Since we cannot be present at the holy ceremonies in honor of the angels, we should not let this time of devotion go by fruitlessly; rather, such time as we do not spend in singing their praises, we should spend in writing about them. And because our aim is to present as best we can the excellence of the holy angels, we ought to begin with man’s earliest conjectures about the angels. In this way, we shall be in a position to accept whatever we find that agrees with faith, and refute whatever is opposed to Catholic teaching. ~ Thomas Aquinas, De Angelis
In The Multiple States of Being, Rene Guenon recommends Aquinas’ short theological treatise on the angels as an introduction to an understanding of angels as higher, supra-individual states of being. Aquinas himself looks back to the ancient Greeks to begin his study of angelic beings. After all, if angels, demons, and gods are real entities or states of being and not merely figments of the imagination or objects of belief, then they can be understood by any metaphysician. Aquinas explains:
Now it is clear that every intellectual substance receives the intellected form according to its totality, or otherwise it would not be able to know it in its totality. For it is thus that the intellect understands a thing insofar as the form of that thing exists in it.
Thus, a complete understanding of the angelic hierarchy is possible only for the intellect that contains the form, that is, the idea of the angel, that is, it participates in the higher form. This is the metaphysical principle, “to know is to be”.
Gods and the Celestial Hierarchy
Confusion results from terminology, since we tend to consider the “angels” as good and “demons” as bad. However, Aquinas clarifies this by pointing out that angels can be evil and that according to Plato, demons can be good or evil. Regarding Plato, Aquinas writes:
In this way, therefore, between us and the highest God, it is clear that they posited four orders, namely, that of the secondary gods, that of the separate intellects, that of the heavenly souls, and that of the good or wicked demons. If all these things were true, then all these intermediate orders would be called by us “angels”, for Sacred Scripture refers to the demons themselves as angels.
So, Aquinas accepted the gods as angels. He also considered that the planets were ensouled. Hence, he seems to be implying that the gods Mars, Venus, Jupiter, Saturn and so on were actually angels. This aligns him with the Hermetic Tradition. Valentin Tomberg, in Meditations on the Tarot, assigns the following correspondences:
| Archangel | Planet |
|---|---|
| Michael | Sun |
| Gabriel | Moon |
| Raphael | Mercury |
| Anael | Venus |
| Zachariel | Jupiter |
| Oriphiel | Saturn |
| Samael | Mars |
Preternatural Phenomena
Aquinas recognizes certain preternatural phenomena and attributes them to the influence of higher intellectual substance. Keep in mind that in the following passage, the Platonic “demon” is the same as the Catholic “angel”, so no inference should be made that it necessarily implies an evil or satanic influence.
[Certain followers of Aristotle] say that it is through the influence of the stars that persons who are possessed sometimes foretell future events, for the realization of which there is a certain disposition in nature through the heavenly bodies. But in such cases, there are manifestly certain works which cannot in any way be reduced to a corporeal cause. For example, that people in a trance should speak in a cultivated way of sciences which they do not know, since they are unlettered folk; and that those who have scarcely left the village in which they were born, speak with fluency the vernacular of a foreign people. Likewise, in the works of magicians, certain images are said to be conjured up which answer questions and move about, all of which could not be accomplished by any corporeal cause. Therefore, as the Platonists see it, who could evidently assign a cause of these effects, except to say that these are brought about through demons.
On Infallibility
We see here that Aquinas asserts the traditional teaching that gnosis is infallible. Unfortunately, self-deception is not so easily overcome.
Accordingly, Augustine says in the Book of Eighty-Three Questions: “Everyone who is deceived, that, indeed, in which he is deceived, he does not understand.” And accordingly, concerning those things which we grasp properly by our intellect as well as concerning the first principles, no one can be deceived.
The Celestial Hierarchy by Dionysius the Areopagite
i had never heard of him until you mentioned his name but – having just looked briefly into it – he seems like a very interesting character, i shall investigate further!
Funny you should mention the Lesser Guardian of the Threshold – I just came across Tomasso Palamadessi.
The daemon of Socrates was indeed instructive, while the demons of the modern world are known to serve the purpose of testing the motives and faith of humans. The Lesser Guardian of the Threshold springs to mind here. For a Christian, though, I wonder if Hermes, for instance, can truly be considered equivalent to (for example), Michael or Gabriel, as there seems to be a major difference in function. Let me be blunt to illustrate this point. One can imagine taking (or being taken by) Hermes as a lover – as nymphs and goddesses alike would attest – but Michael? No, I don’t think so….But there are also definite similarities because both Hermes and Gabriel are heraldic messengers. Then there is the question of Nephilim that crops up for the occultist. There is a clear distinction between a Nephilim and an Elohim – should we equate it to the difference between’ ‘good’ and ‘evil’ or ‘light’ and ‘dark’, I wonder? Certainly there is a difference in quality. But perhaps it is analogous to the difference in quality between a rain cloud and the wispy clouds you see in the sun. The robe of one would feel like petals and the silk of cobwebs – the finest possible substance one can possibly imagine, the way that light feels. The robe of another would feel heavier, like storm clouds….one would bring you absolute joy and freedom, restoring you to a state of absolute innocence and joy, whereas another would hold you in suspense, hypnotically, hardly daring to breathe or blink lest the eye of the Watcher should fall upon the self. Who could bear to be faced with that terrible gaze? Guardian angels, in the meantime, are always loving and protective, best not forget them!
Based on similar analysis, St. Thomas conceded the possibility of legitimate astrology, practiced within certain limits. I could see where the information contained here would dovetail very nicely with St. Thomas’ analysis on that question. It would be interesting to see St. Thomas’ ideas on the relation between the heavenly bodies and the spirit explored in more depth.