(Latin angelus; Greek aggelos; from the Hebrew for
"one going" or "one sent"; messenger). The word is used in
Hebrew to denote indifferently either a divine or human messenger. The
Septuagint renders it by aggelos which also has both significations. The
Latin version, however, distinguishes the divine or spirit-messenger from the
human, rendering the original in the one case by angelus and in the
other by legatus or more generally by nuntius. In a few passages
the Latin version is misleading, the word angelus being used where nuntius
would have better expressed the meaning, e.g. Isaiah 18:2; 33:3, 6.
It is with the spirit-messenger alone that we are here concerned.
We have to discuss
The angels are represented throughout the Bible as a body of
spiritual beings intermediate between God and men: "You have made him
(man) a little less than the angels" (Psalm 8:6). They, equally with man,
are created beings; "praise ye Him, all His angels: praise ye Him, all His
hosts . . . for He spoke and they were made. He commanded and they were
created" (Psalm 148:2, 5: Colossians 1:16, 17). That the angels were
created was laid down in the Fourth Lateran Council (1215). The decree
"Firmiter" against the Albigenses declared both the fact that they
were created and that men were created after them. This decree was repeated by
the Vatican Council, "Dei Filius". We mention it here because the
words: "He that liveth for ever created all things together"
(Ecclesiasticus 18:1) have been held to prove a simultaneous creation of all
things; but it is generally conceded that "together" (simul)
may here mean "equally", in the sense that all things were
"alike" created. They are spirits; the writer of the Epistle to the
Hebrews says: "Are they not all ministering spirits, sent to minister to
them who shall receive the inheritance of salvation?" (Heb. i, 14).
Attendants at God's throne
It is as messengers that they most often figure in the Bible, but,
as St. Augustine, and after him St. Gregory, expresses it: angelus est nomen
officii ("angel is the name of the office") and expresses neither
their essential nature nor their essential function, viz.: that of attendants
upon God's throne in that court of heaven of which Daniel has left us a vivid
picture:
I
behold till thrones were placed, and the Ancient of Days sat: His garment was
white as snow, and the hair of His head like clean wool: His throne like flames
of fire: the wheels of it like a burning fire. A swift stream of fire issued
forth from before Him: thousands of thousands ministered to Him, and ten
thousand times a hundred thousand stood before Him: the judgment sat and the
books were opened. (Daniel 7:9-10; cf. also Psalm 96:7; Psalm 102:20; Isaiah 6,
etc.)
This function of the angelic host is expressed by the word
"assistance" (Job, i, 6: ii, 1), and our Lord refers to it as their
perpetual occupation (Matt., xviii, 10). More than once we are told of seven
angels whose special function it is thus to "stand before God's throne"
(Tob., xii, 15; Apoc., viii, 2-5). The same thought may be intended by
"the angel of His presence" (Is., lxiii, 9) an expression which also
occurs in the pseudo-epigraphical "Testaments of the Twelve
Patriarchs".
God's messengers to mankind
But these glimpses of life beyond the veil are only occasional.
The angels of the Bible generally appear in the role of God's messengers to
mankind. They are His instruments by whom He communicates His will to men, and
in Jacob's vision they are depicted as ascending and descending the ladder
which stretches from earth to heaven while the Eternal Father gazes upon the
wanderer below. It was an angel who found Agar in the wilderness (Gen., xvi);
angels drew Lot out of Sodom; an angel announces to Gideon that he is to save
his people; an angel foretells the birth of Samson (Judges, xiii), and the
angel Gabriel instructs Daniel (Dan., viii, 16), though he is not called an
angel in either of these passages, but "the man Gabriel" (9:21). The
same heavenly spirit announced the birth of St. John the Baptist and the
Incarnation of the Redeemer, while tradition ascribes to him both the message
to the shepherds (Luke, ii, 9), and the most glorious mission of all, that of
strengthening the King of Angels in His Agony (Luke 22:43). The spiritual nature
of the angels is manifested very clearly in the account which Zacharias gives
of the revelations bestowed upon him by the ministry of an angel. The prophet
depicts the angel as speaking "in him". He seems to imply that he was
conscious of an interior voice which was not that of God but of His messenger.
The Massoretic text, the Septuagint, and the Vulgate all agree in thus
describing the communications made by the angel to the prophet. It is a pity
that the "Revised Version" should, in apparent defiance of the
above-named texts, obscure this trait by persistently giving the rendering:
"the angel that talked with me: instead of "within me" (cf.
Zach., i, 9, 13, 14; ii, 3; iv, 5; v, 10).
Such appearances of angels generally last only so long as the
delivery of their message requires, but frequently their mission is prolonged,
and they are represented as the constituted guardians of the nations at some
particular crisis, e.g. during the Exodus (Exod., xiv, 19; Baruch, vi, 6).
Similarly it is the common view of the Fathers that by "the prince of the
Kingdom of the Persians" (Dan., x, 13; x, 21) we are to understand the
angel to whom was entrusted the spiritual care of that kingdom, and we may
perhaps see in the "man of Macedonia" who appeared to St. Paul at
Troas, the guardian angel of that country (Acts. xvi, 9). The Septuagint
(Deut., xxxii, 8), has preserved for us a fragment of information on this head,
though it is difficult to gauge its exact meaning: "When the Most High
divided the nations, when He scattered the children of Adam, He established the
bounds of the nations according to the number of the angels of God". How
large a part the ministry of angels played, not merely in Hebrew theology, but
in the religious ideas of other nations as well, appears from the expression
"like to an angel of God". It is three times used of David (II K.,
xiv, 17, 20; xiv, 27) and once by Achis of Geth (I K., xxlx, 9). It is even
applied by Esther to Assuerus (Esther, xv, 16), and St. Stephen's face is said
to have looked "like the face of an angel" as he stood before the
Sanhedrin (Acts, vi, 15).
Personal guardians
Throughout the Bible we find it repeatedly implied that each
individual soul has its tutelary
angel. Thus Abraham, when sending his steward to seek a wife for Isaac,
says: "He will send His angel before thee" (Genesis 24:7). The words
of the ninetieth Psalm which the devil quoted to our Lord
(Matt., iv, 6) are well known, and Judith accounts for her heroic deed by
saying: "As the Lord liveth, His angel hath been my keeper" (xiii,
20). These passages and many like them (Gen., xvi, 6-32; Osee, xii, 4; III K.,
xix, 5; Acts, xii, 7; Ps., xxxiii, 8), though they will not of themselves
demonstrate the doctrine that every individual has his appointed guardian
angel, receive their complement in our Saviour's words: "See that you
despise not on of these little ones; for I say to you that their angels in Heaven
always see the face of My Father Who is in Heaven" (Matt, xviii, 10),
words which illustrate the remark of St. Augustine: "What lies hidden in
the Old Testament, is made manifest in the New". Indeed, the book of
Tobias seems intended to teach this truth more than any other, and St. Jerome
in his commentary on the above words of our Lord says: "The dignity of a
soul is so great, that each has a guardian angel from its birth." The
general doctrine that the angels are our appointed guardians is considered to
be a point of faith, but that each individual member of the human race has his
own individual guardian angel is not of faith (de fide); the view has,
however, such strong support from the Doctors of the Church that it would be
rash to deny it (cf. St. Jerome, supra). Peter the Lombard (Sentences,
lib. II, dist. xi) was inclined to think that one angel had charge of several
individual human beings. St. Bernard's beautiful homilies (11-14) on the
ninetieth Psalm breathe the spirit of the Church without however deciding the
question. The Bible represents the angels not only as our guardians, but also
as actually interceding for us. "The angel Raphael (Tob., xii, 12) says:
"I offered thy prayer to the Lord" (cf. Job, v, 1 (Septuagint), and
33:23 (Vulgate); Apocalypse 8:4). The Catholic cult of the angels is thus
thoroughly scriptural. Perhaps the earliest explicit declaration of it is to be
found in St. Ambrose's words: "We should pray to the angels who are given
to us as guardians" (De Viduis, ix); (cf. St. Aug., Contra Faustum, xx,
21). An undue cult of angels was reprobated by St. Paul (Col., ii, 18), and
that such a tendency long remained in the same district is evidenced by Canon
35 of the Synod of Laodicea.
As Divine Agents Governing The World
The foregoing passages, especially those relating to the angels
who have charge of various districts, enable us to understand the practically
unanimous view of the Fathers that it is the angels who put into execution
God's law regarding the physical world. The Semitic belief in genii and
in spirits which cause good or evil is well known, and traces of it are to be
found in the Bible. Thus the pestilence which devastated Israel for David's sin
in numbering the people is attributed to an angel whom David is said to have
actually seen (II K., xxiv, 15-17), and more explicitly, I Par., xxi, 14-18).
Even the wind rustling in the tree-tops was regarded as an angel (II K., v, 23,
24; I Par., xiv, 14, 15). This is more explicitly stated with regard to the
pool of Probatica (John, v, 1-4), though these is some doubt about the text; in
that passage the disturbance of the water is said to be due to the periodic
visits of an angel. The Semites clearly felt that all the orderly harmony of
the universe, as well as interruptions of that harmony, were due to God as
their originator, but were carried out by His ministers. This view is strongly
marked in the "Book of Jubilees" where the heavenly host of good and
evil angels is every interfering in the material universe. Maimonides (Directorium
Perplexorum, iv and vi) is quoted by St. Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theol., I:1:3)
as holding that the Bible frequently terms the powers of nature angels, since
they manifest the omnipotence of God (cf. St. Jerome, In Mich., vi, 1, 2; P.
L., iv, col. 1206).
Hierarchical organization
Though the angels who appear in the earlier works of the Old
Testament are strangely impersonal and are overshadowed by the importance of
the message they bring or the work they do, there are not wanting hints
regarding the existence of certain ranks in the heavenly army.
After Adam's fall Paradise is guarded against our First Parents by
cherubim who are
clearly God's ministers, though nothing is said of their nature. Only once
again do the cherubim figure in the Bible, viz., in Ezechiel's marvellous
vision, where they are described at great length (Ezech., i), and are actually
called cherub in Ezechiel, x. The Ark was guarded by two cherubim, but
we are left to conjecture what they were like. It has been suggested with great
probability that we have their counterpart in the winged bulls and lions
guarding the Assyrian palaces, and also in the strange winged men with hawks'
heads who are depicted on the walls of some of their buildings. The seraphim
appear only in the vision of Isaias, vi, 6.
Mention has already been made of the mystic seven who stand before
God, and we seem to have in them an indication of an inner cordon that
surrounds the throne. The term archangel occurs only in St. Jude and I
Thess., iv, 15; but St. Paul has furnished us with two other lists of names of
the heavenly cohorts. He tells us (Ephes., i, 21) that Christ is raised up
"above all principality, and power, and virtue, and dominion"; and,
writing to the Colossians (i, 16), he says: "In Him were all things
created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or
dominations, or principalities or powers." It is to be noted that he uses
two of these names of the powers of darkness when (ii, 15) he talks of Christ
as "despoiling the principalities and powers . . . triumphing over them in
Himself". And it is not a little remarkable that only two verses later he
warns his readers not to be seduced into any "religion of angels". He
seems to put his seal upon a certain lawful angelology, and at the same time to
warn them against indulging superstition on the subject. We have a hint of such
excesses in the Book of Enoch, wherein, as already stated, the angels play a
quite disproportionate part. Similarly Josephus tells us (Be. Jud., II, viii,
7) that the Essenes
had to take a vow to preserve the names of the angels.
We have already seen how (Daniel 10:12-21) various districts are allotted
to various angels who are termed their princes, and the same feature reappears
still more markedly in the Apocalyptic "angels of the seven
churches", though it is impossible to decide what is the precise
signification of the term. These seven Angels of the Churches are generally
regarded as being the Bishops occupying these sees. St. Gregory Nazianzen in
his address to the Bishops at Constantinople twice terms them
"Angels", in the language of the Apocalypse.
The treatise "De Coelesti Hierarchia", which is ascribed
to St. Denis the Areopagite, and which exercised so strong an influence upon
the Scholastics, treats at great length of the hierarchies and orders of the
angels. It is generally conceded that this work was not due to St. Denis, but
must date some centuries later. Though the doctrine it contains regarding the
choirs of angels has been received in the Church with extraordinary unanimity,
no proposition touching the angelic hierarchies is binding on our faith. The
following passages from St. Gregory the Great (Hom. 34, In Evang.) will give us
a clear idea of the view of the Church's doctors on the point:
We know
on the authority of Scripture that there are nine orders of angels, viz.,
Angels, Archangels, Virtues, Powers, Principalities, Dominations, Throne,
Cherubim and Seraphim. That there are Angels and Archangels nearly every page
of the Bible tell us, and the books of the Prophets talk of Cherubim and
Seraphim. St. Paul, too, writing to the Ephesians enumerates four orders when
he says: 'above all Principality, and Power, and Virtue, and Domination'; and
again, writing to the Colossians he says: 'whether Thrones, or Dominations, or
Principalities, or Powers'. If we now join these two lists together we have
five Orders, and adding Angels and Archangels, Cherubim and Seraphim, we find
nine Orders of Angels.
St. Thomas (Summa Theologica I:108), following St. Denis (De
Coelesti Hierarchia, vi, vii), divides the angels into three hierarchies each
of which contains three orders. Their proximity to the Supreme Being serves as
the basis of this division. In the first hierarchy he places the Seraphim,
Cherubim, and Thrones; in the second, the Dominations, Virtues, and Powers; in
the third, the Principalities, Archangels, and Angels. The only Scriptural
names furnished of individual angels are Raphael, Michael, and Gabriel, names which
signify their respective attributes. Apocryphal Jewish books, such as the Book
of Enoch, supply those of Uriel and Jeremiel, while many are found in other
apocryphal sources, like those Milton names in "Paradise Lost". (On
superstitious use of such names, see above).
The number of angels
The number of the angels is frequently stated as prodigious
(Daniel 7:10; Apocalypse 5:11; Psalm 67:18; Matthew 26:53). From the use of the
word host (sabaoth) as a synonym for the heavenly army it is hard to
resist the impression that the term "Lord of Hosts" refers to God's
Supreme command of the angelic multitude (cf. Deuteronomy 33:2; 32:43;
Septuagint). The Fathers see a reference to the relative numbers of men and
angels in the parable of the hundred sheep (Luke 15:1-3), though this may seem
fanciful. The Scholastics, again, following the treatise "De Coelesti
Hierarchia" of St. Denis, regard the preponderance of numbers as a
necessary perfection of the angelic host (cf. St. Thomas, Summa Theol., I:1:3).
The evil angels
The distinction of good and bad angels constantly appears in the
Bible, but it is instructive to note that there is no sign of any dualism or
conflict between two equal principles, one good and the other evil. The
conflict depicted is rather that waged on earth between the Kingdom of God and
the Kingdom of the Evil One, but the latter's inferiority is always supposed.
The existence, then, of this inferior, and therefore created, spirit, has to be
explained.
The gradual development of Hebrew consciousness on this point is
very clearly marked in the inspired writings. The account of the fall of our
First Parents (Gen., iii) is couched in such terms that it is impossible to see
in it anything more than the acknowledgment of the existence of a principle of
evil who was jealous of the human race. The statement (Gen., vi, 1) that the
"sons of God" married the daughters of men is explained of the fall
of the angels, in Enoch, vi-xi, and codices, D, E F, and A of the Septuagint
read frequently, for "sons of God", oi aggeloi tou theou.
Unfortunately, codices B and C are defective in Ge., vi, but it is probably
that they, too, read oi aggeloi in this passage, for they constantly so
render the expression "sons of God"; cf. Job, i, 6; ii, 1; xxxviii,
7; but on the other hand, see Ps., ii, 1; lxxxviii, & (Septuagint). Philo,
in commenting on the passage in his treatise "Quod Deus sit
immutabilis", i, follows the Septuagint. For Philo's doctrine of Angels,
cf. "De Vita Mosis", iii, 2, "De Somniis", VI: "De
Incorrupta Manna", i; "De Sacrifciis", ii; "De Lege
Allegorica", I, 12; III, 73; and for the view of Gen., vi, 1, cf. St.
Justin, Apol., ii 5. It should moreover be noted that the Hebrew word nephilim
rendered gigantes, in 6:4, may mean "fallen ones". The Fathers
generally refer it to the sons of Seth, the chosen stock. In I K., xix, 9, an
evil spirit is said to possess Saul, though this is probably a metaphorical
expression; more explicit is III B., xxii, 19-23, where a spirit is depicted as
appearing in the midst of the heavenly army and offering, at the Lord's
invitation, to be a lying spirit in the mouth of Achab's false prophets. We
might, with Scholastics, explain this is malum poenae, which is actually
caused by God owing to man's fault. A truer exegesis would, however, dwell on
the purely imaginative tone of the whole episode; it is not so much the mould
in which the message is cast as the actual tenor of that message which is meant
to occupy our attention.
The picture afforded us in Job, i and ii, is equally imaginative;
but Satan, perhaps the earliest individualization of the fallen Angel, is
presented as an intruder who is jealous of Job. He is clearly an inferior being
to the Deity and can only touch Job with God's permission. How theologic
thought advanced as the sum of revelation grew appears from a comparison of II
K, xxiv, 1, with I Paral., xxi, 1. Whereas in the former passage David's sin
was said to be due to "the wrath of the Lord" which "stirred up
David", in the latter we read that "Satan moved David to number
Israel". In Job. iv, 18, we seem to find a definite declaration of the
fall: "In His angels He found wickedness." The Septuagint of Job
contains some instructive passages regarding avenging angels in whom we are
perhaps to see fallen spirits, thus xxxiii, 23: "If a thousand
death-dealing angels should be (against him) not one of them shall wound
him"; and xxxvi, 14: "If their souls should perish in their youth (through
rashness) yet their life shall be wounded by the angels"; and xxi, 15:
"The riches unjustly accumulated shall be vomited up, an angel shall drag
him out of his house;" cf. Prov., xvii, 11; Ps., xxxiv, 5, 6; lxxvii, 49,
and especially, Ecclesiasticus, xxxix, 33, a text which, as far as can be
gathered from the present state of the manuscript, was in the Hebrew original.
In some of these passages, it is true, the angels may be regarded as avengers
of God's justice without therefore being evil spirits. In Zach., iii, 1-3,
Satan is called the adversary who pleads before the Lord against Jesus the High Priest.
Isaias, xiv, and Ezech., xxviii, are for the Fathers the loci classici
regarding the fall of Satan (cf. Tertull., adv. Marc., II, x); and Our Lord
Himself has given colour to this view by using the imagery of the latter
passage when saying to His Apostles: "I saw Satan like lightning falling
from heaven" (Luke, x, 18). In New Testament times the idea of the two
spiritual kingdoms is clearly established. The devil is a fallen angel who in
his fall has drawn multitudes of the heavenly host in his train. Our Lord terms
him "the Prince of this world" (John xiv, 30); he is the tempter of
the human race and tries to involve them in his fall (Matthew, xxv, 41; II
Peter, ii, 4: Ephes., vi, 12: II Cor., xi, 14; xii, 7). Christian imagery of
the devil as the dragon is mainly derived from the Apocalypse (ix, 11-15; xii,
7-9), where he is termed "the angel of the bottomless pit", "the
dragon", "the old serpent", etc., and is represented as having
actually been in combat with Archangel Michael. The similarity between scenes
such as these and the early Babylonian accounts of the struggle between Merodach
and the dragon Tiamat is very striking. Whether we are to trace its origin to
vague reminiscences of the mighty saurians which once people the earth is a
moot question, but the curious reader may consult Bousett, "The
Anti-Christ Legend" (tr. by Keane, London, 1896). The translator has
prefixed to it an interesting discussion on the origin of the Babylonian
Dragon-Myth.
The Term "Angel" In The Septuagint
We have had occasion to mention the Septuagint version more than
once, and it may not be amiss to indicate a few passages where it is our only
source of information regarding the angels. The best known passage is Is., ix,
6, where the Septuagint gives the name of the Messias, as "the Angel of
great Counsel". We have already drawn attention to Job, xx, 15, where the
Septuagint reads "Angel" instead of "God", and to xxxvi,
14, where there seems to be question of evil angels. In ix 7, Septuagint (B)
adds: "He is the Hebrew (v, 19) say of "Behemoth": "He is
the beginning of the ways of God, he that made him shall make his sword to approach
him:, the Septuagint reads: "He is the beginning of God's creation, made
for His Angels to mock at", and exactly the same remark is made about
"Leviathan", xli, 24. We have already seen that the Septuagint
generally renders the term "sons of God" by "angels", but
in Deut., xxxii, 43, the Septuagint has an addition in which both terms appear:
"Rejoice in Him all ye heavens, and adore Him all ye angels of God;
rejoice ye nations with His people, and magnify Him all ye Sons of God."
Nor does the Septuagint merely give us these additional references to angels;
it sometimes enables us to correct difficult passages concerning them in the
Vulgate and Massoretic text. Thus the difficult Elim of MT in Job, xli,
17, which the Vulgate renders by "angels", becomes "wild
beasts" in the Septuagint version. The early ideas as to the personality
of the various angelic appearances are, as we have seen, remarkably vague. At
first the angels are regarded in quite an impersonal way(Gen., xvi, 7).They are
God's vice-gerents and are often identified with the Author of their message
(Gen., xlviii, 15-16). But while we read of "the Angels of God"
meeting Jacob (Gen., xxxii, 1) we at other times read of one who is termed
"the Angel of God" par excellence, e.g. Gen., xxxi, 11. It is
true that, owing to the Hebrew idiom, this may mean no more than "an angel
of God", and the Septuagint renders it with or without the article at
will; yet the three visitors at Mambre seem to have been of different ranks,
though St. Paul (Heb., xiii, 2) regarded them all as equally angels; as the
story in Ge., xiii, develops, the speaker is always "the Lord". Thus
in the account of the Angel of the Lord who visited Gideon (Judges, vi), the
visitor is alternately spoken of as "the Angel of the Lord" and as
"the Lord". Similarly, in Judges, xiii, the Angel of the Lord
appears, and both Manue and his wife exclaim: "We shall certainly die
because we have seen God." This want of clearness is particularly apparent
in the various accounts of the Angel of Exodus. In Judges, vi, just now
referred to, the Septuagint is very careful to render the Hebrew
"Lord" by "the Angel of the Lord"; but in the story of the
Exodus it is the Lord who goes before them in the pillar of a cloud (Exod.,
xiii 21), and the Septuagint makes no change (cf. also Num., xiv, 14, and Neh.,
ix, 7-20. Yet in Exod., xiv, 19, their guide is termed "the Angel of
God". When we turn to Exod., xxxiii, where God is angry with His people
for worshipping the golden calf, it is hard not to feel that it is God Himself
who has hitherto been their guide, but who now refuses to accompany them any
longer. God offers an angel instead, but at Moses's petition He says (14)
"My face shall go before thee", which the Septuagint reads by autos
though the following verse shows that this rendering is clearly impossible, for
Moses objects: "If Thou Thyself dost not go before us, bring us not out of
this place." But what does God mean by "my face"? Is it possible
that some angel of specially high rank is intended, as in Is., lxiii, 9 (cf.
Tobias, xii, 15)? May not this be what is meant by "the angel of God"
(cf. Num., xx, 16)?
That a process of evolution in theological thought accompanied the
gradual unfolding of God's revelation need hardly be said, but it is especially
marked in the various views entertained regarding the person of the Giver of
the Law. The Massoretic text as well as the Vulgate of Exod., iii and xix-xx
clearly represent the Supreme Being as appearing to Moses in the bush and on
Mount Sinai; but the Septuagint version, while agreeing that it was God Himself
who gave the Law, yet makes it "the angel of the Lord" who appeared
in the bush. By New Testament times the Septuagint view has prevailed, and it
is now not merely in the bush that the angel of the Lord, and not God Himself
appears, but the angel is also the Giver of the Law (cf. Gal., iii, 19; Heb.,
ii, 2; Acts, vii, 30). The person of "the angel of the Lord" finds a
counterpart in the personification of Wisdom in the Sapiential books and in at
least one passage (Zach., iii, 1) it seems to stand for that "Son of
Man" whom Daniel (vii, 13) saw brought before "the Ancient of
Days". Zacharias says: "And the Lord showed me Jesus the high priest standing
before the angel of the Lord, and Satan stood on His right hand to be His
adversary". Tertullian regards many of these passages as preludes to the
Incarnation; as the Word of God adumbrating the sublime character in which He
is one day to reveal Himself to men (cf. adv, Prax., xvi; adv. Marc., II, 27;
III, 9: I, 10, 21, 22). It is possible, then, that in these confused views we
can trace vague gropings after certain dogmatic truths regarding the Trinity,
reminiscences perhaps of the early revelation of which the Protevangelium in
Ge., iii is but a relic. The earlier Fathers, going by the letter of the text,
maintained that it was actually God Himself who appeared. he who appeared was
called God and acted as God. It was not unnatural then for Tertullian, as we
have already seen, to regard such manifestations in the light of preludes to
the Incarnation, and most of the Eastern Fathers followed the same line of
thought. It was held as recently as 1851 by Vandenbroeck, "Dissertatio
Theologica de Theophaniis sub Veteri Testamento" (Louvain).
But the great Latins, St. Jerome, St. Augustine, and St. Gregory
the Great, held the opposite view, and the Scholastics as a body followed them.
St. Augustine (Sermo vii, de Scripturis, P. G. V) when treating of the burning
bush (Exod., iii) says: "That the same person who spoke to Moses should be
deemed both the Lord and an angel of the Lord, is very hard to understand. it
is a question which forbids any rash assertions bug rather demands careful
investigation . . . Some maintain that he is called both the Lord and the angel
of the Lord because he was Christ, indeed the prophet (Is., ix, 6, Septuagint
Ver.) clearly styles Christ the 'Angel of great Counsel.'" The saint
proceeds to show that such a view is tenable though we must be careful not to
fall into Arianism in stating it. He points out, however, that if we hold that
it was an angel who appeared, we must explain how he came to be called
"the Lord," and he proceeds to show how this might be: "Elsewhere
in the Bible when a prophet speaks it is yet said to be the Lord who speaks,
not of course because the prophet is the Lord but because the Lord is in the
prophet; and so in the same way when the Lord condescends to speak through the
mouth of a prophet or an angel, it is the same as when he speaks by a prophet
or apostle, and the angel is correctly termed an angel if we consider him
himself, but equally correctly is he termed 'the Lord' because God dwells in
him." He concludes: "It is the name of the indweller, not of the temple."
And a little further on: "It seems to me that we shall most correctly say
that our forefathers recognized the Lord in the angel," and he adduces the
authority of the New Testament writers who clearly so understood it and yet
sometimes allowed the same confusion of terms (cf. Heb., ii, 2, and Acts, vii,
31-33). The saint discusses the same question even more elaborately, "In
Heptateuchum," lib. vii, 54, P. G. III, 558. As an instance of how
convinced some of the Fathers were in holding the opposite view, we may note
Theodoret's words (In Exod.): "The whole passage (Exod., iii) shows that
it was God who appeared to him. But (Moses) called Him an angel in order to let
us know that it was not God the Father whom he saw -- for whose angel could the
Father be? -- but the Only-begotten Son, the Angel of great Counsel" (cf.
Eusebius, Hist. Eccles., I, ii, 7; St. Irenaeus, Haer., iii, 6). But the view
propounded by the Latin Fathers was destined to live in the Church, and the
Scholastics reduced it to a system (cf. St. Thomas, Quaest., Disp., De
Potentia, vi, 8, ad 3am); and for a very good exposition of both sides of the
question, cf. "Revue biblique," 1894, 232-247.
Angels In Babylonian Literature
The Bible has shown us that a belief in angels, or spirits intermediate
between God and man, is a characteristic of the Semitic people. It is therefore
interesting to trace this belief in the Semites of Babylonia. According to
Sayce (The Religions of Ancient Egypt and Babylonia, Gifford Lectures, 1901),
the engrafting of Semitic beliefs on the earliest Sumerian religion of
Babylonia is marked by the entrance of angels or sukallin in their
theosophy. Thus we find an interesting parallel to "the angels of the
Lord" in Nebo, "the minister of Merodach" (ibid., 355). He is
also termed the "angel" or interpreter of the will or Merodach
(ibid., 456), and Sayce accepts Hommel's statement that it can be shown from
the Minean inscriptions that primitive Semitic religion consisted of moon and
star worship, the moon-god Athtar and an "angel" god standing at the
head of the pantheon (ibid., 315). The Biblical conflict between the kingdoms
of good and evil finds its parallel in the "spirits of heaven" or the
Igigi--who constituted the "host" of which Ninip was the champion
(and from who he received the title of "chief of the angels") and the
"spirits of the earth", or Annuna-Ki, who dwelt in Hades (ibid. 355).
The Babylonian sukalli corresponded to the spirit0-messengers of the
Bible; they declared their Lord's will and executed his behests (ibid., 361).
Some of them appear to have been more than messengers; they were the
interpreters and vicegerents of the supreme deity, thus Nebo is "the
prophet of Borsippa". These angels are even termed "the sons" of
the deity whose vicegerents they are; thus Ninip, at one time the messenger of
En-lil, is transformed into his son just as Merodach becomes the son of Ea
(ibid., 496). The Babylonian accounts of the Creation and the Flood do not
contrast very favourably with the Biblical accounts, and the same must be said
of the chaotic hierarchies of gods and angels which modern research has
revealed. perhaps we are justified in seeing all forms of religion vestiges of
a primitive nature-worship which has at times succeeded in debasing the purer
revelation, and which, where that primitive revelation has not received
successive increments as among the Hebrews, results in an abundant crop of
weeds.
Thus the Bible certainly sanctions the idea of certain angels
being in charge of special districts (cf. Dan., x, and above). This belief
persists in a debased form in the Arab notion of Genii, or Jinns, who haunt
particular spots. A reference to it is perhaps to be found in Gen., xxxii, 1,2:
"Jacob also went on the journey he had begun: and the angels of God met
him: And when he saw then he said: These are the camps of God, and he called
the name of that place Mahanaim, that is, 'Camps.' " Recent explorations
in the Arab district about Petra have revealed certain precincts marked off
with stones as the abiding-laces of angels, and the nomad tribes frequent them
for prayer and sacrifice. These places bear a name which corresponds exactly
with the "Mahanaim" of the above passage in Genesis (cf. Lagrange,
Religions Semitques, 184, and Robertson Smith, Religion of the Semites, 445).
Jacob's vision at Bethel (Gen., xxviii, 12) may perhaps come under the same
category. Suffice it to say that not everything in the Bible is revelation, and
that the object of the inspired writings is not merely to tell us new truths but
also to make clearer certain truths taught us by nature. The modern view, which
tends to regard everything Babylonian as absolutely primitive and which seems
to think that because critics affix a late date to the Biblical writings the
religion therein contained must also be late, may be seen in Haag,
"Theologie Biblique" (339). This writer sees in the Biblical angels
only primitive deities debased into demi-gods by the triumphant progress of
Monotheism.
Angels in the Zend-Avesta
Attempts have also been made to trace a connection between the
angels of the Bible and the "great archangels" or
"Amesha-Spentas" of the Zend-Avesta. That the Persian domination and
the Babylonian captivity exerted a large influence upon the Hebrew conception of
the angels is acknowledged in the Talmud of Jerusalem, Rosch Haschanna, 56,
where it is said that the names of the angels were introduced from Babylon. it
is, however, by no means clear that the angelic beings who figure so largely in
the pages of the Avesta are to be referred to the older Persian
Neo-Zoroastrianism of the Sassanides. If this be the case, as Darmesteter
holds, we should rather reverse the position and attribute the Zoroastrian
angels to the influence of the Bible and of Philo. Stress has been laid upon
the similarity between the Biblical "seven who stand before God" and
the seven Amesha-Spentas of the Zend-Avesta. But it must be noted that these
latter are really six, the number seven is only obtained by counting
"their father, Ahura-Mazda," among them as their chief. Moreover,
these Zoroastrian archangels are more abstract that concrete; they are not
individuals charged with weighty missions as in the Bible.
Angels in the New Testament
Hitherto we have dwelt almost exclusively on the angels of the Old
Testament, whose visits and messages have been by no means rare; but when we
come to the New Testament their name appears on every page and the number of
references to them equals those in the Old Dispensation. It is their privilege
to announce the Zachary and Mary the dawn of Redemption, and to the shepherds
its actual accomplishment. Our Lord in His discourses talks of them as one who
actually saw them, and who, whilst "conversing amongst men", was yet
receiving the silent unseen adoration of the hosts of heaven. He describes
their life in heaven (Matt., xxii, 30; Luke, xx, 36); He tell us how they form
a bodyguard round Him and at a word from Him would avenge Him on His enemies
(Matt., xxvi, 53); it is the privilege of one of them to assist Him in His
Agony and sweat of Blood. More than once He speaks of them as auxiliaries and
witnesses at the final judgment (Matt., xvi, 27), which indeed they will
prepare (ibid., xiii, 39-49); and lastly, they are the joyous witnesses of His
triumphant Resurrection (ibid., xxviii, 2). It is easy for skeptical minds to
see in these angelic hosts the mere play of Hebrew fancy and the rank growth of
superstition, but do not the records of the angels who figure in the Bible
supply a most natural and harmonious progression? In the opening page of the
sacred story of the Jewish nation is chose out from amongst others as the
depositary of God's promise; as the people from whose stock He would one day
raise up a Redeemer. The angels appear in the course of this chosen people's
history, now as God's messengers, now as that people's guides; at one time they
are the bestowers of God's law, at another they actually prefigure the Redeemer
Whose divine purpose they are helping to mature. They converse with His
prophets, with David and Elias, with Daniel and Zacharias; they slay the hosts
camped against Israel, they serve as guides to God's servants, and the last
prophet, Malachi, bears a name of peculiar significance; "the Angel of
Jehovah." He seems to sum up in his very name the previous "ministry
by the hands of angels", as though God would thus recall the old-time
glories of the Exodus and Sinai. The Septuagint, indeed, seems not to know his
name as that of an individual prophet and its rendering of the opening verse of
his prophecy is peculiarly solemn: "The burden of the Word of the Lord of
Israel by the hand of His angel; lay it up in your hearts." All this
loving ministry on the part of the angels is solely for the sake of the
Saviour, on Whose face they desire to look. Hence when the fullness of time was
arrived it is they who bring the glad message, and sing "Gloria in
excelsis Deo." They guide the newborn King of Angels in His hurried flight
into Egypt, and minister to Him in the desert. His second coming and the dire
events that must precede that, are revealed to His chosen servant in the island
of Patmos, It is a question of revelation again, and consequently its ministers
and messengers of old appear once more in the sacred story and the record of
God's revealing love ends fittingly almost as it had begun: "I, Jesus, have sent My angel
to testify to you these things in the churches" (Apoc., xxii, 16). It is
easy for the student to trace the influence of surrounding nations and of other
religions in the Biblical account of the angels. Indeed it is needful and
instructive to do so, but it would be wrong to shut our eyes to the higher line
of development which we have shown and which brings out so strikingly the
marvellous unity and harmony of the whole divine story of the Bible. (See also Angels in Early Christian Art)
In
addition to works mentioned above, see St. Thomas, Summa Theol., I, QQ. 50-54
and 106-114; Suarez De Angelis, lib. i-iv.
HUGH POPE
Transcribed by Jim Holden
The Catholic
Encyclopedia, Volume I
Copyright © 1907 by Robert Appleton Company
Online Edition Copyright © 1999 by Kevin Knight
Nihil Obstat, March 1, 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor
Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York