Angels
ANGELS
Celestial spirits who serve God in various capacities. This article treats of (1) the angels in the Bible, (2) theology of the angels, (3) devotion to the angels, and (4) iconography of the angels.
IN THE BIBLE
The word "angel" ultimately is derived from the Greek ἅγγελος, which is the translation of Hebrew māl’āk, messenger. The primary significance of angel,
therefore, is messenger from God, a significance describing function rather than being or nature. A few other Hebrew words sometimes signify angels, and some of these are more indicative of being, e.g.: ’abbîrîm, the mighty [Ps 77(78).25]; 'ĕlohîm (gods) of Ps 8.6, which is still translated angels, but as such is questionable; b enē 'ĕlohîm of Jb 1.6; 2.1 and b ene ’ēlîm (sons of god) of Ps 88(89).7; 28(29).1, which surely mean angels in Job and probably in the Psalms, but the designation "sons" is one of association and identity of wills rather than similarity of natures; m ešār etîm [Ps 102(103).21], ministers, which refers to the heavenly spirits or angels; 'ăbādîm (Jb 4.18), servants, which is used in parallel with angels; the Aramaic 'îr, watchers, of Dn 4.10, 14, 20, which is interpreted by the Septuagint (LXX) as angels; ṣābā' (1 Kgs 22.19; 2 Chr 18.18; Neh 9.6; Ps 148.2), host(s), which indicates the ordered service of the angels; q edōšîm [Ps 88(89).6, 8; Jb 5.1; 15.15; Dn 8.13], holy ones, the angels as "set apart" for the service of God.
Angels in the Old Testament. The angel is an object of divine faith. Knowledge of their existence must come from God. Therefore, the intelligence concerning angels that one may garner from Hebrew Scripture is not a human fabrication or an evolution of religious thought resulting in the projection upon human consciousness of images not truly extramental. The angels are real, possessors of real objective natures, whose appearances and functions are real.
It is true that in the Scriptures, to some degree in the OT, more noticeably in the NT, a development can be discerned in the way man comprehends the angelic world. It is true also that God undoubtedly used the cultural and religious content of man's knowledge as a screen on which to project knowledge of His messengers and their work. Thus, the disturbed course of Israel through eras and empires was influenced by foreign ideas that God willed to use, as catalysts and elements, to communicate His truth of beings superior to man, instruments of His government of His people. To classify Israel's angels merely as the residue of former polytheism, the extravagances of religious élan, or the Jewish expropriations of Persian ideas is to deny Judaeo-Christian belief in them. Polytheism, devout speculation, and Persia were all present, but as catalysts speeding the development of the essential relationship of God's people to Himself and His heavenly court.
Nature of Angels. Hebrew mentality paid little heed to the abstract and did not advert to the spiritual defined as nonmaterial. The Israelite never thought of God as being philosophically supernatural. Hence one does not find in the OT a sophisticated theological definition of the nature of angel or a formally developed angelology. Angels are mentioned frequently, however, and on the whole are understood to be superhuman, heavenly beings whose normal habitat is Yahweh's court (Jb 1.6; 2.1), where they enter into divine counsels (1 Kgs 22.19–22) yet always in subordination to God [Tb 12.18; Ps 102(103).20–21]. Like Yahweh they are normally invisible, unapproachable, and unaffected by human needs (Tb 12.19). Thus, without philosophical advertence to them, angels are assigned to God's extramundane place and manner of being (Gn 28.12). Though there is no explicit mention of their creation, they belong to God (Ex 23.23; 32.34). In the OT there is no mention of fallen angels or of battles in heaven, although Satan, the adversary of Job, is gradually thought of as an evil force (Jb 1.6–12; 2.1–7; Zec 3.1–2; 1 Chr 21.1).
Appearance of Angels. For the most part, the angels sent by God to intervene in men's lives appeared to them in human form (Gn 18.2; 19.1; Dn 8.15). Because of the editorial layers of Genesis chapters 18 and 19, it is difficult to determine whether there was something in the appearance of the "three men" that revealed them to be angels (19.1). In Gn 18.2 Abraham saw three men, yet Yahweh alone appeared to him in 18.1, and again Yahweh spoke alone in 18.13, 17, 20, etc. Samson's mother, however, asserted that a man of God, who appeared to her, had the "appearance" of an angel of God (Jgs 13.6), as though there was a standard way to recognize an angel in human guise, but Manoe does not know him to be the Angel of the Lord who is later identified as Yahweh Himself (Jgs 13.3–23). Only one angel is said to be able to fly (Dn 9.21).
Function of Angels. The primary function of angels is to do God's will (Tb 12.18). They serve and praise God and are closer to Him than men [Ps 102(103).20–21; Dn 7.10]. Yet God's will has them also intervene in human affairs, by the exercise of power over nature without any apparent material energy (Gn ch. 19), by communicating God's messages (Gn 31.11; Zec ch. 4), by destroying and punishing (2 Kgs 19.35; 2 Sm 24.16), and by helping and saving [1 Kgs 19.5–8; Ps 33(34).8; 90(91).11–12; Dn 6.23].
Angels in the New Testament. With the advent of the Son of God into the world, the prime office of the angel, mediation between God and men, was overshadowed by Our Lord's perfect mediation. Whereas the Old Law came through the ministry of God's angels (Gal 3.19; Heb 2.2), the new dispensation came through His Son, superior to the angels and adored by them (Heb 1.1–8). The Christian dispensation is not subject to angels but to the Lord Jesus (Heb 2.5–18). Also, a greater knowledge of angels and their functions in God's government has been revealed to Christians, which has led to the development of the more elaborate doctrine of Christian angelology.
Nature of Angels. Angels are spirits (Heb 1.14). Their spirituality is not simply immateriality but is totally above human experience so that a worthy man's spiritualization at the resurrection will make him the angel's equal, i.e., unmarried, immortal, and the son of God and of the resurrection (Lk 20.36; Mt 22.30; Mk 12.25). Angels see, praise, and worship God in His presence (Mt 18.10; Rv 5.11–13; 7.11–12; 8.2). They experience joy (Lk 15.10); they desire to bend over and get a better look at the mysteries of salvation (1 Pt 1.12)—obvious anthropomorphic expressions applied to angelic activity. They are stronger and more powerful than men (2 Pt 2.11) and instill fear by reflecting God's glory (Acts 10.4). Yet, at some time they were capable of rebelling against God, for some sinned (2 Pt 2.4; Jude 6). The consequence of the evil angels' defection is described in a mysterious battle won by Michael and his angels over satan and his angels (Rv 12.7–9; cf. Mt 25.41). The NT texts suppose that the evil angels are unalterably opposed to God and incapable of redemption.
The notion of angelic rank and gradation, adopted from Jewish literature, also began to crystallize (Jude 8–9; Lk 1.19; Eph 1.21; Col 1.16; see section 2, below). As to the number, Christ speaks of 12 legions (Mt 26.53); the author of Hebrews, of many thousands (Heb 12.22); and John, of thousands of thousands of angels (Rv 5.11). The actual multitude of the angels is vast, therefore, but beyond that nothing else is known.
Appearance of Angels. Of themselves, spiritual beings are invisible and intangible to men. Hence when angels communicate with men, they ordinarily assume a human form that is either indicated or presumed in the text, e.g., the angelic appearances to Zachary (Lk 1.11), to Mary (Lk 1.26, 28), to the shepherds (Lk 2.9, 13), to the witnesses at the tomb (Mt 28.2–7; Mk 16.5; Jn 20.12; Lk 24.4), and to Peter (Acts 12.7). In some of these appearances there is an aura of glory, i.e., light, radiance, and whiteness. The angels mentioned so frequently in the Revelation are described with the imagery of the OT apocalypses, adapted to the author's purposes (Rv 10.1). These descriptions of angelic appearances to men are anthropomorphic accounts of supernatural experiences, and as a result, it is impossible to determine their material objectivity in detail.
Functions of Angels. "Are they not all ministering spirits, sent for service, for the sake of those who shall inherit salvation?" (Heb 1.14). The angels are subject to Christ (Eph 1.20–22; 1 Pt 3.22), and their prime role is to minister to Jesus and His kingdom. They announce its preparation and its actual commencement (Lk 1.11, 19, 26–37). They obviate obstacles to the King's advent (Mt 1.20; 2.13, 19–20); they are the first heralds of the gospel of peace (Lk 2.9–13); and they minister to and strengthen the King (Mt 4.11; 26.53; Lk 22.43). As harbingers of glory, they roll back the stone from the tomb's mouth (Mt 28.2–4), wait for those who would seek the living among the dead, and give them the first news of the victory of the light over darkness (Mt 28.5–7; Mk 16.5–7; Lk 24.4–7; Jn 20.12–13). For the children of light, the little ones, they are advocates before God (Mt 18.10; Acts 12.11) and bearers of prayers to God (Rv 8.3). Through the good offices of angels, the Prophets of the new and eternal Covenant are delivered from bondage (Acts 5.19; 12.7–11). The vital force of God's Kingdom, the grace of its King, is spread through angels' instrumentality to new peoples and in new directions (Acts 8.26; 10.3, 22; 27.23–24).
They avenge God's honor (Acts 12.23), and on the day of judgment the angels of His power (2 Thes 1.7) will accompany the King in His parousia (Mk 8.38), when they will be part of Christ's and His Father's glory and gather together the elect (Lk 9.26; Mt 25.31). They will gather also the workers of evil and cast them into the fire (Mt 13.41), thus separating the wicked from the just (Mt 13.49). Jesus will acknowledge before the angels those who in their lives have acknowledged Him before men (Lk 12.8–9), and Christians will enter the heavenly Jerusalem in the company of myriads of angels (Heb 12.22). They are not, however, to be worshiped by the citizens of God's Kingdom (Col 2.18); rather, the saints, who belong to Jesus, will judge the angels (1 Cor 6.3).
The angelic panoply of the Revelation deserves special mention, but it is much too intricate for detailed treatment here. Since almost everything in Apocalyptic literature is symbolic, undoubtedly the angels of many of this book's visions are also symbolic, e.g., the seven angels of the churches (Rv 2.1–3.14, passim ). At least this much may be said of the angels of Revelation: they are servitors of God's power, glory, and judgment and are constantly active in God's government of apocalyptical and eschatological battle.
See Also: cherubim; seraphim; angels, guardian; michael, archangel; gabriel, archangel; raphael, archangel.
Bibliography: Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture, ed. b. orchard et al. (London–New York 1957). a. lemonnyer, Dictionnaire de la Bible, suppl., ed. l. pirot, et al. (Paris 1928) 1:255–262. j. bonsirven, ibid. 4:1161–66. Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Bible (New York 1963) 81–87. k. rahner, Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, ed. j. hofer and k. rahner (Freiburg 1957–65) 1:533–538. j. michl, ibid. 3:863–867. w. g. heidt, Angelology of the Old Testament (Washington, D.C. 1949). j. l. mckenzie, "The Divine Sonship of the Angels," Catholic Bible Quarterly 5 (1943) 293–300.
[t. l. fallon]
THEOLOGY
Christian theology drew on Holy Scripture, both the Old and the New Testament, for its angelology, but in the beginning it was also guided by extra-biblical, Judaic ideas as well as by prevailing views on nature-spirits. In this way opinions about the angels that were contemporary and popular gained, at times, wide circulation. Gradually, however, in the course of a long development and refinement, theology time and again pared away these accretions, until finally, through speculative elaboration of the concepts contained in Holy Scripture, there evolved an angelology that, with varying degrees of certitude, has become the doctrine of the Church.
Nature of the angels. In pre-Christian Judaism there already existed the conviction that angels were spiritual beings without bodies (First Book of Enoch 15.6; Philo, De sacrif. Abelis et Caini 5), and that, consequently, they were visible to men only as apparitions and did not appear in material bodies (Tb 12.19). For this reason, angels were always known in Christendom as spiritual beings (Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 2.30.6–7; Pseudo-Dionysius, Hierarchia coelestis 1.3; Eccl. hier 1.2; Gregory the Great, Moralia 2.8;4.8), and were called simply "spirits" (Tertullian, Apologeticum 22.8; Clement of Alexandria, Str. 5.36.3; 7.82.5; Origen, Contra Celsus 4.24–25; 6.18; cf. Heb 1.14). They were said not to have a body of flesh (Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 3.20.4; Eusebius Praeparatio evangelica 4.3.18), which did not mean, however, that they had no body of any kind, i.e., absolute spirituality as opposed to some sort of corporeality. It was said rather that angels had an immaterial body corresponding to their nature (Tertullian, De carne Chris-ti 6.9: "constat angelos … substantiae spiritalis, etsi corporis alicuius, sui tamen generis"; see also Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. 28.31; Ambrose, De Abrahamo 2.58; Augustine, Lib. Arb. 3.11.33; Gen. Ad Litt. 3.10). These bodies were considered to be in some way vaporous or firelike (Basil, Spir. 38: ἡ μἑν οὐσία α[symbol omitted]τ[symbol omitted]ν ἀέριον πνε[symbol omitted]μα, εἰ τύχοι, ἣπ[symbol omitted]ρ ἄυλον; Fulgentius, Trin. 9: the good angels have a corpus aethereum, id est igneum, the bad a corpus aerium ). This was not to say, however, that they were material in any sense known to man's experience (Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. 38.9). At that time the view prevailed that everything created was corporeal; the angels, then, could be no exception (cf. Gennadius, Liber ecclesiasticorum dogmatum 12: "creatura omnis corporea est: angeli et omnes caelestes virtutes corporeae, licet non carne subsistant; ex eo autem corporeas esse credimus intellectuales naturas, quod localitate circumscribuntur"). Augustine, to be sure, already knew of the opinion concerning the pure spirituality of angels, but he did not think that it could be accepted inasmuch as occasionally they became visible in visions (Epistolae 95.8). Pseudo-Dionysius was the first to teach the complete spirituality of angels (Hierarchia coelestis 2.2–3; 4.2–3; Eccl. hier. 1.2; Div. nom. 7.2) and following him was Gregory the Great (Moralia 2.8; 4.8; 7.50; cf. Dialogues 4.3.29). But this doctrine still encountered long opposition because of the contrary views of many Fathers in the East as well as in the West, where it was opposed by the authority of Augustine. Then, Rupert of Deutz espoused the notion that the bodies of angels were vaporous (De victoria Verbi Dei 1.28, Patrologia Latina 169:1241–42; In Gen. 1.11; Patrologia Latina 167, 208–209), while Bernard of Clairvaux took no stand on the question (De consideratione 5.4.7; cf. In Cant. sermo 5.7). It was first in the period of high scholasticism (e.g., Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae 1a, 50.1) and then, subsequently, that a spirituality of angels, no longer burdened by any corporeality, was generally taught.
Holy Scripture and the history of the Church tell of the appearances of angels. This led to the question of how spiritual beings could be seen. It was thought that an angel was perceived in an ethereal body that was proper to it (Augustine, Trin. 3.5; Enchir. 59; Fulgentius, Trin. 9), or that he assumed a material body for the apparition (Augustine, Trin. 3.5; Augustine took this possibility into consideration but avoided making a decision on the question), perhaps a body from air (Gregory the Great, Moralia 28.3: "ad tempus ex aere corpora sumerent", so also Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae 1a, 51.2), all of which were inadequate hypotheses. In any case, so it was said, an angel never showed himself in a body of flesh (John Chrysostom, C. Anom. 7.6), nor in his true form, but in a special form suited to the apparition (ἐν μετασχηματισμᾦ: John Damascene, Fide orth. 2.3; Patrologia Graeca : 94, 869).
Angels as moral beings. The doctrine that God had created the angels was, in general, firmly held from the beginning [Justin, Dialogues 88.5; 141.1; Athenagoras, Leg. 24.3; Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 2.2.3; Clement of Alexandria, Prot. 63.2; Augustine, Civ. 9.23; 12.26(25)], and, in fact, through the power of the preexisting Christ (Tatian, Orat. 7.1–2; Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 2.2.4; 3.8.3; Origen, Princ. 1.7.1; Athanasius, C. Ar. 1.62; cf. Col 1.16). The angels, moreover, came into being before any other creature [Basil, Hex. 1.5; Augustine, Conf. 12.13 (according to these explanations the concept of heaven in Gn 1.1 would include the creation of the angels); Civ. 11.9, 32; Gregory the Great, Moralia 28.34] as beings gifted with reason and given freedom for forming personal, moral decisions (Justin, Dialogues 102.4; Tatian, Orat. 7.3; Athenagoras, Leg. 24.4; Irenaeus, Ad-versus haereses 4.37.1, 6; Augustine, Civ. 22.1; Gregory the Great, Moralia 6.20).
The angels, therefore, could also sin (Augustine, Enchir. 15). Origen was of the opinion that all the heavenly spirits had sinned, and, according to the gravity of the offense, they had then become demons, souls of men, or angels (Princ. 1.8.1). Other sources supposed that only a part of the angels had sinned. For the most part, in the beginning, their sin was considered in conjunction with a Judaic opinion (Book of Jubilees 4.22; 5.1, 6, 10; First Book of Enoch 6–7 and frequently; Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch 56.12–13; Philo, De gigantibus 6; Flavius Josephus, Ant. 1.3.1.73) to be one of sexual union with human women [Justin, 2 Apol. 4(5).3; Athenagoras, Leg. 24.5; Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 4.36.4; Clement of Alexandria, Str. 3.59.2; 5.10.2; Tertullian, De cultu fem. 1.2.1–4; 1.4.1; Cyprian, De hab. virg. 14; Ambrose, De virginibus 1.52–53; De Noe et Arca 4; cf. Jude 6; 2 Pt 2.4]. This opinion was based on a specific interpretation of the "Sons of God" in Gn 6.2, 4, but there were also other interpretations assigned to the passage (Origen, Contra Celsus 5.55; Augustine, Civ. 15.22–23; John Chrysostom, Homily 22 in Gen. 2). The sin of the angels was then connected with abuse of the service that God had intrusted to them (Origen, Homily 4 in Ezech. 1; In Jo. 13.59.412), and especially with pride (Athenagoras, Leg. 24.4; John Chrysostom, Homily 22 in Gen. 2; Augustine, Gen. ad litt. 11.15; Enchir. 28; Gregory the Great, Moralia 4.8; 27.65). According to those who held for a sexual transgression, the sin of the angels occurred in the course of human history, namely, before the flood; according to those who presumed a sin of a different kind, it had already occurred at the beginning of the world (Augustine, Civ. 15.23). This view then prevailed generally. The sin of Satan and the sin of the bad angels had to be considered different things as long as the sin of the angels was presumed to be sexual, because the devil existed, as the seducer, in Paradise (Gn 3.1–5, 13–14) long before the fall of the angels. Already from the second century, however, the two offenses were linked in such a way that the other angels were thought to have been taken up in the sin of the one angel who through pride became Satan (Tatian, Orat. 7.5; Augustine, Enchir. 28; Gregory the Great, Moralia 4.15). It also continued to be the view of later times (e.g., Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae 1a, 63.8; Suárez, De angelis 5.12.13).
According to an early opinion, the rest of the angels, who had not sinned the previous time, did not yet experience the full beatitude of heaven, but they had first to undergo a period of trial like humans on earth (cf. Ignatius, Smyrn. 6.1; Clement of Alexandria, Str. 7.5.2). They were not without guilt (Ambrose, Expos. Ps 118.8.29; De Spir. Sancto 3.134; Jerome, In Micheam 2 at 6.1–2, concerning the angels of the Churches in Rv ch. 2 and 3, who are praised and reprimanded) and required the forgiveness of God (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catech. 2.10). Gradually, however, another opinion prevailed according to which the angels were absolutely spotless and happy beings (Methodius, Symp. 3.6; Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. 38.9; Augustine, Civ. 10.26; Enchir. 57; Pseudo-Dionysius, Hierarchia coelestis 7.2; Eccl. hier. 6.3, 6; Gregory the Great, Moralia 18.71; 27.65); they were sanctified by the Holy Spirit from their creation (Basil, Hom. in Ps. 32.4; John Damascene, Fide Orth. 2.3, Patrologia Graeca 94:869); they had never been involved in sin (Gregory the Great, Moralia 18.71), and they live in blessed communion with God [Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. 28.31; Augustine, Civ. 7.30; 11.13; Doct. christ. 1.31(30); Pseudo-Dionysius, Hierarchia coelestis 4.2].
Service of the angels. According to the general view, the angels serve God (Clement of Rome, 1 Clem. 34.5–6; Clement of Alexandria, Str. 7.3.4; Origen, Contra Celsus 8.13, 25; Athanasius, C. Ar. 1.55, 62; Augustine, Civ. 10.26), who works in creation through them (Tertullian, De anima 37.1; Origen, Contra Celsus 8.47; Augustine, Civ. 7.30; 10.12). The angels, however, also serve men, especially Christians [Hermas, Vis. 4.2.4; Sim. 5.4.4; Clement of Alexandria, Str. 5.91.3; Origen, Contra Celsus 1.60; Athanasius, C.Ar. 1.61; Augustine, Civ. 7.30; Doctr. christ. 1.33(30); cf. Heb 1.14]. It was believed that God even appointed a guardian angel for every man (Clement of Alexandria, Str. 6.157.5; Origen, Orat. 11.5; Contra Celsus 5.57; Princ. 1.8.1; Ambrose. Explan. Ps. 38.32; Jerome, In Matth. 3 at 18.10; John Chrysostom, Hom. 59 in Mt. 4; cf. Mt 18.10; Acts 12.15) or, according to another explanation, at least for the baptized (Origen, Contra Celsus 6.41; Princ. 2.10.7; Basil, Adv. Eun. 3.1; John Chrysostom, Hom. 59 in Mt. 4). While Pseudo-Dionysius and Gregory the Great, theologians very influential in angelology, never mention a personal guardian angel, in the Middle Ages the view prevailed that every man had such a spirit at his side (e.g., Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologia 1a, 113.2–5). An echo of a prior Judaic view (Qumran, Manual of Discipline 3.18–19) was the opinion that every man had at his side an angel of justice and an angel of wickedness (Hermas, Mand. 6.2.1–10; Origen, Princ. 3.2.4; Cassian, Conl. 7.13; 8.17 13.12).
According to an early Christian view, nations also have their angels (Irenaeus, Adversus haereses 3.12.9; Clement of Alexandria, Str. 6.157.5; Origen, Contra Celssus 5.29–32; Princ. 1.5.2; 3.3.3; John Chrysostom, Hom. 59 in Mt 4; Jerome, In Dan. at 10.13; Augustine, In ps. 88 sermo 1.3; Pseudo-Dionysius, Hierarchia coelestis 9.2–4; Gregory the Great, Moralia 17.17; cf. Dn 10.13, 20–21; 12.1), cities likewise (Clement of Alexandria, Str. 6.157.5; Origen, Hom. 12 in Luc., Rauer 87; Jerome, In Ierem. 6.7 at Jer 30.12) and the Christian communities (Hermas, Sim. 5.3; Tertullian, De pudicitia 14.28; Origen, Orat. 11.3; 31.6–7; Princ. 1.8.1; Ambrose, In Luc. 2.50; cf. Rv 1.20; ch. 2–3).
Various duties in creation were attributed to the angels (Justin, 2 Apol. 4(5).2; Athenagoras, Leg. 10.3–4; 24.3; Origen, Contra Celsus 8.31–32, 36; Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. 28.31; Augustine, Civ. 7.30; Gen. ad litt. 8.24: "sublimibus angelis … subdita est omnis natura corporea, omnis inrationalis vita, omnis voluntas vel infirma vel prava, ut hoc de subditis vel cum subditis agant, quod naturae ordo poscit in omnibus iubente illo, cui subiecta sunt omnia"; ibid. 8.45, 47). They were said to move the stars (Clement of Alexandria, Str. 5.37.2), and to be placed over the four elements: earth, water, air, and fire (Origen, Hom. 10 in Jer. 6; cf. Rv 7.1–2; 14.18; 16.5), over plants (Origen, Hom. 10 in Jer. 6) and animals (Hermas, Vis. 4.2.4; Origen, Hom. 10 in Jer. 6; Hom. 14 in Num. 2). But this concept of nature-angels also met with rejection because it was thought unworthy in the Christian view of their contemplation of God (Jerome, In Hab. at 1.14). In refined form, however, it still perdured in the Middle Ages and even in Thomas Aquinas, according to whose doctrine all things corporeal were governed by angels (Summa theologiae 1a, 110.1–3).
What is more, it was thought that the procreation of living creatures could not be explained except by the participation of angels (Origen, Contra Celssus 8.57; Hom. 14 in Num. 2); even human beings were said to originate with their help [Tertullian, De anima 37.1; Clement of Alexandria, Excerpta ex Theo. 53.3; Origen, In Jo. 13.50 (49).326–327, 329, 335]. They were, indeed, not considered for this reason to be creators of life (Augustine, Civ. 12.25–26(24–25); Trin. 3.8.13], but to be helpers in a manner that men were not capable of discerning (Augustine, Gen. ad litt. 9.16).
Angels punish men (Hermas, Sim. 6.2.5–7; Clement of Alexandria, Str. 7.12.5; Cyprian, Ad Demetrianum 22; Ambrose, De Abraham 2; Gregory the Great, Hom. in evang. 38.5; Moralia 19.46); these angels were thought by some to be evil spirits (Jerome, In Is. 6 at 13.3), by others good spirits (Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.28.12; Ambrose, Epist. 34.10; Augustine, Civ. 9.5).
Angels take part in the Divine Service with Christians (Origen, Orat. 31.5–6; Ambrose, In Luc. 1.12; Const. App. 8.4.5; Gregory the Great, Dialogues 4.58) and celebrate with the Church on earth the feasts of Christendom (Gregory of Nazianzus, Orat. 38.17; John Chrysostom, Sermo de resurrectione 3). The angels also bring the prayers of men before God (Clement of Alexandria, Str. 7.39.3; Origen, Orat. 11.1, 5; Contra Celssus 5.4; 8.36; Ambrose, In Luc. 8.61; Augustine, In psalm. 78.1) and watch over men from heaven (Clement of Alexandria, Str. 7.20.4; Tertullian, De spectaculis 27.3; Basil, Hom. de ieiunio 2.2).
Finally, it was expected that at men's death angels would come and lead the souls of the deceased into the next world (Tertullian, De anima 53.6; Origen, Hom. 5 in Num. 3; John Chrysostom, Laz. 2.2; Gregory the Great, Hom. in evang. 35.8; Moralia 8.30; Dial. 2.35; 4.7, 19; in the Roman rite, the "Ordo commendationis animae" and the Offertory of the Mass for the dead; cf. Lk 16.22).
Groupings of angels. From Judaic tradition (Tb 12.15; First Book of Enoch 20.2–7; 61.10; Testament of Levi 3.2–8) and from the New Testament (Rom 8.38; 1 Cor 15.24; Eph 1.21; Col 1.16) the view was taken that there were various orders of angels. The princes of the angels, who are usually called ἀρχάγγελοι, archangels, command a leading role [Epistula Apostolorum 13(24); Irenaeus Adversus haereses 5.25.5; Clement of Alexandria, Str. 6.41.2; Pseudo-Dionysius, Hierarchia coelestis 9.2]. As was already true in Judaism, so also at this time their numbers fluctuated. Four such angels are mentioned (Orac. Sib. 2.215), six (Hermas, Vis. 3.1.6–7), or seven (Clement of Alexandria, Str. 6.143.1). Under the influence of the Book of Tobit (12.15) and Revelation (ch. 8 and 9; cf. 1.4), the number was finally fixed at seven, and they have been revered, especially in the religion of the common people, throughout the entire Middle Ages in the East and West and even down into modern times. It was, however, only the three archangels mentioned in Holy Scripture, michael, gabriel, and raphael, who received attention in theology and who were also gradually honored in the liturgy (Gregory the Great, Hom. in evang. 34.9; Lateran Synod of 745, J. D. Mansi Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio [ Paris 1889–1927] 12:380A).
Since the 4th century the choirs of angels have been reckoned at nine both in the East (Cyril of Jerusalem, Catech. mystag. 5.6; Chrysostom, Hom. 4 in Gen. 5) and in the West (Ambrose, De apologia prophetae David 5.20). This number prevailed because the five groups named in the Pauline Epistles (δυνάμεις, virtutes, virtues; ἐξουσίαι potestates, powers; ἀρχα, principatus, principalities; κυριότητες, dominationes, dominations; θρόνοι, throni, thrones) were looked upon as good heavenly spirits, and they were placed together with the angels and archangels [their numbers were estimated at a gradually increasing figure (Const. Ap. 8.12.27: a million archangels)] along with the cherubim and seraphim. This series, somewhat schematic and not fully in accord with the Bible, was speculatively developed under Neoplatonic influence by Pseudo-Dionysius into a hierarchical structure of three triads (HIerarchia coelestis 6.2; 7–9; Eccl. hier. 1.2). Thus elaborated, this doctrine of nine choirs of angels was commonly held in the West from the time of Gregory the Great (Hom. in evang. 34.7; Moralia 32.48; Epist. 5.54). It received widespread attention chiefly from John Scotus Erigena's Latin translation of the writings of Pseudo-Dionysius in the 9th century (see, e.g., Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae 1a, 108.5–6; a vision and description of the nine choirs by Hildegard of Bingen, Scivias 1.6; and a poetical description by Dante, Paradiso 28.88–129).
Names of angels. Most frequently mentioned are the names that occur in Holy Scripture: Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael (Origen, Contra Celsus 1.25; Gregory the Great, Hom. in evang. 34.9). People were especially fond of linking the names of Michael and Gabriel (Tertullian, De carne Christi 14.3; Origen, Contra Celssus 8.15). In Syria the sign XMT—usually rendered Christ, Michael, Gabriel (see Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum [Stuttgart 1941] 5:182)—was frequently found on tombs, doorframes, and rings. Another name for one of the princes of the angels that is encountered with relative frequency is Uriel. It comes from the Judaic angelology [Orac. Sib. 2.215; Epist. Apost. 13(24); Ambrose, De fide 3.20]. Over and above the names found in the Bible, popular belief, and particularly superstition, attributed still further names to the princes of angels and other angels. These were names borrowed from the Jews, or even invented arbitrarily or out of ridicule. The Church, however, condemned these tendencies in the Lateran Synod of 745 (J. D. Mansi Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplis-sima collectio [ Paris 1889–1927] 12:379–380) and in further decrees of the 8th and 9th centuries. When similar attempts were made in the 15th century and again later, the Church once more took steps against them (see Real-lexikon für Antike und Christentum [Stuttgart 1941] 5:188).
Teaching of the Church. The Church has defined as dogma that besides the visible world God also created a kingdom of invisible spirits, called angels, and that He created them before the creation of the world (Lateran Council IV, 1215, ch. 1, H. Denzinger Enchiridion symbolorum [Freiburg 1963] 800; repeated at Vatican Council I, 1870, ibid. 3002; cf., earlier, the Nicene Creed of 325, ibid. 125: Πιστεύομεν εἰς ἕνα θεόν… πάντων ὁρατ[symbol omitted]ν τε καì ἀοράτων ποιητήν). In conformity with Holy Scripture and with the whole Christian tradition, these angels must be regarded as personal beings and not as mere powers or the like. Pius XII rejected a contrary opinion as being opposed to Catholic doctrine (encyclical Humani generis, Aug. 12, 1950; 3891). Only those three names for angels that occur in the Bible may be used.
The Church has further declared as dogma that God created the devil and the demons good by nature, and that they became bad through a fault of their own (Lateran Council IV, ch. 1; H. Denzinger Enchiridion symbolorum [Freiburg 1963] 800). The Church, however, has never declared authoritatively the way in which the angels sinned to become the devil and demons.
Moreover, in evaluating the accounts taken from the Bible and from Christian tradition, two extremes are to be avoided: on the one hand, not everything that is therein contained can be taken as fact because much of it belongs simply to the philosophy of life in antiquity and must be discarded; so, too, the existence and efficacy of angels cannot be denied out of hand simply because it is possible today, because of more accurate knowledge, to explain by natural causes what was once attributed to the angels. In the interpretation of biblical passages, the literary type must be taken into consideration, that is, whether it intends simply the communication of a fact, e.g., that angels are helpers of the Christians (Heb 1.14); or a narrative that popular imagination has embellished (e.g., the Book of Tobit); or symbolic visions whose true message must first be discovered through the veil of symbolic experiences that are presented in images proper to the period (e.g., in Revelation). In expressions drawn from tradition, however, one must take into consideration that in the course of time theology has purified the obscurity and error contained in traditional views about angels. In this way theology has now come to a point of distinguishing exactly among angels, stars, and the powers of nature, and specifies that the nature of angels is completely spiritual and no longer merely a very fine material, firelike and vaporous. Up to now it has not yet been defined as dogma that every man has a guardian angel. This opinion does, however, have a basis in Holy Scripture and has been maintained in the Church since ancient times, despite the uncertainty of the question in the first 1,000 years. The Church has never declared itself on whether the angels are divided into orders, nor has it said what kinds of orders there might be. Still, it can be drawn from the New Testament that angels exist and are effective in various ways, as can be detected there within certain limits. Many questions, however, that are raised in Scripture and tradition relating to the angels, cannot be answered or, at least, cannot be answered convincingly, because the necessarily certain knowledge is not possible.
Modern attitudes toward the belief in angels. In the modern mind, angels are considered to be tenuous creatures who, with the passage of time, are more and more being relegated to the sphere of legend, fairy tale, and child's fancy. Then, of course, there was rationalism, which thought that all belief in the existence of angels should be repudiated. Inasmuch as they are considered to be products of the imagination, their existence is widely denied. The believing Christian, however, will even today maintain that there are angels because the Bible and the Church teach it. What is more, he is convinced that the assertions of the Bible must be understood and evaluated in terms of the basic principles laid down in the previous section. Some reservations are also required in regard to many of the expressed views of the Fathers or other theologians. The old opinion that events in the world were caused by spiritual beings has been replaced in favor of a mechanical explanation arising from insight into the play of cause and effect. Therefore, the Christian can no longer postulate angelic activity where he knows that impersonal forces are at work. Furthermore, he will reject each and every embellishment of the concept of angels. He also believes that the angels, inasmuch as they are pure spirits, can never appear in a real body; that as spiritual beings they act on earth as causes in a manner that is unknown to men but verified in Scripture and in the experience of the Christian life of grace. Such spiritual beings can evoke in the phantasms of men a vision structured in accordance with the concepts of the times (a similar explanation was already attempted in the Middle Ages and was rejected by Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae 1a 51.2 by an appeal to Scripture, but clearly from an outdated exegesis). Finally, one must be aware that the profane sciences can never prove either the existence or the activity of angels. One knows that angels exist, as St. Augustine once said, through faith ["esse angelos novimus ex fide" (In psalm. 103 serm. 1.15)].
See Also: angelology; angels, guardian; angels of the churches; cherubim; demon (in the bible); demon (theology of); original sin; seraphim.
Bibliography: See tracts on the angels in the manuals of dogma. j. turmel, "Histoire de l'angélologie des temps apostoliques à la fin du Ve siècle," Revue d'histoire et de littérature religieuses 3 (1898) 289–308, 407–434, 533–552, "L'Angélologie depuis le faux Denys l'Aréopagite," ibid. 4 (1899) 217–238; 289–309, 414–434, 537–562; Histoire des dogmes, 6 v. (Paris 1931–36) 4:45–119. w. lueken, Michael: Eine Darstellung und Vergleichung der jüdischen und der morgenländisch-christlichen Tradition vom Erzengel Michael (Göttingen 1898). g. bareille et al., Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, ed. a. vacant et al. (Paris 1903–50) 1:1192–1271. p. perdrizet, "L'Archange Ouriel," Seminarium Kondakovianum 2 (Prague 1928) 241–276. j. duhr, Dictionnaire de spiritualité ascétique et mystique, 1:580–598, 622–625. e. peterson, Das Buch von den Engeln: Stel-lung und Bedeutung der hl. Engel im Kultus (2d ed. Munich 1955). o. hophan, Die Engel (Luzern 1956). j. daniÉlou, The Angels and Their Mission, tr. d. heimann (Westminster, Md. 1957). a. winklhofer, Die Welt der Engel (Ettal 1958). r. haubst, Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, ed. j. hofer and k. rahner (Freiburg 1957–65) 3:867–872. c. d. g. mueller, Die Engellehre der koptischen Kirche (Wiesbaden 1959). p. glorieux, ed., Autour de la spiritualité des anges: Dossier scripturaire et patristique (Tournai 1959). b. neunheuser, "Die Engel im Zeugnis der Liturgie," Archiv für Liturgiewissenschalft (1959) 4–27. j. michl, Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum, ed. t. klauser [Stuttgart 1941 (1950)— ] 5:115–258.
[j. michl]
DEVOTION
In the strict sense, cult of (devotion to) angels denotes a religious practice flowing from the virtue of religion (St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa theologiae 2a2ae, 82.2) and constituting an external manifestation of honor and reverence to angels in recognition of their excellence and of one's own reasonable dependence on them. It is an act of secondary veneration (dulia). In general, any religious act of venerating angels can be termed angelic devotion; however, where such an act possesses the required internal (intellect and will) and external (reverence and subjection) elements, it will coincide with angelic cult as defined above. When associated with divine faith, cult of the angels belongs to the supernatural order and has its place in the spiritual life.
Sacred scripture. The Christian concept of angelic cult is verified only in practices of genuine, divinely revealed, religion and has no equivalent in pagan cults associated with "angels." Assyrians, Persians, and Egyptians paid honor to protective deities, in Accadian kāribu, but there is no identity between these pagan deities and the Hebrew k erûbîm.
The OT offers some manifestations of angelic cult, e.g., by Balaam (Nm 22.21–35), Tobit (Tb 12.16), and Daniel (Dn 10.9), but such practices did not constitute the principal object of prophetic teaching; nor did people, though conscious of angels, consider their existence relevant. In the NT, the Gospels mention angels but do not specifically recommend or reject devotion to them; St. Paul implicitly teaches veneration of angels (1 Cor 11.10; Gal 4.14), but such cult is to be given in a manner that does not derogate from Christ, the one and unique mediator; he shows displeasure at false or exaggerated cult to angels. In Rv 22.8–9 St. John is rebuked and corrected for offering excessive veneration to an angel but not for venerating him.
Patristic era. Fathers of the East and West showed their approval of angelic cult and testified to its early existence. They warned against idolatrous cult of angels (see Aristides, Apol. 14; Patrologia Graeca 96:1121), condemned latreutic acts of worship toward angels (see Origen, Contr Celsus 8.13, 57; Patrologia Graeca 11:1533, 1601), defended angelic cult as distinct from adoration reserved to God alone, latria (see Eusebius, Praeparatio evangelica 7.15; Patrologia Graeca 21:553). There was a period when reserve and restriction had to be urged especially because of false cults and charges of "atheism" against Christians for not worshiping pagan deities [Justin Martyr, 1 Apol. 6, Patrologia Graeca 6:336; Athenagoras, Leg. 10, Ante-Nicene Fathers (New York 1903) 2:133]. St. Augustine deserves credit for the excellent formula of honor and love as proper cultic dispositions for venerating angels, distinct from the worship given to God: "[W]e honor them out of charity not out of servitude" (Vera relig. 55.110; Patrologia Latina 34:170). The acceptance of the angelology of Pseudo-Dionysius (5th–6th century), taught especially in his Hierarchia coelestis (Patrologia Graeca 3:119–370), is largely responsible for angelic cult becoming firmly and universally established in the Church.
The earliest known devotion to angels was principally centered on the Archangel michael, the only individual angel honored in liturgical feasts in the Church before the 9th century. In the East, Michaeline devotion was evidenced by the 4th century in the churches and sanctuaries in and near Constantinople. It then spread to Italy and to the rest of Europe.
In the West, the feast of St. Michael and the angels was celebrated as early as the 5th century in the church of the same name outside Rome (see leonine sacramentary, 7th century; Masses and prayers in honor of St. Michael are also mentioned). Devotion at two presently active Michaeline sanctuaries began with separate apparitions of St. Michael in the early centuries: one at Monte Gargano (c. 490), near Foggia, Italy, and the other at Mont-Saint-Michel (708), Manche, France.
Beginning with St. Benedict (543) in the West, there was a steadily growing tradition of angelic cult of faith, love, and devotion from the time of Pope Gregory the Great to St. Bernard of Clairvaux (d. 1153). The latter was the principal and most eloquent exponent of cult of the guardian angels; with him angelic cult assumed that form which has continued unchanged in the Church.
Scholasticism. Theologians of the school were less occupied with devotion to angels and more with a study of their nature, intelligence, and will. Even so, angelic cult was not dormant. The scholastic period was noted for prayers to the guardian angels (13th century), growth of associations and confraternities formed to honor the angels (15–16th centuries), development and popularization of angelic devotion—in which religious orders (Dominican, Franciscan, Jesuit) and individuals [Pierre Caton (d. 1626), Johannes Tauler, Ludolph of Saxony] played prominent roles. Of particular note, also, were a popular treatise on angels by Fra Francesco Eiximenis (d. 1409) and a collection of the practical counsels of mystics on angels by Denis the Carthusian (d. 1471). By 1630 the cult of angels was widespread.
Nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Devotion to the angels has been perpetuated in various ways in the last two centuries but in particular through: (1) associations and societies, such as the Archconfraternity of St. Michael Archangel (formally erected by Leo XIII, 1878), and the episcopally approved association of Philangeli ("Friends of Angels," founded in England, 1950, by Mary Angela Jeeves—hqs., 1212 E. Euclid, Arlington Heights, IL); (2) patronages under the titles of holy and guardian angels in general, and of SS. Michael, gabriel, and raphael in particular; (3) publications, such as the two currently (1965) published— L'Ange gardien (Clerics of St. Viator, 28 rue du Bon-Pasteur, Lyons, France) and Les Annales du Mont-Saint-Michel (Mont-Saint-Michel, Manche, France); and (4) a variety of liturgical and nonliturgical rites or practices—Masses and Divine Offices in honor of guardian angels and the Archangels Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael; prayers in the Mass, e.g., Preface, Supplices te rogamus, Per intercessionem, Domine Jesu Christe; the prayer in the Communion of the Sick, Exaudi nos; in the burial service of adults, In paradisum; in the blessing of homes, Exaudi nos; the Litany of All Saints and novenas [see The Raccolta (New York 1957) 440–455 and The Roman Martyrology ].
Magisterium of the Church. Whatever had contributed to the original establishment and development of angelic cult, however it was associated with the beliefs of the faithful and even subjected to Jewish-Gnostic influence, it is evident that the Church, through its official magisterium, unified and clarified belief in the angels and guided this cult (see J. Michl, Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum [Stuttgart 1941] 5:199–200). The positive teaching of the Church treats of veneration due to angels, the benefits of angelic intervention, and the man-angel relationships in the communion of the saints (blessed). It encourages the faithful to love, respect, and invoke the angels (see Nicaea II, H. Denzinger Enchiridion symbol-orum [Freiburg 1963] 600; Benedict XIV, ibid. 2532; The Raccolta ); on the other hand, the Church guards its subjects against false and dangerous practices, e.g., by rejecting all names of individual angels except Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael [see the Council of Rome under Pope St. Zachary (745); c.35 of the Council of Laodicea (4th century); the Synod of Aachen (789); the Council of Trent, ibid. 1821–25].
Orthodox churches. The devotion to angels among the Orthodox is found particularly in their Liturgy (Mass and Divine Office) and their observance of special feasts; it is directed especially to Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael.
Bibliography: j. michl and t. klauser, Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum, ed. t. klauser [Stuttgart 1941 (1950)— ] 5:53–322. a. vacant et al., Dictionnaire de théologie catholique (Paris 1903–50) 1.2:1189–1271. k. rahner, Lexikon für Theologie und Kirche, ed. j. hofer and k. rahner (Freiburg 1957–65) 1:533–538. r. haubst, ibid. 3:867–872. j. duhr, Dictionnaire de spiritualité ascétique et mystique, ed. m. viller et al. (Paris 1932) 1:580–625. h. leclercq, Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, ed. f. cabrol, h. leclerq, and h. i. marrou (Paris 1907–53) 1.2:2144–59, bibliog. 2159–61. Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Bible (New York 1963) 81–87. c. j. von hefele, Histoire des conciles d'après les documents originaux (Paris 1907–38) v. 1, 4, 5. a. a. bialas, The Patronage of Saint Michael the Archangel (Chicago, Ill. 1954). j. daniÉlou, The Angels and Their Mission …, tr. d. heimann (Westminster, Md. 1957). j. daniÉlou, Theology of Jewish Christianity, ed. and tr. j. a. baker (Chicago, Ill. 1964) 147–187. l. m. o. duchesne, Christian Worship: Its Origin and Evolution, tr. m. l. mcclure (5th ed. repr. New York 1949). w. g. heidt, Angelology of the Old Testament (Washington, D.C. 1949). p. p. parente, The Angels (St. Meinrad, Ind. 1958), also pub. as Beyond Space (New York 1961). j. w. moran, "St. Paul's Doctrine on Angels," American Ecclesiastical Review 132 (1955) 374–384. m. a. jeeves, "The Friends of Angels," Life of the Spirit 8 (1953–54) 159–163.
[a. a. bialas]
ICONOGRAPHY
The concept of angels originated in the Orient, but the figural type of the Christian angel was derived from the winged Greek goddess of Victory, or Nike. During and after the Italian Renaissance, pagan putti, cupids, or amors served as models for new types of Christian angels. (Illustrations on following pages.)
Gender, garments, and wings. According to Scripture, angels are masculine, youthfulness and virility being their general attributes. It was only in the late Gothic period that artists began to depict angels of an ideal beauty; this development led to the invention of the purely feminine angel in the Renaissance. The infant angel, also created in the late Gothic period, was used widely during the Italian Renaissance. In early Christian times angels were represented in long white tunics and palliums, which symbolized both the divine light emanating from angels and the purity of angels. At times they were represented in togas with the chlamys of the Roman senator to give them an air of dignity. During the Byzantine period the influence of imperial ceremony increased; often they were represented in the guise of imperial court guards, i.e., in loro and military chlamys and holding standards. In the West, the early Christian type was used continuously ously during the Middle Ages, often with additions such as a diadem, a scepter, a codex or roll, or taenia, all symbolic of divine power. From the 13th century the influence of the liturgy and mystery plays became stronger, and their garments imitated various liturgical costumes according to their liturgical functions. At the beginning of the early Christian period angels were represented as wingless youths; it was only in the 4th century that they were depicted with wings. The earliest Christian example of a winged human figure is found in S. Pudenziana in Rome as the symbol of St. Matthew. In St. Mary Major in Rome winged angels are represented hovering in the air.
Functions. As the original Greek word indicates, the most important function of angels is to bring messages from God to men. In scenes from the life of Christ and the life of the Virgin, angels come to assist or to serve them. Angels appear also in scenes of the martyrdom of saints to give them strength and to deliver them a palm branch or a crown as a symbol of their martyrdom. They are shown, like ancient muses, inspiring an Evangelist or a Church Father, such as St. Jerome, engaged in writing. As the liturgical system developed and became more complex in the late Middle Ages, angels were regarded as participants in the heavenly liturgy, and many liturgical functions were attributed to them, such as those performed by deacons, acolytes, etc.
Angelic choir. The concept of a celestial hierarchy is derived from the order of Oriental monarchism. It was the Hierarchia coelestis by Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite that inspired the artistic representation of the heavenly hierarchy. Three orders are recognized, each order consisting of three choirs: seraphim, cherubim, and thrones (first order); dominations, virtues, and powers (second order); principalities, archangels, and angels (third order). Often the Virgin Mary is brought into the center of this hierarchy. Seraphim and cherubim are to be distinguished from other messenger angels in that they alone guard the thrones of the Holy of Holies, sometimes hiding them with their wings from human eyes. The seraph is characterized by six wings covered with eyes, whereas the cherub has only four wings. The former is represented in the red color of fire, the latter, in the blue color of sky. The origin of the type is Oriental, and the biblical statement of the vision of Isaiah (Is 6.21) provided the basis for the iconography. In scenes of the stigma-tization of St. Francis, the crucifix appears in the guise of a Seraph.
Archangels. Among archangels, seven (and at times nine) are given names as well as various functions based on relevant biblical testimony. Three of them, michael, gabriel, and Raphael, have been most popularly venerated. Among them Michael is the most popular as the militant angel and as the guard of the faithful— Princeps militiae angelorum. In Byzantine art he is represented in the purple chlamys or in the loro of the imperial court. In the West he is represented in a long tunic or in the coat of mail and helmet of a medieval knight. He appears in scenes of the Last Judgment combating the dragon of the apocalypse (Rv 12.7) or battling the hordes of Satan. This iconography is not to be confused with that of St. George. Michael is represented also weighing the souls of the dead. In the iconography of the heavenly hierarchy, he is shown as the guard of the celestial domain, hurling the rebellious angels, or demons, into the abyss. Gabriel is familiar to us as the bringer of glad tidings from God to men, as in the Annunciation to the Virgin and the annunciation to Zachariah. Raphael is represented most frequently in association with the story of Tobit.
Bibliography: g. stuhlfauth, Die Engel in der altchristlichen Kunst (Fribourg 1897). c. e. clement, Angels in Art (London 1901). k. künstle, Ikonographie der christlichen Kunst (Freiburg 1926–28) 1:239–264. h. leclercq, Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne, ed. f. cabrol, h. leclerq, and h. i. marrou (Paris 1907) 1:2080–2161. r. p. rÉgamey, Anges (Paris 1946). l. rÉau, Iconographie de l'art chrétien (Paris 1955–59) 2.1:30–55. k. a. wirth, Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte, ed. o. schmitt (Stuttgart 1937–) 5:342–602.
[s. tsuji]