A prior note on terminology. Anchorites will insist they don’t worship angels the same way they worship God. The Bible, however, collapses the distinction between doulia (reverence by way of service) and latria (proper worship). God specifically tells his people neither to worship these gods (however you want to define that term) or serve them. Further, the claim that praying to an angel is no different from asking your friend to pray for you won’t hold up. If you examine these prayers, besides the fact it is nowhere commanded by God, the angels are simply asked to intercede, but to act in such a way that they have power to do x and y. That is simple Paganism.
Old Creation Judged and Gone
Angels ruled the Old Creation. That has since been destroyed in the Death-Resurrection of Christ and the Death of Jerusalem. Why would we pray/invoke entities who no longer rule? Does not the New Covenant say The “lights” of creation (day 4) were designed to rule (thus the language of greater lights ruling over the lesser lights). Lights (e.g., the sun) manage time, and so also in the Old Creation they are connected with Festivals.
Before Jesus humanity was under angelic tutors. Psalm 104:3-4 (and Heb. 1:7) connects angels with the natural forces. Further, this is also connected with Torah. The law was to shut the whole world under sin (Gal. 3:22-23) and was given by angels (Acts 7:53). Thus we can conclude that the angels had some authority over the world which was connected with Torah. Paul further connects Torah and Angels with “elementary principles” (stoichea, Gal. 4:3, 9; Col. 2:8). We may further conclude that any attempt to live under the guidance of angels, however slight, is seeking to go back to the stoichea and is elsewhere condemned in the book of Hebrews. Oliver O’Donovan even notes that Paul connects both Torah with the stoichiea. In fact, Paul even notes (Galatians 4) that the Gentiles were in bondage to Stoichea. This is shocking. No one ever accused the pagan Gentiles of being too much under Stoichea. It’s not as shocking as it seems: apart from Christ both Torah and the stoichea appear to us as a threat (RMO, 22). This conclusion of Paul’s only makes sense if we keep in mind that Angels, Torah, and Stoichea are interconnected under the Old Creation.
Forms, Realism, and Nominalism
One thing I noticed in recently reading Homer and Vergil is that the pagan deities were often invoked as powers. This is not that different from the language of Forms. Forms in this philosophy is not simply an idea of x, but that the higher form causes and acts in such a way that is is a power to the lower forms. Paul Tillich made the interesting connection that ancient Christianity simply baptized the older view of Forms with the newer view that these forms were saints and angels, which form a hierarchy of being to God.
Tillich’s suggestion makes sense. After Plato and the skeptics, few Greeks and Romans were stupid enough to believe that Athena sprang from Zeus’ head. However, Greek mythology did have a lot of explanatory power. It might have been philosophically naive to suppose that the pantheon was rule, but it was philosophically astute to transpose that understanding of deity to the realm of the Forms.
Maximus the Confessor famously (though not originally) spoke of the distinction between Logos and Logoi. Jesus is the Form in whom all the forms exist. He is the inter-causal causal cause. It’s beautiful philosophy. It runs into problems with the Forms are identified with the stoichea.
This is why I am neither realist nor nominalist, but covenantal verbalist.
Nota Bene: I wonder if this is why demon-possession stories are so common in Catholic and Orthodox lands (see Seraphim Rose, Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future and The Soul After Death). They are playing too close to the elementary principles of the Old Creation, which God has specifically condemned. If they get too close to these principles, then God just might let them get close indeed.