On Angels

Subsection

Fall of Angels
Demons & Spiritual Warfare
Reformed vs. Aquinas

Order of Contents

Creation of 4
Confirmation of 1
Hierarchy of 4
Location of 4
Communion with 2
Guardian Angels 5
Images of
Worship of 6
Predestination & Reprobation of 3
Latin 6+

Articles

Anthology of the Post-Reformation

Heppe, Heinrich – ch. 10, ‘Angels Good & Bad’ in Reformed Dogmatics ed. Ernst Bizer, tr. G.T. Thomson Pre Buy (1861; Wipf & Stock, 2007), pp. 201-220

Heppe (1820–1879) was a German reformed theologian.

1500’s

Bullinger, Henry – 9^th Sermon, ‘Of Good & Evil Spirits; that is, of the Holy Angels of God & of Devils or Evil Spirits & of their Operations’ in The Decades ed. Thomas Harding (1549; Cambridge: Parker Society, 1850), vol. 3, 4^th Decade, pp. 327-65

Vermigli, Peter Martyr – ‘Of the Creation of Angels, their Sundry Names, Visions, Assuming of Bodies, Office, Dignity, Order & Degrees’ in 13. ‘Of the Creation of All Things’ in The Common Places… (London: Henrie Denham et al., 1583), pt. 1, pp. 111-21

Musculus, Wolfgang – Common Places of the Christian Religion (1560; London, 1563)

‘Creation of Angels’ 10.b
‘Of the Fall of the Angels’ 11.a

Ursinus, Zachary – The Sum of Christian Religion: Delivered… in his Lectures upon the Catechism… tr. Henrie Parrie (d. 1583; Oxford, 1587)

Of Angels

What Good Angels are
Of evil spirits or Angels

7. Of the Angels in Rules & Axions of Certain Chief Points of Christianity in A Collection of Certain Learned Discourses… (Oxford, 1600)

Zanchi, Girolamo – ch. 5, ’Of the Creation of the World, of Angels & of Man’s First Estate’ in Confession of the Christian Religion… (1586; Cambridge, 1599), pp. 21-26

Finch, Henry – 13. Of our own Righteousness, whereof the State of Angels & Men, before and by their Fall in The Sacred Doctrine of Divinity gathered out of the Word of God… (Middelburg: 1589), bk. 2

Finch (d. 1625) was an English lawyer and politician.

Beza, Theodore, Anthony Faius & Students – 13. ‘Of Good & Evil Angels’ in Propositions & Principles of Divinity Propounded & Disputed in the University of Geneva by Certain Students of Divinity there, under Mr. Theodore Beza & Mr. Anthony Faius… (Edinburgh: Waldegrave, 1591), pp. 26-30

1600’s

Perkins, William

8. ’Of Angels’ in A Golden Chain (Cambridge: Legat, 1600)
‘The Creation of Angels’ in An Exposition of the Symbol, or Apostles’ Creed… (Cambridge, 1595), p. 73

Perkins (d. 1602) was an influential, puritan, Anglican clergyman and Cambridge theologian.

Bucanus, William – 6. ‘Of Angels in General’ in Institutions of Christian Religion... (London: Snowdon, 1606), pp. 64-77

What is signified by this word ‘angel’?
Whence had angels their beginning?
Are angels without all matter or not?
But when were the angels created?
Christ says, Mt. 18:10, ‘the angels do always behold the face of his Father,’ therefore they have been always?
What is an angel?
Are the angels substances really and truly subsisting?
How were the angels created?
Are the angels mutable or immutable?
What is the reason that while some of the angels fell from the truth, others continued in grace and truth?
Can those then which continued in the truth fall from the same and so fall into sin?
But seeing they can no more sin, nor become miserable, do they not cease to have freedom of will?
What names are given to the angels?
How many ways have angels appeared unto men?
Whether might angels, when they assume unto them true human bodies, be called men?
What became of those bodies after their ascension to heaven?
Do angels move out of their places and dispatch their business within the space of time?
How many angels be there?
Are there orders and degrees of angels?
Has each of them his proper name?
Have the angels any knowledge of things?
Whether do the angels know the actions of every particular man, or what they do, say or suffer?
Have they also the knowledge of their thoughts and affections?
But in what sense are affections (as joy and sorrow) ascribed unto angels in the Scriptures, seeing they are blessed?
What are we to think of the force and power of angels?
What manner of speech do the angels use, either toward God, or amongst themselves, or unto men?
What be the offices of angels?
Have particular men, or countries and cities some one good and certain angel appointed to defend thema and an evil angel to tempt them?
Whether can there arise dissensions and discords by our means amongst the good angels, as Dan. 10:13, it is said that the Prince of the Persians fought against the Prince of the Grecians?
Have those angels which never sinned need of Christ the Mediator?
Are we to pray unto the angels, or to worship them with any religious worship?
Why would God use the ministry of angels?
What is the reason that whereas the angels were accustomed in old time to appear often to the fathers in the form of men and to converse and talk with them familiarly, now they do it no more?
What use has the Church of the doctrine concerning angels?
What things be contrary to this doctrine?

Walaeus, Anthony – 12. ‘Concerning the Good & Bad Angels’ in Synopsis of a Purer Theology: Latin Text & English Translation Buy (1625; Brill, 2016), vol. 1, pp. 284-314

Wolleb, Johannes – 7. ‘The Governance of Angels’ in Abridgment of Christian Divinity (1626) in ed. John Beardslee, Reformed Dogmatics: J. Wollebius, G. Voetius & F. Turretin (Oxford Univ. Press, 1965), bk. 1, pp. 61-64

Wolleb (1589–1629) was a Swiss reformed theologian. He was a student of Amandus Polanus.

Leigh, Edward – 7. ‘Of the Angels, Good & Bad’ in A System or Body of Divinity… (London, A.M., 1654), bk. 3, pp. 268-88

Turretin, Francis – Institutes of Elenctic Theology, tr. George M. Giger, ed. James Dennison Jr. (1679–1685; P&R, 1992), vol. 1

7^th Topic

1. ‘Whether and when angels were created.’  539
2. ‘Are angels spiritual and incorporeal substances? We affirm.’  541
3. ‘What is the mode and what is the object of angelic knowledge?’  543
4. ‘What is the will and the free will of angels? Do affections belong to them?’  546
5. ‘What is the power of the angels?’  547
6. ‘What were the apparitions of angels, and what bodies did they assume?’  549
7. ‘Is there any order among the angels and are there distinct hierarchies among them? The former we affirm; the latter we deny against the Jews and Romanists.’  551
8. ‘Why and for what does God use the ministry of angels? Is a particular angel assigned as a perpetual guardian to each believer? We deny.’  555
9. ‘Are angels our intercessors with God, and is any religious worship due to them? We deny against the Romanists.’  560

9th Topic

5. ‘What was the sin of the angels by which they are said to have rebelled against God?’ 601

van Mastricht, Peter – Theoretical Practical Theology (2nd ed. 1698; RHB), vol. 3, pt. 1, bk. 3

ch. 7, ‘The Good Angels’ 175
ch. 8, ‘The Evil Angels’ 213-46

Heidegger, Johann H. – 8. ‘On Angels’ in The Concise Marrow of Theology tr. Casey Carmichael in Classic Reformed Theology, vol. 4 (1697; RHB, 2019), pp. 55-61

1700’s

à Brakel, Wilhelmus – ch. 9, ‘Angels & Devils’ in The Christian’s Reasonable Service, vols. 1 ed. Joel Beeke, trans. Bartel Elshout Buy (1700; RHB, 1992/1999), pp. 285-307

a Brakel (1635-1711) was a contemporary of Voet and Witsius and a major representative of the Dutch Further Reformation.

Venema, Herman – Translation of Hermann Venema’s inedited Institutes of Theology tr. Alexander W. Brown (d. 1787; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1850)

20. Angels (Existence of, Names of, their Essence, Spiritual Beings, their Attributes as Substances, Whence they are, How began, How Exist, Atttributes as Spiritual Substances, their Understanding & Will, Number of, Nature of their Presence, Manner of their Intercourse) 350

21. Holy Angels (Two Classes of, Origin of Classes, Holy Angels, Internal & External Condition, Leader of, Rank among them, Offices to God & Men, Intercede for us?, Guardian Angels? To be Worshipped?) 360

22. Fallen Angels (Names, Internal & External Condition, Understanding & Will, Residence, Number, their Orders, Satan Devils, Employments, Errors Refuted, Scriptural View, Magical Arts, Temptations, Afflictions) 372

Venema (1697-1787) was a professor at Franeker. Venema “maintained the fundamental line of confessional orthodoxy without drawing heavily on any of the newer philosophies… and maintained a fairly centrist Reformed position. Venema… evidence[s] the inroads of a rationalistic model…” – Richard Muller

1800’s

Alexander, Archibald – 13. ‘Angels’ in God, Creation & Human Rebellion: Lecture Notes of Archibald Alexander from the Hand of Charles Hodge (1818; RBO, 2023), pp. 160-72

Book

1600’s

Ambrose, Isaac – The Ministration of & Communion with Angels in Works of Isaac Ambrose... (London: Fisher, 1800), pp. 473-560

On the Creation of the Angels

Article

1500’s

Musculus, Wolfgang – Common Places of the Christian Religion (1560; London, 1563)

‘Creation of Angels’ 10.b

Beza, Theodore – pp. 23-24 & 47-49 in A Book of Christian Questions & Answers… (London, 1574)

Viret, Pierre – A Christian Instruction… (d. 1571; London: Veale, 1573), The Exposition of the Preface of the Law, The Exposition of the Preface of the Law

Of the creation and fall of the angels, and how that God in the same has declared the difference that is between the Creator and the Creature, and how it is only He that is perfect and unchangeable

Zanchi, Girolamo – pp. 22-23 of ch. 5, ’Of the Creation of the World, of Angels & of Man’s First Estate’ in Confession of the Christian Religion… (1586; Cambridge, 1599)

1600’s

Bucanus, William – 6. ‘Of Angels in General’ in Institutions of Christian Religion... (London: Snowdon, 1606), pp. 64-77

Whence had angels their beginning?
Are angels without all matter or not?
But when were the angels created?
Christ says, Mt. 18:10, ‘the angels do always behold the face of his Father,’ therefore they have been always?
What is an angel?
Are the angels substances really and truly subsisting?
How were the angels created?
Are the angels mutable or immutable?

Turretin, Francis – Institutes of Elenctic Theology, tr. George M. Giger, ed. James Dennison Jr. (1679–1685; P&R, 1992), vol. 1, 7^th Topic

1. ‘Whether and when angels were created.’ 539-41

On the Confirmation of the Righteous Angels in Righteousness

Quote

1600’s

Joseph Caryl

An Exposition with Practical Observations continued upon the Fifteenth, Sixteenth & Seventeenth Chapters of the Book of Job… (London: 1650), sermon on Job 15:15, pp. 62-63

“There is no created holiness sure, stable, and perfect in itself: The glorious angels which are, and ever shall be saints in Heaven, and the saints in Heaven who are like angels, stand not in that holy and happy estate by their own sufficiency, but by the decree and grace of God. Those angels which fell at first were holy, and they who now stand, might have fallen notwithstanding their created holiness, if God had not superadded confirming grace which establishes them forever. Yet this is not all, that the angels are imperfect because they might fall if not supported, there is somewhat more in it…”

On a Hierarchy of Angels

Articles

1600’s

Voetius, Gisbert – ‘On the Celestial Hierarchy & Guardian Angels’, pp. 376-89 in Select Theological Disputations, vol. 1, pt. 2 tr. by AI by Onku (Utrecht: Johannes a Waesberg, 1648) Latin

Turretin, Francis – 7. ‘Is there any order among the angels and are there distinct hierarchies among them? The former we affirm; the latter we deny against the Jews and Romanists.’ in Institutes of Elenctic Theology, tr. George M. Giger, ed. James Dennison Jr. (1679–1685; P&R, 1992), vol. 1, 7^th Topic, pp. 551-55

Latin

1600’s

Voet, Gisbert

(2) Of the Order of the Angels & Heavenly Hierarchy in Syllabus of Theological Problems (Utrecht, 1643), pt. 1, section 1, tract 3, 2. Of the Good Angels in Specific, Appendices Abbr.

46. ‘Of the Heavenly Hierarchy & of Guardian Angels’ in Select Theological Disputations (Utrecht: Waesberg, 1648), vol. 1, pp. 882-906

On the Location of Angels

Order of Contents

Quotes 2
Article 1
Historical 1

Order of Quotes

Cheynell
Heidegger

1600’s

Francis Cheynell

The Divine Trinunity… (London, 1650), ch. 6, pp. 169-70

“…and it is most certain that angelical persons have a limited
presence, because they have a finite essince [as opposed to God]…

I need say no more concerning angels than what is commonly said, ‘Angeli sunt alicuoi definitive; sunt enim in suo ubi non per operationem vel circumscriptionem, sed per designationem definitivam,’ angels are naturally somewhere; though they are
not in any place by extension of parts, yet their finite nature is contained within certain bounds and limits. Hence it is that
some learned men affirm that it is improper to say, that God is somewhere because He is everywhere; somewhere is a definitive word.”

Johann H. Heidegger

as in Heinrich Heppe, Reformed Dogmatics, ch. 10, §§21-22, p. 209

“Angels have limits both to their essence and to their operation, or, as it is termed, a sphere of activity. But it is difficult for us to understand… It is at least certain that they are not in a place strictly or locally so as to be extended or diffused in it; for they are not bodies, which alone are extended in space of their own and commensurate with it…

Thomas [Quodlibet 1, q. 3, art. 1] is more correct [than Duns Scotus] in denying that they are in a place without operating, because they are everywhere and operate by knowledge and will, even ad extra, by glorifying God, and serving Him among men and all other creatures. So that they may be said to be in a place not because they are bounded by a place, but because they themselves rather bound the place by their operation, as Thomas rightly says…

Therefore angels whom no medium resists must move very swiftly… Nor does it follow from this that angels move in a moment or by deserting their localization acquire a new one in a moment… as well as the distance between the termini, which involves some measure of delay.”

Article

1600’s

van Mastricht, Peter – Theoretical Practical Theology, vol. 3, bk. 3, ch. 7, §15, pp. 183-84

Historical

On the Post-Reformation

Articles

1900’s

Muller, Richard – Dictionary of Latin & Greek Theological Terms: Drawn Principally from Protestant Scholastic Theology 1st ed. (Baker, 1985)

‘alicubitas’
‘definitivus’
‘illocalis subsistendi modus’
‘ubietas’
‘unio accidentalis’

On our Communion with Angels

Article

1600’s

Baxter, Richard – ch. 11, ‘Directions about our Communion with the Holy Angels’ in A Christian Directory… (London, 1673), pt. 3, Christian Ecclesiastics, pp. 763-66

Book

1600’s

Ambrose, Isaac – The Ministration of & Communion with Angels in Works of Isaac Ambrose... (London: Fisher, 1800), pp. 473-560

On Making Visual Images of Angels

Order of

Articles
Quotes
Historical Theology
Latin

Articles

1500’s

Vermigli, Peter Martyr – The Common Places… (d. 1562; London: Henrie Denham et al., 1583), pt. 2

5. ‘The Second Precept, which concerns Images, their Beginning, Antiquity & Cause’ 333

‘Whether it be lawful to express Christ, the angels and other creatures in Images’ 340
‘Whether it be lawful to place images in churches’ 351
‘Of Cherubim & Teraphim’ 356

1600’s

Willet, Andrew – ‘Whether it be lawful to have the images of the Trinity, of Christ, or of the Angels’ in Synopsis Papismi (London, 1592), Controversies Concerning the Church Triumphant, 9th Controversy: concerning Saints Departed, 2nd Part, 5th Question, Part 1, Second Article, pp. 348-50

Le Blanc de Beaulieu, Louis – On the Veneration of Images, Angels & Saints tr. by AI by WesternCatholike

The Roman Church’s Doctrine on the Veneration & Adoration of Images 1

Part 2, in which the Reformed Church’s Doctrine is Explained & Confirmed 16-26

Le Blanc (1614-1675) was a reformed professor of theology at Sedan.

Quotes

Order of

Calvin
Vermigli
2nd Helvetic Confession
Beza
Zanchi
Calderwood
Parliament
Fisher

1500’s

John Calvin

Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Henry Beveridge (1559; Edinburgh: Calvin Translation Society, 1845), vol. 1, bk. 1, ch. 11, section 3, pp. 122-23

“The mercy-seat, also (Ex. 25:17-18, 21) where, under the Law, God exhibited the presence of his power, was so framed as to intimate that God is best seen when the mind rises in admiration above itself: the cherubim with outstretched wings shaded, and the veil covered it, while the remoteness of the place was in itself a sufficient concealment. It is therefore mere infatuation to attempt to defend images of God and the saints by the example of the cherubim.

For what, pray, did these figures mean, if not that images are unfit to represent the mysteries of God, since they were so formed as to cover the mercy-seat with their wings, thereby concealing the view of God, not only from the eye, but from every human sense, and curbing presumption?… Moreover, all men of sound judgment acknowledge that the cherubim in question belonged to the old tutelage of the law. It is absurd, therefore, to bring them forward as an example for our age. For that period of puerility, if I may so express it, to which such rudiments were adapted, has passed away.”

Institutes, bk. 1, ch. 11, sect. 12 (Battles)

“But because sculpture and painting are gifts of God, I seek a pure and legitimate use of each… We believe it wrong that God should be represented by a visible appearance, because He Himself has forbidden it [Ex. 20:4] and it cannot be done without some defacing of his glory… Therefore it remains that only those things are to be sculptured or painted which the eyes are capable of seeing: let not God’s majesty, whichis far above the perception of the eys, be debased through unseemly representations.

Within this class some are histories and events, some are images and forms of bodies without any depicting of past events. The former have some use in teaching or admonition; as for the latter, I do not see what they can afford other than pleasure. And yet it is clear that almost all the images that until now have stood in churches were of this [latter] sort. From this, one may judge that these images had been called forth not out of judgment or selection but of foolish and thoughtless craving.”

Peter Martyr Vermigli

The Common Places… (London: Henrie Denham et al., 1583), pt. 2, ch. 5. ‘The Second Precept, which concerns Images, their Beginning, Antiquity & Cause’

p. 335

“4…it seems meet to be determined that all creatures may be represented by images: yea the very angels themselves, I mean not in respect of their spiritual nature, but in such sort as they have exhibited themselves to be seen of men. Wherefore the godly men, which either be dead or yet living, kings, stars, plants, stones, earth, sea, and such like may be represented by pictures.”

p. 341

“11. The angels, as touching their substance and nature, seeing they be spirits, cannot be expressed; yet is it lawful sometimes to picture them in such wise, as they have showed themselves unto men: for they be not, as God is, infinite; but are bounded and limited. Neither does the commandment of God forbid this, unless their pictures were made, to the intent they should be religiously and devoutly worshipped.”

2nd Helvetic Confession 1566 (Bullinger was the principal author)

ch. 4, ‘Of idols or images of God, Christ and the saints

“Images of saints. And since the blessed spirits and saints in heaven, while they lived here on earth, rejected all worship of themselves (Acts 3:12 f.; 14:11 ff.; Rev. 14:7; 22:9) and condemned images, shall anyone find it likely that the heavenly saints and angels are pleased with their own images before which men kneel. uncover their heads, and bestow other honors?

But in fact in order to instruct men in religion and to remind them of divine things and of their salvation, the Lord commanded the preaching of the Gospel (Mark 16:15) – not to paint and to teach the laity by means of pictures. Moreover, he instituted sacraments, but nowhere did he set up images.”

Theodore Beza

Lutheranism vs. Calvinism: The Classic Debate at the Colloquy of Montbeliard 1586 (Concordia Publishing House, 2017), ch. 4, p. 462

“…the everlasting and precise observation of this favorable precept [2nd Commandment] in the ancient, purely Christian Church… They observed the rule with the Cherubim, too; it was exactly as if they had not been put in the temple, even outside the gaze of all the Priests, and they were put forth as types of the Majesty of the Messiah who rules over the angels themselves, the truth of which we now maintain.

But the other images, like the lions and the bulls, pertain in no way to this matter, since they were like decorations of holy vases, lacking any danger of idolatry, and besides this, constructed in this way by the express word of God.”

Jerome Zanchi

A Volume of Theological Tracts... (d. 1590; Neustadt: Schrammius, 1603) ,bk. 1, ch. 15, ‘On Images,’ p. 502 lt col bot

“Another thing follows from this thesis: It is allowed, indeed, that angels are not able to be pictured, because they are spirits; however their corporal forms, which they assumed, are able to be images.

Yet by this reason, is it indeed allowed to make and express images of bodies in which God was accustomed to appear, either by those men, or by the burning of the bush, or of the cloud, or of the column of fire? They are not similar things.” [See the rest of the paragraph]

1600’s

David Calderwood

Perth Assembly… (Leiden, 1619), ‘Kneeling considered, as it is a Breach of the Second Commandment’, p. 51

“It is true, likewise, that God directed his people under the Law to bend and bow themselves toward the ark and the temple, wherein the ark was, and the mountain whereon the temple was situate: partly lest that rude people should turn their worship another way, partly because of his promise to hear them when they should pray toward the temple or the ark; partly because of his singular manner of presence in the ark: He was said to dwell between the cherubims, the ark is called his ‘foot-stool,’ and sometime the ‘face of God,’ ‘the glory of the Lord.’

It is reason, where God is present after an extraordinary manner, as when He spake out of the bush and the cloud, that adoration be directed to the place of his extraordinary presence. The altars, the offerings and other holy things wanted [lacked] the like presence and the like promise. The ark and the cherubims upon the ark were not seen [being in the Holy of Holies]: and therefore could not be readily abused to idolatry.”

English Parliament 1644, May 9th

‘An Ordinance for the Further Demolishing of Monuments of Idolatry & Superstition’

“Representations of God, Angels, and Saints.; Copes, Surplisses, Roods, etc.; Organs.

The Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament, the better to accomplish the blessed Reformation so happily begun, and to remove all offences and things illegal in the worship of God, do Ordain, That all Representations of any of the Persons of the Trinity, or of any Angel or Saint, in or about any Cathedral, Collegiate or Parish Church, or Chapel, or in any open place within this Kingdom, shall be taken away, defaced, and utterly demolished; And that no such shall hereafter be set up, And that the Chancel-ground of every such Church or Chapel, raised for any altar, or Communion Table to stand upon, shall be laid down and leveled; And that no copes, surplisses, superstitious vestments, roods, or roodlons, holy-water fonts, shall be, or be any more used in any Church or Chapel within this realm; And that no cross, crucifix, picture, or representation of any of the Persons of the Trinity, or of any angel or saint shall be, or continue upon any plate, or other thing used, or to be used in or about the worship of God; And that all organs, and the frames or cases wherein they stand in all Churches or Chapels aforesaid, shall be taken away, and utterly defaced, and none other hereafter set up in their places; and that all copes, surplisses, superstitious vestments, roods, and fonts aforesaid, be likewise utterly defaced; whereunto all persons within this Kingdom, whom it may concern, are hereby required at their peril to yield due obedience.”

1700’s

James Fisher

The Assembly’s Shorter Catechism Explained (1753)

“Q. 23. Is it lawful, as some plead, to have images or pictures in churches, though not for worship, yet for instruction, and raising the affections?

No; because God has expressly prohibited not only the worshipping but the MAKING of any image whatever on a religious account; and the setting them up in churches, cannot but have a natural tendency to beget a sacred veneration for them; and therefore ought to be abstained from, as having at least an “appearance of evil,” Isa. 45:9-18; 1 Thess. 5:22.

Q. 24. May they not be placed in churches for beauty and ornament?

No; the proper ornament of churches is the sound preaching of the gospel, and the pure dispensation of the sacraments, and other ordinances of divine institution.

Q. 25. Were not the images of the cherubims placed in the tabernacle and temple, by the command of God himself?

Yes; but out of all hazard of any abuse, being placed in the holy of holies, where none of the people ever came: they were instituted by God Himself, which images are not; and they belonged to the typical and ceremonial worship, which is now quite abolished.”

Historical Theology

On the Puritans

Quote

John K. La Shell

‘Imagination & Idol: A Puritan Tension’ (1987) 101 paragraphs in Westminster Theological Journal, vol. 49:2 (Fall 1987)

“Even though God Himself may not be represented by any created thing [according to many puritans], there is an occasional grudging admission that visible symbols may be used to convey spiritual truth. The cherubim found in the tabernacle and temple form an interesting case study. Calvin calls them “paltry little images” whose sole purpose is to show

‘that images are not suited to represent God’s mysteries. For they had been formed to this end, that veiling the mercy seat with their wings they might bar not only human eyes but all the senses from beholding God, and thus correct men’s rashness.’ (Institutes 1.11.3)

Owen insists that they are not images of angels since angels are spirits and do not really look like winged creatures. He calls them

“mere hieroglyphics, to represent the constant tender love and watchfulness of God over the ark of his covenant and the people that kept it, and had nothing of the nature of images in them.” (Works 14.446)

Durham seems even more uncomfortable over the problem posed by the cherubim. He would like to ban representations of angels altogether, but he hesitates to take too firm a stand:

‘From this ground also it would seem, that painting of angels might be condemned, as a thing impossible, they being spirits which no corporeal thing can represent, beside that the representing of them has some hazard with it: and for those cherubims that were made by God’s direction under the Old Testament, they were rather some emblem of the nature and service of angels, as being full of zeal, and always (as it were) upon wing read to obey God’s will, than any likeness of themselves.’ (Law Unsealed, pp. 68–69)

The bronze serpent made by Moses is clearly a happier example. The worship of this “Nehushtan” by later generations demonstrates how easily even lawful images may be abused. (Cf. ibid., p. 69; Boston, Works 2.151; Watson, Body of Divinity, pp. 388-89)”

Latin

1600’s

Wendelin, Marcus Friedrich – Vindicatory Theological Exercises for Christian Theology… Opposite the Anti-Wendeliana Collection by Johann Gerhard & Other Festering Writings of Recent Lutherans Against the Orthodox… (Cassell, 1652)

Exercise 135, ‘The Orthodox Doctrine on Prohibited Images is Asserted & Vindicated, & first, indeed, the first & second assertions are defended, where is vindicated arguments opposite images of God’, pp. 222-29

Exercise 136, ‘The Third, Fourth & Fifth Assertion on Images is vindicated, & especially the arguments of the Orthodox are defended which prove images of God, human saints and angels in church buildings are not to be borne’, pp. 229-39

Exercise 137, ‘Dissolutions of Arguments for retaining idols of Christians & religious images in church buildings are vindicated & defended’, pp. 239-43

On Worshipping Angels

Order of

Articles
Book
Quote

Articles

1500’s

Musculus, Wolfgang – Common Places of the Christian Religion (1560; London, 1563), ‘Of the true service of God’

Of the service of the angels 356.a

1600’s

Perkins, William – sect. 2, To what things is adoration due, and in what manner; and what is the adoration that is due unto wicked spirits and devils? in The Whole Treatise of the Cases of Conscience… (Cambridge: Legat, 1606), bk. 2, ch. 11, Of Adoration

Le Blanc de Beaulieu, Louis – On the Veneration of Images, Angels & Saints tr. by AI by WesternCatholike 73 pp.

On the Worship & Veneration of Angels & Saints, in which the Doctrine of the Church and the Roman School is Explained 27

Part 2, in which the Doctrine of the Protestants is Explained, Compared with the Doctrine of the Roman School, & Confirmed by Various Arguments 47-73

Le Blanc (1614-1675) was a reformed professor of theology at Sedan.

Turretin, Francis – Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 3 vols. (P&R), vol. 1, 7th Topic

Q. 9, ‘Are Angels our Intercessors with God, and is Any Religious Worship Due to Them? We Deny Against the Romanists.’ 560-569

1700’s

Venema, Herman – p. 371 in Translation of Hermann Venema’s inedited Institutes of Theology tr. Alexander W. Brown (d. 1787; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1850), ch. 21, Holy Angels

Book

Ferne, Henry – An Appeal to Scripture & Antiquity in the Questions of 1. the Worship & Invocation of Saints & Angels, 2. the Worship of Images, 3. Justification by and Merit of Good Works, 4. Purgatory, 5. Real presence & Half-Communion: Against the Romanists (London, 1665)

Ferne (1602–1662) was an Anglican bishop, a doctor of divinity, an academic and a chaplain to Charles I.

Quote

1600’s

John Corbet

The Remains of… John Corbet… (London: Parkhurst, 1684), Of Divine Worship, 2nd Part, section 18, p. 205

“Divine worship directed to such images or representations as to a mediate object, is idolatry. The ark and the cherubims, and the temple, were not made the object of worship. A learned man writes that incurvation in way of religion towards any symbolical presence, as to an object, is flat idolatry; if it be in worship of saints, angels, and demons, it is double idolatry; if in the worship of the true God, single [idolatry].”

On Guardian Angels

The reformed typically argued, against the Romanists, that each Christian does not have a particular angel assigned to him or her, though the angels in general are often sent to protect and help Christians.

Articles

1600’s

Voetius, Gisbert – Select Theological Disputations, vol. 1, pt. 2 tr. by AI by Onku (Utrecht: Johannes a Waesberg, 1648) Latin

‘On the Celestial Hierarchy & Guardian Angels’ 376
‘On Guardian Angels’ 389-96

Turretin, Francis – 8. ‘Why and for what does God use the ministry of angels? Is a particular angel assigned as a perpetual guardian to each believer? We deny.’ in Institutes of Elenctic Theology, tr. George M. Giger, ed. James Dennison Jr. (1679–1685; P&R, 1992), vol. 1, 7^th Topic, pp. 555-60

1700’s

Venema, Herman – Translation of Hermann Venema’s inedited Institutes of Theology tr. Alexander W. Brown (d. 1787; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1850)

Latin Articles

1600’s

Voet, Gisbert

(1) Of the Guardianship of Angels in Syllabus of Theological Problems (Utrecht, 1643), pt. 1, section 1, tract 3, 2. Of the Good Angels in Specific, Appendices Abbr.

46. ‘Of the Heavenly Hierarchy & of Guardian Angels’ in Select Theological Disputations (Utrecht: Waesberg, 1648), vol. 1, pp. 882-906

On the Predestination & Reprobation of Angels

Article

1600’s

Alsted, Johann H. – Scholastic-Didactic Theology: exhibiting Common Places by a Scholastic Method tr. by AI by Nosferatu Ref (Conrad Eifrid, 1618), chs. 4-12

9. ‘Election of Angels’ 31-32
…
11. ‘Reprobation of Angels’ 51-53

Cappel, Louis – ‘Theological Theses on the Predestination, or Election & Reprobation, of Angels’ tr. by AI by Chaznvo

1800’s

Dabney, Robert – ‘Predestination of Angels different from that of Man’ & ‘Schemes of the Sublapsarian & Supralapsarian Examined’ in Lecture 21, ‘Predestination’ in Lectures in Theology (St. Louis: Presbyterian Publishing Co. of St. Louis, 1878), pp. 231-34

Latin

1600’s

Alsted, Henry

ch. 10, ‘Angels’ in Distinctions through Universal Theology, taken out of the Canon of the Sacred Letters & Classical Theologians (Frankfurt: 1626), pp. 50-53

ch. 4, ‘On Angels’ in Theological Common Places Illustrated by Perpetual Similitudes (Frankfurt, 1630), pp. 27-34

Wendelin, Marcus Friedrich – Christian Theology (Hanau, 1634; 2nd ed., Amsterdam, 1657), bk. 1, ‘Knowledge of God’

ch. 5, ‘Of Creation; where also is of Angels & Men’, pp. 153-71

ch. 7, ‘Of the Governance of Rational Creatures in General & in Specific, & of the Governance of Them Before the Fall’, pp. 192-95

ch. 8, ‘Of the Certain Obedience of Angels & of the Disobedience of Others’, pp. 195-98

Voet, Gisbert

Syllabus of Theological Problems (Utrecht, 1643), pt. 1 Abbr.

section 1, tract 3

1. Of the Angels in General

Whether Angels may Exist & were Created?
What they Are
Of What Qualities are they on Account of their Properties?
Of What Qualities are they on Account of their Intellect? & its Mode & Object
Of the Will
On Account of their Affections, Power, Actions & Adjuncts

2. Of the Good Angels in Specific
. Intellect, Will, Power, Actions & Adjuncts
Appendices:

(1) Of the Guardianship of Angels
(2) Of the Order of the Angels & Heavenly Hierarchy
(3) Containing Cases about Interactions with Good Angels