show that he could call into being not only a nature akin to himself but also one altogether alien to him. For akin to Deity are those natures which are intellectual and only to be comprehended by mind; but all of which sense can take cognizance are utterly alien to it, and of these the furthest removed from it are all those which are entirely destitute of soul and power of motion.Mind, then, and sense—thus distinguished from each other—had remained within their own boundaries and bore in themselves the magnificence of the Creator-Word, silent praisers and thrilling heralds of his mighty work. Not yet was there any mingling of both, nor any mixture of these opposites, tokens of a greater wisdom and generosity in the creation of natures; nor as yet were the whole riches of goodness made known. Now the Creator-Word, determining to exhibit this and to produce a single living being out of both (the invisible and the visible creation, I mean) fashions man; and taking a body from already existing matter, and placing in it a breath taken from himself (which the Word knew to be an intelligent soul and the image of God), as a sort of second world great in littleness, he placed him on the earth—a new angel, a mingled worshiper initiated fully into the visible creation but only partially into the intellectual; king of all on earth but subject to the King above; earthly and heavenly; temporal and yet immortal; visible and yet intellectual; halfway between greatness and lowliness; in one person combining spirit and flesh. Spirit because of the favor bestowed on him, flesh on account of the height to which he had been raised; the one that he might continue to live and glorify his benefactor, the other that he might suffer and by suffering be put in remembrance, and be corrected if he became proud in his greatness; a living creature, trained here and then moved elsewhere; and to complete the mystery, made godly by its inclination to God.

This same language was not used for (the creation) of other things. The command was simple when light was created; God said, “let there be light.” Heaven was also made without deliberation.… These, though, were before (the creation of) humans. For humans, there was deliberation. He did not say, as he did when creating other things, “Let there be a human.” See how worthy you are! Your origins are not in an imperative. Instead, God deliberated about the best way to bring to life a creation worthy of honor.

Scripture informs us that the Deity proceeded by a sort of graduated and ordered advance to the creation of man. After the foundations of the universe were laid, as the history records, man did not appear on the earth at once, but the creation of the brutes preceded him, and the plants preceded them. Thereby Scripture shows that the vital forces blended with the world of matter according to a gradation; first it infused itself into insensate nature; and in continuation of this advanced into the sentient world; and then ascended to intelligent and rational beings.… The creation of man is related as coming last, as of one who took up into himself every single form of life, both that of plants and that which is seen in brutes. His nourishment and growth he derives from vegetable life; for even in vegetables such processes are to be seen when aliment is being drawn in by their roots and given off in fruit and leaves. His sentient organization he derives from the brute creation. But his faculty of thought and reason is incommunicable, and a peculiar gift in our nature.… It is not possible for this reasoning faculty to exist in the life of the body without existing by means of sensations, and since sensation is already found subsisting in the brute creation, necessarily, as it were, by reason of this one condition, our soul has touch with the other things which are knit up with it; and these are all those phenomena within us that we call “passions.”

Let us add that [man’s] creation in the image of the nature that governs all demonstrates precisely that he has from the beginning a royal nature. Following common usage, painters of portraits of princes, as well as representing their features, express their royal dignity by garments of purple, and before this image one is accustomed to say “the king.” Thus human nature, created to rule the world because of his resemblance to the universal King, has been made like a living image that participates in the archetype by dignity and by name. He is not clothed in purple, scepter and diadem, for these do not signify his dignity (the archetype himself does not possess them). But in place of purple, he is clothed with virtue, the most royal of garments. Instead of a scepter, he is endowed with blessed immortality. Instead of a royal diadem, he bears the crown of justice, in such a way that everything about him manifests royal dignity, by his exact likeness to the beauty of the archetype.

If, therefore, Scripture tells us that man was made last, after every animate thing, the lawgiver is doing nothing else than declaring to us the doctrine of the soul, considering that what is perfect comes last, according to a certain necessary sequence in the order of things.… Thus we may suppose that nature makes an ascent as it were by steps—I mean the various properties of life—from the lower to the perfect form.

God creates man for no other reason than that God is good; and being such, and having this as his reason for entering upon the creation of our nature, he would not exhibit the power of this goodness in an imperfect form, giving our nature some one of the things at his disposal and grudging it a share in another: but the perfect form of goodness is here to be seen by his both bringing man into being from nothing and fully supplying him with all good gifts. But since the list of individual good gifts is a long one, it is out of the question to apprehend it numerically. The language of Scripture therefore expresses it concisely by a comprehensive phrase, in saying that man was made “in the image of God,” for this is the same as to say that he made human nature participant in all good; for if the Deity is the fullness of good, and this is his image, then the image finds its resemblance to the archetype in being filled with all good.

He who said Let us make man in our image and with the plural indication manifested the Holy Trinity would not have referred to the image in the singular, if the models were diverse the one from the other. For it would not be possible to indicate a unique image of beings that do not coincide between them. But if the natures were different, He would certainly have been principle of different images, creating the image that would correspond to each [nature]. - "On The Making of Man, PG 44, 140"

“Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.” We possess the one by creation; we acquire the other by free will. In the first structure it is given us to be born in the image of God; by free will there is formed in us the being in the likeness of God.… “Let us make man in our image”: Let him possess by creation what is in the image, but let him also become according to the likeness. God has given the power for this. If he had created you also in the likeness, where would your privilege be? Why have you been crowned? And if the Creator had given you everything, how would the kingdom of heaven have opened for you? But it is proper that one part is given you, while the other has been left incomplete: this is so that you might complete it yourself and might be worthy of the reward which comes from God.

But let us define more accurately the meaning of the phrase “to the image of God.” Is it true that the flesh is made “to the image of God”? In that case, is there earth in God, since flesh is of earth? Is God corporeal, that is to say, weak and subject like the flesh to the passions? Perhaps the head may seem to you to be made in the likeness of God because it stands aloft, or the eyes because they observe or the ears because they hear? As to the question of height, are we to consider ourselves to be tall just because we tower a little over the earth? Are we not ashamed to be thought of as like to God merely because we are taller than serpents or other creeping creatures or even than deer, sheep or wolves? In that respect, how much taller are elephants and camels in comparison with us! Sight is important to us in order to enable us to behold the things of the world and to have knowledge of what is not reported by any person but is grasped by our sense of sight. How significant, in fact, is this power of sight! Because of it we may be said to have the likeness of God, who sees all, observes all, comprehends our hidden emotions and searches into the secrets of our hearts! Am I not ashamed to admit that it is not in my power to see parts of my body? What is in front of me I can see, but I am unable to see what is behind me. I have no view of my neck or of the back of my head, and I cannot see my loins. In like manner, what avail is our sense of hearing if we cannot either see or hear what is only a short distance away? If walls should intervene, both sight and hearing are impeded. Furthermore, our bodies are fixed and enclosed in a narrow space, whereas all wild animals have a wider range and are also swifter than men. The flesh, therefore, cannot be made to the image of God. This is true, however, of our souls, which are free to wander far and wide in acts of reflection and of counsel. Our souls are able to envisage and reflect on all things. We who are now in Italy have in mind what seems to pertain to affairs in the East or in the West. We seem to have dealings with men who dwell in Persia. We envision those who have their homes in Africa, if there happen to be acquaintances of ours who enjoy the hospitality of that land. We accompany these people on their departure and draw near to them in their voyage abroad. We are one with them in their absence. Those who are separated far from us engage us in conversation. We arouse the dead even to mutual interchange of thoughts and embrace them as if they were still living. We even go to the point of conferring on these people the usages and customs of our daily life. That, therefore, is made to the image of God that is perceived not by the power of the body but by that of the mind. It is that power that beholds the absent and embraces in its vision countries beyond the horizon. Its vision crosses boundaries and gazes intently on what is hidden. In one moment the utmost bounds of the world and its remote secret places are under its ken. God is attained, and Christ is approached. There is a descent into hell, and aloft in the sky there is an ascent into heaven. Hear, then, what Scripture says: “But our citizenship is in heaven.” Is not that, therefore, in which God is ever-present made to the likeness of God? Listen to what the apostle says in that regard: “We all, therefore, with faces unveiled, reflecting as in a mirror the glory of God, are being transformed into his very image from glory to glory, as through the Spirit of the Lord.”

Some others base themselves on our arguments by asserting that God possesses an image in common with us, but they do not understand correctly what has been said. We did not speak about an image of being but about an image of command, as we will explain below. In fact, as a proof that divinity has no human form, listen to Paul’s words: “But for a man it is not right to have his head covered, since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man.” This is why—he says—“she must wear a veil on her head.” And in truth, in this passage he has called “image” this absence of difference of form with regard to God, and man is called image of God because God also possesses this figure: in their opinion, therefore, it should not be said that man only is the image of God but the woman as well. For man and woman have in common a single figure, character and resemblance. Why then is man called image of God, while the woman is not? Because Paul does not mean the image appearing in the form but the image concerning the command, which was given to man, not woman. Man in fact is subject to no creature, while woman is subject to man, according to God’s words: “Your movement will be toward your husband, and he will rule you.” This is why man is the image of God. He has no creature over him, and there is nobody over God: he rules on everything. Woman, on the other hand, is the glory of man, because she is subject to man.

To begin, it is worthwhile to ask why God did not say, when the heavens were created, “Let us make the heavens” but instead, “Let there be a heaven.… Let there be light,” and similarly for each other aspect of creation. “Let us make” suggests deliberation, collaboration and conference with another person. So what is it whose pending creation is granted so great an honor? It is humanity, the greatest and most marvelous of living beings, and the creation most worthy of honor before God.… There is here this deliberation, collaboration and communion not because God needs advice—God forbid saying such a thing!—but so that the very impact of the language of our creation would show us honor.

The inspired historian makes it very clear
That at earth’s dawn the Father not alone
Nor without Christ his new creation formed.
“God fashioned man,” he says, “and gave to him
The face of God.” What but to say that he
Was not alone, that God stood by God’s side
When the Lord made man in image of the Lord?

For why the “our,” if the Son is the image of the Father alone? But it is on account of the imperfect likeness, as we have said, that man is spoken of as “after our image,” and so “our,” that man might be an image of the Trinity. This image is not equal to the Trinity, as the Son is to the Father, but approaching it, as is said, by a certain likeness; as in things distinct there can be closeness, not however in this case as if a spatial closeness but by imitation.

Not everything that among creatures bears some likeness to God is rightly called his image, but only that than which God alone is more exalted. That is directly drawn from him, if between himself and it there is no interposed nature.

For God said, “Let us make man in our image and likeness”: a little later, however, it is said “And God made man in the image of God.” It would certainly not be correct to say “our,” because the number is plural, if man were made in the image of one person, whether Father, Son or Holy Spirit. But because he is made in the image of the Trinity, consequently it was said “in our image.” Again, lest we choose to believe in three gods in the Trinity, since the same Trinity is one God, he said, “And God made man in his image,” as if he were to say “in his [own triune] image.”

Placing him in the midst of all the brothers, he inquired as to how the Catholic churches throughout the East interpreted what is said in Genesis: “Let us make man according to our image and likeness.” Then he explained that the image and likeness of God was treated by all the heads of the churches not according to the lowly sound of the letter but in a spiritual way, and he proved this with a long discourse and many examples from Scripture, showing that nothing of this sort could be the case with that immeasurable and incomprehensible and invisible majesty—that it could be circumscribed in a human form and likeness, that indeed a nature that was incorporeal and uncomposed and simple could be apprehended by the eye or seized by the mind.

All men are made in God’s image; but to be in his likeness is granted only to those who through great love have brought their own freedom into subjection to God. For only when we do not belong to ourselves do we become like him who through love has reconciled us to himself. No one achieves this unless he persuades his soul not to be distracted by the false glitter of this life.

Therefore let us hold that the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit are by nature one God; neither is the Father the one who is the Son, nor the Son the one who is the Father, nor the Holy Spirit the one who is the Father or the Son. For the essence, that which the Greeks call the ousia, of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit is one, in which essence the Father is not one thing and the Son a second thing and the Holy Spirit still a third thing, although in person the Father is different, the Son is different, and the Holy Spirit is different. All of this is demonstrated for us in the strongest fashion at the very beginning of the Holy Scriptures, when God says, “Let us make human beings in our image and likeness.” When, using the singular number, he says “image,” he shows that the nature is one, in whose image the human being was made. But when he says “our” in the plural, he shows that the very same God in whose image the human being was made is not one in person. For if in that one essence of Father, Son and Holy Spirit there were one person, “to our image” would not have been spoken but “in my image.” Nor would he have said “let us make” but “I shall make.” If in reality in those three persons three substances were to be understood or believed, “to our image” would not have been said; rather, “to our images”; for there could not be one image of three unequal natures. But while the human being is said to be made according to the one image of the one God, the divinity of the Holy Trinity in one essence is announced. Then and shortly thereafter, in place of what he had said above, “Let us make human beings in our image and likeness,” Scripture thus told of the making of the human being by saying, “And God created humankind in his image; in the image of God he created them.”

These are the virtues that man acquires by considering and controlling his own senses. He “takes off the old man, who was corrupted in the convolutions of his error,” “and wears the new one, who is renewed in knowing the image of his Creator,” and he becomes as a whole an effigy, likeness and image of his God. Like a living sacrifice, suitable and pleasing to God, he employs his body for his rational service. He consecrates and somehow presents to God the vows and the offerings of all his limbs and offers the sacrifices suitable for the action of grace, which are the rational fruits of the lips of those who confess his name by incessantly celebrating God in their body and soul, God to whom they belong now in definitive oblations.

And He said: Let us make man in our image and likeness. Now it appears more clearly why it is said of the created herbs and trees, fishes and birds, also terrestrial animals, that each was made according to its kind and species. For it was foreseen that his creation was coming, who would not only correspond by similarity and species to his own kind but would also be made in the image and likeness of his Creator. The nobility of this creation is also testified by the fact that, unlike the other creatures, God did not say: Let man be made, and man was made; or: Let the earth bring forth man, and the earth brought forth man; but, before he was made, it is said: Let us make man, so that, because a rational creature was being created, it might seem as if he were made with counsel. As if he were formed with effort out of the earth and raised by the inspiration of the Creator with the power of the vital spirit, so that he might exist not by the command of voice but by the dignity of operation, because he was being made in the image of the Creator. When it is said, Let us make man in our image and likeness, the unity of the Holy Trinity is openly commended. Indeed, the same indivisible Trinity was mystically hinted at in the preceding formation of things, when it was said: And God said: Let it be done, and God made it; and God saw that it was good. But now this same is more manifestly suggested, when it is said: Let us make man in our image and likeness, and rightly so, because until he who was to be taught was, the proclamation of Deity was hidden in profundity; but when the creation of man began to be expected, faith was revealed, and the dogma of truth clearly shone forth. For in that it is said, Let us make, the operation of the three persons is shown; and in what follows, in our image and likeness, the one and equal substance of the same Holy Trinity is indicated. For how would it be one image and likeness if the Son were lesser than the Father, if the Holy Spirit were lesser than the Son, if the glory of the whole Trinity were not consubstantial of the same power? Or how would it be said, Let us make, if there were not cooperative power of the three persons in one deity? Nor could it be said by God to the angels, Let us make man in our image and likeness, because no reason at all allows that we believe the image or likeness of God and the angels to be one and the same. And concerning how man was made in the image and likeness of God, the Apostle testifies, as he diligently admonishes us to recover within ourselves, through the grace of the same Creator, this which we lost in the first parent. Renew yourselves, he says, in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man, who is created according to God in justice, holiness, and truth (Ephesians IV, 23). Therefore, Adam was created a new man from the earth according to God, so that he would be just, holy, and true, subject and humbly adhering to the grace of his Creator, who exists eternally and perfectly just, holy, and true: who because he corrupted through sin this very beautiful novelty of the divine image in himself, and procreated a corrupted offspring of the human race from himself, from where came the second Adam, that is, the Lord Himself and our Creator, born of the Virgin, created incorruptibly and unchangeably in God's image, immune from all fault, and full of all grace and truth, so that He might restore in us His image and likeness by His examples and gifts. For He is truly the new man created according to God, because He took from Adam the true substance of flesh so that He would draw nothing of the filthy vice from him: whose examples we follow according to our capacity, whose gifts we adhere to, whose commandments we obey; this is to recover the image of God which we lost in the old man, in the new. Therefore, man is created in the image of God not according to the body, but according to the intellect of the mind. Although even in the body he has a certain property which indicates this, for he is made with an upright stature, so that he might be admonished by this very thing that earthly things, such as those of the beasts whose entire pleasure is from the earth, are not to be pursued; from which all things prone and prostrate towards the ground are, according to what one of the poets has most beautifully and truly said: Other animals look downward toward the earth, but He gave man an uplifted face to look toward the heavens and the stars.

And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the beasts, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth; because doubtless in this primarily man was made in the image of God, in that he surpasses the irrational beings: being made capable of reason, through which he can rightly govern all created things in the world, and enjoy the knowledge of Him who created all things. If set in this honor he does not understand to do good, he will be compared to the very same senseless animals over which he has been placed in authority, as the Psalmist testifies (Psalm 49:13).

It is therefore fitting that his body matches his rational soul, not according to the outlines and shapes of the limbs, but rather according to that which is raised up to heaven to observe the things in the upper parts of the world, just as the rational soul ought to be raised in those things which excel most in spiritual nature, so that it may set its mind on things above, not on things on the earth. But it is well added.

Since this is so, God created man out of visible and invisible nature with his own hands according to the image and likeness, forming the body from the earth and through his own breathing upon it giving it a rational and intellectual soul, which we call the divine image. That which is “according to the image” is manifest in the intellect and free will. That which is “according to the likeness” is manifest in such likeness in virtue as is possible.

Let us make man to our image and likeness: Man is said to be after the image of God, not as regards his body, but as regards that whereby he excels other animals. Hence, when it is said, "Let us make man to our image and likeness", it is added, "And let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea" (Genesis 1:26). Now man excels all animals by his reason and intelligence; hence it is according to his intelligence and reason, which are incorporeal, that man is said to be according to the image of God.
But equality does not belong to the essence of an image; for as Augustine says (QQ. 83, qu. 74): "Where there is an image there is not necessarily equality," as we see in a person's image reflected in a glass. Yet this is of the essence of a perfect image; for in a perfect image nothing is wanting that is to be found in that of which it is a copy. Now it is manifest that in man there is some likeness to God, copied from God as from an exemplar; yet this likeness is not one of equality, for such an exemplar infinitely excels its copy. Therefore there is in man a likeness to God; not, indeed, a perfect likeness, but imperfect. And Scripture implies the same when it says that man was made "to" God's likeness; for the preposition "to" signifies a certain approach, as of something at a distance.
Let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the birds of the air, and the beasts of the earth: Now all animals are naturally subject to man. This can be proved in three ways.
First, from the order observed by nature; for just as in the generation of things we perceive a certain order of procession of the perfect from the imperfect (thus matter is for the sake of form; and the imperfect form, for the sake of the perfect), so also is there order in the use of natural things; thus the imperfect are for the use of the perfect; as the plants make use of the earth for their nourishment, and animals make use of plants, and man makes use of both plants and animals. Therefore it is in keeping with the order of nature, that man should be master over animals. Hence the Philosopher says (Polit. i, 5) that the hunting of wild animals is just and natural, because man thereby exercises a natural right. Secondly, this is proved by the order of Divine Providence which always governs inferior things by the superior. Wherefore, as man, being made to the image of God, is above other animals, these are rightly subject to his government. Thirdly, this is proved from a property of man and of other animals. For we see in the latter a certain participated prudence of natural instinct, in regard to certain particular acts; whereas man possesses a universal prudence as regards all practical matters. Now whatever is participated is subject to what is essential and universal. Therefore the subjection of other animals to man is proved to be natural.