Canon Thirty-Five of the Synod of Laodicaea
(mid-fourth century) states that Christians should not
depart from the church, invoke angels (onomazein
angelous), and
hold assemblies. Additionally, the synod described angel
invocation as a "hidden idolatry."
In order to illustrate the sort of angel invocations the
fourth-century church confronted and in order to
understand the synod's reaction, I examine the practice
of extra-ecclesiastical angel invocation as exhibited by
invocations of angels inscribed on stones, amulets, and
lamellae (E.g. Bonner 1950: nos. 41 and 172; Delatte and
Derchaine 1964: nos. 142 and 362; D. Jordan 1991:61-69).
The study's examination of epigraphic material is the
result of field research in Turkey and the Aegean basin,
as well as museum research in the Cabinet des
Médailles et Antiquité at the Bibliotheque
Nationale in Paris.
A
number of late-antique invocations of angels carved on
amulets contain Christian formulas or symbols combined
with the names of archangels, pagan and Gnostic deities,
depictions of fabulous creatures, as well as Greek
adaptations of Hebrew words and phrases.
Those who employed such syncretistic formulae believed them to
be efficacious for acquiring divine aid, but these
invocations were troubling for the Christian church,
particularly in the fourth century as the Church
attempted to define orthodoxy. Such syncretistic angel
invocations are one reason that reactions against angel
invocation and veneration appear in Christian literature
of the later Roman era.
But, while Christian intellectuals perceived a difference
between orthodox and heterodox forms of angel invocation
(e.g. Origen, Contra Celsum 5.4-7; Augustine, Civ. Dei 10.25-26), many who called upon angels for
help in their daily lives did not.
For those invoking angels through inscriptions on stones,
amulets, and lamellae, ritual efficacy, rather than
orthodoxy, was most important.
Previous studies noting the Synod of
Laodicaea's ban on angel invocation have not sufficiently
appreciated that the synod was careful to prohibit angel
invocation away from the church and did not prohibit
angel invocation entirely (e.g. C. E. Arnold 1996: 85-7,
G. Peers 2001:10-11). Rather, the synod was attempting to
establish church authority over angel invocation by
preventing Christians from invoking angelic
intermediaries apart from clerical supervision.
Numerous inscriptions, as well as literary sources, testify to
the long-standing popularity of angel invocation in the
region of Laodicaea (A.R.R. Sheppard 1980/81:71-101, S.
Mitchell 1993: II, 46). I therefore argue that the synod's ban on angel
invocation was an attempt to bring within the control of
the church a popular religious practice that could rival
the church's authority over intermediation and access to
the divine. In
this regard, the synod's ban on extra-ecclesiastical
angel invocation was part of a broader trend in early
Christianity of attempting to bring spiritually powerful
practices and objects (as well as people) under the
authority of the church (E.g. P. Brown 1981; 1971), where
clerical supervision could insure their orthodoxy.