Today it is necessary for me to pay the debt, which yesterday 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 will you 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 has 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 impiety ; 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 among us, ought to be exactly similar, as, for example, in respect of the features and the likeness. But here indeed among 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.
"The Firstborn of all creation." "What then," says one, "Lo, He is a creature." Whence? Tell me. "Because he said 'Firstborn.'" However, he said not "first created," but "firstborn." Then it is reasonable that he should be called many things. For he must also be called a brother "in all things." [Hebrews 2:17] And we must take from Him His being Creator; and insist that neither in dignity nor in any other thing is He superior to us? And who that has understanding would say this? For the word "firstborn" is not expressive of dignity and honor, nor of anything else, but of time only. What does "the firstborn" signify? That he is created, is the answer. Well. If then this be so, it has also kindred expressions. But otherwise the firstborn is of the same essence with those of whom he is firstborn. Therefore he will be the firstborn son of all things — for it said "of every creature"; therefore of stones also, and of me, is God the Word firstborn. But again, of what, tell me, are the words "firstborn from the dead" [Colossians 1:18; Romans 8:29] declaratory? Not that He first rose; for he said not simply, "of the dead," but "firstborn from the dead," nor yet, "that He died first," but that He rose the firstborn from the dead. So that they declare nothing else than this, that He is the Firstfruits of the Resurrection. Surely then neither in the place before us. Next he proceeds to the doctrine itself. For that they may not think Him to be of more recent existence, because that in former times the approach was through Angels, but now through Him; he shows first, that they had no power (for else it had not been "out of darkness" [ver. 13] that he brought), next, that He is also before them. And he uses as a proof of His being before them, this; that they were created by him. "For in Him," he says, "were all things created." What say here the followers of Paul of Samosata? "The things in the heavens." What was in question, he has placed first; "and the things upon the earth." Then he says, "the visible and the invisible things"; invisible, such as soul, and all that has come to exist in heaven; visible, such as men, sun, sky. "Whether thrones." And what is granted, he lets alone, but what is doubted he asserts. "Whether thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers." The words "whether," "or," comprehend the whole of things; but by means of the greater things show it of the less also. But the Spirit is not among the "powers." "All things," he says, "have been created through Him, and unto Him." Lo, "in Him," is "through Him," for having said "in Him," he added, "through Him." But what "unto Him"? It is this; the subsistence of all things depends on Him. Not only did He Himself bring them out of nothing into being, but Himself sustains them now, so that were they dissevered from His Providence, they were at once undone and destroyed. But He said not, "He continues them," which had been a grosser way of speaking, but what is more subtle, that "on" Him they depend. To have only a bearing on Him is enough to continue anything and bind it fast. So also the word "firstborn," in the sense of a foundation. But this does not show the creatures to be consubstantial with Him; but that all things are through Him, and in Him are upheld. Since Paul also when he says elsewhere, "I have laid a foundation" [1 Corinthians 3:10], is speaking not concerning substance, but operation. For, that you may not think Him to be a minister, he says that He continues them, which is not less than making them. Certainly, with us it is greater even: for to the former, art conducts us; but to the latter, not so, it does not even stay a thing in decay.
"And He is before all things," he says. This is befitting God. Where is Paul of Samosata? "And in Him all things consist," that is, they are created into Him. He repeats these expressions in close sequence; with their close succession, as it were with rapid strokes, tearing up the deadly doctrine by the roots. For, if even when such great things had been declared, still after so long a time Paul of Samosata sprung up, how much more [would such have been the case], had not these things been said before? "And in Him," he says, "all things consist." How "consist" in one who was not? So that the things also done through Angels are of Him.
"And He is the head of the body, the Church."
Then having spoken of His dignity, he afterwards speaks of His love to man also. "He is," says he, "the Head of the body, the Church." And he said not "of the fullness," (although this too is signified,) out of a wish to show His great friendliness to us, in that He who is thus above, and above all, connected Himself with those below. For everywhere He is first; above first; in the Church first, for He is the Head; in the Resurrection first. That is,
For after making mention of the creation, he naturally speaks of the Framer’s power as seen in it, which power, I say, is the Word of God, by whom all things have been made. If indeed the creation is sufficient of itself alone, without the Son, to make God known, see that you don’t err in thinking that without the Son it has come to be. For if through the Son it has come to be, and “in him all things consist,” it must follow that he who contemplates the creation rightly is contemplating also the Word who framed it, and through him begins to apprehend the Father. .
Now we come to that laughable method, attempted by some, of showing a difference of power to subsist between Father and Son…. It is urged that no small difference in degree of divine majesty is signified in the affirmation that all things are “of” the Father and “through” the Son. Whereas nothing is clearer than that here a plain reason is given of the omnipotence of the Son, inasmuch as while all things are “of” the Father, nonetheless are they all “through” the Son. The Father is not “among” all things, for to him it is confessed that “all things serve Thee.” Nor is the Son reckoned “among” all things, for “all things were made by him,” and “all things exist together in him, and he is above all the heavens.” The Son, therefore, exists not “among” but above all things. Indeed, after the flesh, he is of the people, the Jews. Yet at the same time he is God over all, blessed forever, having a name which is above every name, it being said of him, “You have put all things in subjection under his feet.” -.
For God knows all things beforehand, both past and present at once, and everything which is going to happen in the future up to the end of the world. He sees them as already present, because in and through Him all things hold together (Colossians 1:17). Indeed, just as today the emperor takes in with a glance those who race and who wrestle in the area, but does not thereby make himself responsible for the victory of the winners or the failure of the losers-the zeal, or in other cases the slackness, of the contestants being cause of their victory or defeat-understand with me that it is just so with God Himself. When He endowed us with free will, giving commandments to teach us instead how we must oppose our adversaries, He left it to the free choice of each either to oppose and vanquish the enemy, or to relax and be miserably defeated by him. Nor does He leave us entirely to ourselves-for He knows the weakness of human nature-but rather is present Himself with us and, indeed, allies Himself with those who choose to struggle, and mysteriously imbues us with strength, and Himself, not we, accomplishes the victory over the adversary. This the earthly emperor is unable to do, since he is himself also a man, and is rather in need himself of assistance, just as we require it, too.
God, on the other hand, Who is mighty and invincible, becomes, as we just said, an ally of those who willingly choose to do battle with the enemy, and He establishes them as victors over the cunning of the devil. He does not, however, compel any who do not so choose to this war, in order that He not destroy the power of choice which is proper to our reasoning nature, made according to His own image, and bring us down to the level of unreasoning brutes. Thus God, as we have explained, sees us all at once as if in an arena, just like the earthly emperor looks down on the athletes in competition. But, while the latter does not know who will lose and who will win until he sees the outcome of their contest and, though he may prepare the victors’ crowns beforehand, he still does not know to whom he is going to present them; the King of Heaven, on the other hand, knows from before the ages exactly who the victors and vanquished are going to be. This is why He said to those who asked Him if they could sit at His right hand and His left in His glory: “It is not mine to give to you” [Matthew 20:23], but that it will be given instead to those for whom it was prepared. - "Second Ethical Discourse"
All creatures, from the angel to the atom, are other than God; with an otherness to which there is no parallel: incommensurable. The very word "to be" cannot be applied to Him and to them in exactly the same sense. But also, no creature is other than He in the same way in which it is other than all the rest. He is in it as they can never be in one another. In each of them as the ground and root and continual supply of its reality. And also in good rational creatures as light; in bad ones as fire, as at first the smouldering unease, and later the flaming anguish, of an unwelcome and vainly resisted presence.
Therefore of each creature we can say, "This also is Thou: neither is this Thou."
Simple faith leaps to this with astonishing ease. I once talked to a Continental pastor who had seen Hitler, and had, by all human standards, good cause to hate him. "What did he look like?" I asked. "Like all men," he replied, "that is, like Christ."
One is always fighting on at least two fronts. When one is among Pantheists one must emphasise the distinctness, and relative independence, of the creatures. Among Deists--or perhaps in Woolwich, if the laity there really think God is to be sought in the sky--one must emphasise the divine presence in my neighbour, my dog, my cabbage-patch.
It is much wiser, I believe, to think of that presence in particular objects than just of "omnipresence". The latter gives very naïf people (Woolwich again, perhaps?) the idea of something spatially extended, like a gas. It also blurs the distinctions, the truth that God is present in each thing but not necessarily in the same mode; not in a man as in the consecrated bread and wine, nor in a bad man as in a good one, nor in a beast as in a man, nor in a tree as in a beast, nor in inanimate matter as in a tree. I take it there is a paradox here. The higher the creature, the more and also the less God is in it; the more present by grace, and the less present (by a sort of abdication) as mere power. By grace He gives the higher creatures power to will His will ("and wield their little tridents"): the lower ones simply execute it automatically.
It is well to have specifically holy places, and things, and days, for, without these focal points or reminders, the belief that all is holy and "big with God" will soon dwindle into a mere sentiment. But if these holy places, things, and days cease to remind us, if they obliterate our awareness that all ground is holy and every bush (could we but perceive it) a Burning Bush, then the hallows begin to do harm. Hence both the necessity, and the perennial danger, of "religion".
Boehme advises us once an hour "to fling ourselves beyond every creature." But in order to find God it is perhaps not always necessary to leave the creatures behind. We may ignore, but we can nowhere evade, the presence of God. The world is crowded with Him. He walks everywhere incognito. And the incognito is not always hard to penetrate. The real labour is to remember, to attend. In fact, to come awake. Still more, to remain awake.
Oddly enough, what corroborates me in this faith is the fact, otherwise so infinitely deplorable, that the awareness of this presence has so often been unwelcome. I call upon Him in prayer. Often He might reply--I think He does reply--"But you have been evading me for hours." For He comes not only to raise up but to cast down; to deny, to rebuke, to interrupt. The prayer "prevent us in all our doings" is often answered as if the word prevent had its modern meaning. The presence which we voluntarily evade is often, and we know it, His presence in wrath.
[AD 258] Cyprian on Colossians 1:15-18