And if it be s •id, mans soul cannot be painted, but his body may, and yet that picture representeth a man: I answer, it doth so, because he has but one Nature, and what representeth that, repr assenteth the person; but it is not so with Christ, his Godhead is not a distinct part of the humane Nature, as the soul of man is (which is necessarily supposed in every living man) but a distinct nature, only united with the manhood in that one person Christ, who has no fellow; therefore what representeth him, must not represent a man only, but must represent Christ, Immanuel, God man, otherwise it is not his Image; beside, there is no warrant for representing him in his Manhood, nor any colourable possib •lity of it, but as men fancy; and shall that be called Christs portraiture? would that be called any other mans portraiture? which were drawn at mens pleasure, without regard to the pattern; again there is no use of it, for either that Image behoved to have but common estimation with other Images, and that would wrong Christ, or a peculiar respect and reverence, and so it sinneth against this Commandment that forbiddeth all religious reverence to Images; but he being God, and so the object of Worship, we must either divide his Natures, or say, that Image or picture representeth not Christ.
And if it be s •id, mans soul cannot be painted, but his body may, and yet that picture representeth a man: I answer, it doth so, because he has but one Nature, and what representeth that, repr •senteth the person; but it is not so with Christ, his Godhead is not a distinct part of the humane Nature, as the soul of man is (which is necessarily supposed in every living man) but a distinct nature, only united with the manhood in that one person Christ, who has no fellow; therefore what representeth him, must not represent a man only, but must represent Christ, Immanuel, God man, otherwise it is not his Image; beside, there is no warrant for representing him in his Manhood, nor any colourable possib •lity of it, but as men fancy; and shall that be called Christs portraiture? would that be called any other mans portraiture? which were drawn at mens pleasure, without regard to the patern; again there is no use of it, for either that Image behoved to have but common estimation with other Images, and that would wrong Christ, or a peculiar respect and reverence, and so it sinneth against this Commandment that forbiddeth all religious reverence to Images; but he being God, and so the object of Worship, we must either divide his Natures, or say, that Image or picture representeth not Christ.