tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post1557176577258993530..comments2024-03-09T00:51:33.602-07:00Comments on Little Catholic Bubble: Humans never become angelsLeila@LittleCatholicBubblehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comBlogger49125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-92226875745208143362014-04-06T19:58:18.174-07:002014-04-06T19:58:18.174-07:00So, that last part that I said was just my positin...So, that last part that I said was just my positing that God can save however He pleases (theoretically) and may have been a bit of a non-sequiter. Mary was saved a little differently from the rest of us, and not even in the way Jesus saved the others who died before His atoning death (who really were delivered <i>later</i>). <br /><br />But you are right that she was saved by the merits of Christ, only she was saved in a singular, privileged way (so had already been "delivered" at her conception). Here is the actual declaration: <br /><br />"We declare, pronounce and define that the doctrine which holds that the Blessed Virgin Mary, at the first instant of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace of the Omnipotent God, in virtue of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of mankind, was preserved immaculate from all stain of original sin, has been revealed by God, and therefore should firmly and constantly be believed by all the faithful."<br /><br />But yes, I give you partial credit for that comment, lol! I like your spunk. :) Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-24607688001457191842014-04-06T19:51:01.538-07:002014-04-06T19:51:01.538-07:00ha ha, well, although I guess I follow what you me...ha ha, well, although I guess I follow what you mean, I still don't think it works. First, because we know that the writers were Protestant and meant it in the Protestant understanding (i.e., wrongly), and second because Mary was conceived in time and she had been saved preemptively (implying time). So, at the time of Jesus' birth, she had (in time) already been saved. She had been delivered from sin. And, we also know that it was not strictly necessary for Jesus to save us the way he did. He could have saved us with a blink of an eye, not death on a cross. I remember that Cardinal O'Connor said to Kathie Lee Gifford once, "Jesus could have saved us through his miracles, but he chose to save us through his suffering." So, it was still a choice, and God could have gone about things any number of ways. Now we've just opened up any number of new topics, ha ha! :)Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-15810835219344693552014-04-06T19:41:17.833-07:002014-04-06T19:41:17.833-07:00It is true that Mary was preserved from Original S...It is true that Mary was preserved from Original Sin from the moment of her conception. However, those effects were applied from outside of time. The death and resurrection of the Lord (which the song is clearly referring to), temporally speaking, had not happened yet. Sadly, the phrasing, "The child that you delivered / Will soon perform the act that results in your deliverance even though its effects were previously applied because God works outside of time" doesn't quite have the right rhythm. :P It's perfectly understandable from an orthodox Catholic position. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-13937755226594035392014-03-28T17:15:05.361-07:002014-03-28T17:15:05.361-07:00Mine, too. It makes me happy that my late husband ...Mine, too. It makes me happy that my late husband gets to spend time with our first child now. :-)Melissa H-Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03674140433439195917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-73468921161364879492014-03-28T14:52:12.819-07:002014-03-28T14:52:12.819-07:00Jen, amen. I trust that God is merciful too, and t...Jen, amen. I trust that God is merciful too, and that I will meet my miscarried baby in Heaven one day. :)Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-32290498318070813202014-03-28T13:15:50.554-07:002014-03-28T13:15:50.554-07:00love that explanation about Revelation Leila. And...love that explanation about Revelation Leila. And thanks for your comments above. It was crushing to me when I lost my first miscarried baby (there are now 2) that no one could tell me she was in Heaven. But I do refer to these babies as baby saints rather than baby angels. Perhaps that is not technically true, but I trust the Lord is merciful to them...Jenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00365421565603011159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-21610071649263366442014-03-26T19:48:56.877-07:002014-03-26T19:48:56.877-07:00Great question, Johanne, and it's one that I h...Great question, Johanne, and it's one that I have thought deserves its own blog post. In a nutshell, we hope for the Beatific Vision for those babies as well (such as my own miscarried child). Jesus never revealed what happens in those cases, He only urged the baptism of all, for salvation. However, we know that God is not bound by His sacraments, only we are. So, He can bring others to Himself in ways known to Him, and also we believe in something called Baptism of Desire (those who, had they known of the necessity of Baptism, would have chosen it immediately). And certainly Christian parents who wished to baptize their children but never had a chance would have that desire for their children. Because Jesus never revealed that answer (what happens to unbaptized children/babies), theologians have speculated throughout time, including the concept of Limbo (never a doctrine) which said that unbaptized babies, while not being able to share in the Beatific Vision in Heaven, would nevertheless be in a state of perfect happiness for eternity, in "Limbo". More or less, this construct has fallen out of favor, and the Church says:<br /><br />"…the Catechism teaches that infants who die without baptism are entrusted by the Church to the mercy of God, as is shown in the specific funeral rite for such children. The principle that God desires the salvation of all people gives rise to the hope that there is a path to salvation for infants who die without baptism (cf. CCC, 1261)"<br /><br />http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20070419_un-baptised-infants_en.html<br /><br />This question (and the fact that it's unanswered) is, to me, proof of the divine and not human origins of the Church teachings. Think about it: How many millions of Catholic mothers throughout the millennia have anguished about the question and beseeched the Church. If the answer were based on some human making a decision, some pope somewhere (or multiple) would have given an answer. But no pope can, nor will one. Because <i>it has not been revealed. It is not part of Revelation</i>. The Church cannot speak what she does not know. She may look like a fool to the world for it, but to me, it's huge evidence that humans do not decide doctrine. The hierarchy only passes down what it has been given in Revelation. Any other religion would have answered the question by now. That is because all other religions are manmade, and the rules and doctrines are made by humans. <br />Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-85829972905881548942014-03-26T18:26:55.745-07:002014-03-26T18:26:55.745-07:00or if it's a small baptized child or baby, we ...<i>or if it's a small baptized child or baby, we can say with 100% certainty, "That child is a saint in Heaven now!"</i><br /><br />Leila<br />What happens to a baby who, for some reason, died before it was baptized?Johannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07861467738117604139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-62041362003621748972014-03-26T15:24:16.523-07:002014-03-26T15:24:16.523-07:00Angela, no worries, it's definitely not a sin!...Angela, no worries, it's definitely not a sin! It's you being charitable. If the opportunity arises in a way that will not make someone feel bad when they are trying to comfort you, then go for it, but otherwise, no, you're fine.Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-24330970383568926112014-03-26T15:19:11.522-07:002014-03-26T15:19:11.522-07:00Amen! It always secretly annoys me when people ca...Amen! It always secretly annoys me when people call my miscarried babies "angels", and yet it's so awkward to correct them when they are trying to say something kind....I usually just let it go. That's probably a sin on my part?....missing a chance to catechize?Angelahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11042100782571641258noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-11885978501322803882014-03-26T07:24:14.212-07:002014-03-26T07:24:14.212-07:00Francis, get better soon!!
And, I can't promi...Francis, get better soon!!<br /><br />And, I can't promise to be able to answer any of your thoughts, as this is definitely not an area I've studied in depth. :)Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-58647425008677292132014-03-26T06:49:04.495-07:002014-03-26T06:49:04.495-07:00Leila,
Thanks for your latest comments. I'm ba...Leila,<br />Thanks for your latest comments. I'm battling the 'flu at the moment (and the seriously blocked brain and sinuses that comes with it, not to mention the aches in every sore joint! :)) So I don't want to rush off any comments right away which might be half baked or carelessly worded. But I will write, as I still have a thousand points to bounce off you/the good folks at the Bubble on this topic. I promise to limit my questions to only about half a dozen though! :) Talk soon.Francis Choudhuryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01146223983345452362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-57139746054403748332014-03-25T20:22:03.608-07:002014-03-25T20:22:03.608-07:00Jen, amen! It can take a long time (and many feet ...Jen, amen! It can take a long time (and many feet in mouth) before one gets the hang of <i>when</i> is appropriate and when is not. I shudder now looking back at the things I said when I was first "on fire" for the Faith and was so zealous to bring the Truth to others. I am pretty sure that I drove people away and even horrified them! Hopefully, a couple of decades later, I have discerned a bit better, and become more wise and prudent, but I can tell you, it's still really hard. That's why I like this blog, because people obviously know that I'm going to talk about Catholic doctrine here. It's a safe place to catechize, ha ha.<br /><br />Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-18221090305036149592014-03-25T19:30:49.569-07:002014-03-25T19:30:49.569-07:00Good discussion and tricky. When my grandma died ...Good discussion and tricky. When my grandma died and my little cousin said she was an angel I think I was over the top in correcting her. I also think truth is important. But I was also really overzealous and maybe didn't correct her as gently. It's so hard in the moment when we want EVERYONE TO KNOW THE TRUTH to also acknowledge that everyone is NOT CATECHIZED. Ack. So I always suffer agonies trying to decide when/how to say something about this. Especially having had two miscarriages and when people refer to them as baby angels. Or our friend died recently and left five small children and people kept saying their mom would be their guardian angel. Ack. so hard.Jenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00365421565603011159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-19198519893402995322014-03-25T16:12:30.838-07:002014-03-25T16:12:30.838-07:00continued….
3. If we attain eternal life (saintho...continued….<br /><br />3. If we attain eternal life (sainthood), we will become “Christs”, sharing in His divinity. “The Word became flesh to make us "partakers of the divine nature": "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God." "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God." "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods." (CCC # 470). <br /><br /><i>It's #460, here's the whole thing: The Word became flesh to make us "partakers of the divine nature":78 "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God."79 "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God."80 "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."81</i><br /><br /><i>This is about the Beatific Vision. "Partakers" Yes it's wonderful, but it doesn't reverse the order of creation. It's about salvation. Probably a better answer.</i><br /><br />Whilst angels reflect the glory of God, and, indeed, live in Him (and He in them – which is why we praise Him “in His angels and in His saints”), I think it is debatable (?) whether they “become God” in the sense that we do. What I’m wondering is whether angels, whilst being beloved creatures of God, can be considered equal to children of God. At least one Catholic priest seems to “imply” that they can’t: “In the hierarchy of Grace and Salvation, saved human souls are "higher" than Angels. This is in contrast to a question simply of the nature of the beings apart from a consideration of God's Grace, in which the Angelic nature is of a higher order than the human nature.”<br /><br /><i>We don't become God, we behold God. The angels are already doing that, the highest ones directly, the lower ones less so. They are not children of God, they are messengers of God, that's what "angel" means.</i><br /><br />Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-84670257687797653542014-03-25T16:12:05.881-07:002014-03-25T16:12:05.881-07:00Francis, I heard back from the one smarter than I,...Francis, I heard back from the one smarter than I, and that person had the following to say, but with the caveat that the issues of Incarnation and all this other stuff can quickly become heresy simply by using one or more words imprecisely. So, it's sort of risky to dive in too deeply without a serious theologian in the mix, and I am definitely not that, ha ha. <br /><br />Any way, here are some responses to your questions:<br /><br />On the issue of who is "higher" (angels or men), the following is my understanding (and I'd be grateful to be corrected if I'm wrong):<br /><br />1. As men we’re created lower than the angels, not least of all because we are all subject to death. Indeed, it was only in this sense (to die and rise - redemptively) that Christ (as Man) was created "a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death" (Heb 2:9, Douay-Rheims).<br /><br /><i>Christ was NOT created. That is the heresy of Arianism, see here: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-great-heresies<br /><br />CCC 331 Christ is the center of the angelic world. They are his angels: "When the Son of man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him. . "191 They belong to him because they were created through and for him: "for in him all things were created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities - all things were created through him and for him."192 They belong to him still more because he has made them messengers of his saving plan: "Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to serve, for the sake of those who are to obtain salvation?"</i><br /><br />2. After His Resurrection, Christ (the Man), who had been "made perfect" by suffering ("For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, who had brought many children into glory, to perfect the author of their salvation, by his passion” (Heb 2:10)) was elevated above the angels: “In these days hath spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the world. Who being the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, making purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high. Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they” (Heb 1:2-4).<br /><br /><i>Christ was NOT made perfect. He was/is/and always will be the Second Person of Holy Trinity, God Incarnate. See the note on the D-R translation here for Hebrews 1 and 2: http://www.drbo.org/chapter/65002.htm and http://www.drbo.org/chapter/65001.htm</i><br /><br />to be continued….Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-2199953785452565642014-03-25T10:08:20.894-07:002014-03-25T10:08:20.894-07:00This is one of my favorite pet peeves. Our choir d...This is one of my favorite pet peeves. Our choir director aggravates me every time she refers to somebody who has recently died as having just earned his or her wings. And she had us sing "Mary, Did You Know," and I thought I was the only person who was annoyed by that song, because hello! How could Mary *not* know? ::sigh::Melissa H-Khttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03674140433439195917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-15947215432761071972014-03-25T08:52:24.080-07:002014-03-25T08:52:24.080-07:00Crystal, I used the word "soul" instead ...Crystal, I used the word "soul" instead of "spirit" for humans, because there are other creatures (animals, plants) that have animating spirits. But those spirits do not outlive the creature. So, I didn't want to open that debate, since it's confusing! :) So, while angels have only a spiritual (non-material) dimension, humans are a union of both material (body) and non-material (soul)… that were and are always meant to be together. Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-32295261186921625752014-03-25T08:49:58.395-07:002014-03-25T08:49:58.395-07:00Francis, I am no expert, and I will ask my friend....Francis, I am no expert, and I will ask my friend. However, I was speaking in terms of the created order. We were created lower than the angels. <br /><br />1) Humans were not created to die (that came later, with the Fall), so that doesn't seem relevant to me.<br /><br />2) Jesus, as God, has always had dominion over the angels, even though His human body was of a lower order of creation. Remember, he was always God, even in His human body, so naturally He would always be infinitely above them.<br /><br />3) Not sure about this one. I'd need to be much more learned. I always understood that angels have the divine life in them (sanctifying grace), or they could not stand in the presence of God or dwell in Heaven. So, I can't answer this one with any confidence. We will partake in God's nature (already do, if we have His grace within us), but don't they already? I am willing to be corrected, of course! Please, anyone with more knowledge of Catholic theology, correct me.<br /><br />4) Yes, I take that as the humans in Heaven being unable to die, like the angels. <br /><br />As for your follow-up question, I think angels do partake in God's nature (sanctifying grace)… someone help me? And we are still limited in that we will continue to learn and grow in knowledge of God throughout eternity, I believe. Meaning, we never can get to the end of infinity (which is God), so we have an eternity to keeping knowing and loving him, more and more. We will be divinized, but we will not <i>be</i> Him.<br /><br />Please, anyone, correct me. I know the basics (pretty much what I wrote in the OP), but this is not my area of expertise, ha ha.<br /><br /><br /><br />Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-34243992490643547412014-03-25T08:40:06.184-07:002014-03-25T08:40:06.184-07:00Margrave, if she did, then she may have been simpl...Margrave, if she did, then she may have been simply speaking affectionately. I often call my living children "sweet angels", in the same way one might call them "kittens", or "muffins". I don't think it <i>justifies</i> calling saints angels, but she may have called them that in a colloquial way (and from the French colloquial, which I don't know much about).Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-59558368084193020922014-03-25T08:35:59.647-07:002014-03-25T08:35:59.647-07:00Therese of Liseux constantly referred to her decea...Therese of Liseux constantly referred to her deceased siblings as "angels" in heaven- and while I do not believe for a moment that she is denying the theology you have outlined above, I think it does show that referring to humans as angels is sometimes justified.Strawbshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12117602919895334867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-34850478254612102362014-03-25T06:21:02.349-07:002014-03-25T06:21:02.349-07:00Perhaps you could ask your expert friend: If we ar...Perhaps you could ask your expert friend: If we are indeed to become partakers of God's <i>divine</i> nature - which is indisputably above the nature of angels - how could we <i>not</i> be elevated above the angels ourselves? Which probably leads to a related, much larger, question, which I've wondered about before: In what ways is our partaking in God's nature going to be limited - if it is? Is there any text on this that anyone knows of?Francis Choudhuryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01146223983345452362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-57601648339058045452014-03-25T06:05:33.050-07:002014-03-25T06:05:33.050-07:00Crystal,
Yes, that is Catholic teaching. St Thoma...<b>Crystal,</b><br /><br />Yes, that is Catholic teaching. St Thomas Aquinas explains that angels are "as immaterial as they are incorporeal". <br /><br /><a href="http://www.raphael.net/StThomas/SummaTheologiae/Q50.htm#2" rel="nofollow">“The Angels in St Thomas Aquinas”</a><br /><br /><b>Leila,</b><br /><br />On the issue of who is "higher" (angels or men), the following is my understanding (and I'd be grateful to be corrected if I'm wrong):<br /><br />1. As men we’re created lower than the angels, not least of all because we are all subject to death. Indeed, it was <i>only</i> in this sense (to die and rise - redemptively) that Christ (as Man) was created "a little lower than the angels, <i>for the suffering of death</i>" (Heb 2:9, Douay-Rheims).<br /><br />2. After His Resurrection, Christ (the Man), who had been "made perfect" by suffering ("For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, who had brought many children into glory, to perfect the author of their salvation, by his passion” (Heb 2:10)) was elevated above the angels: “In these days hath spoken to us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the world. Who being the brightness of his glory, and the figure of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, making purgation of sins, sitteth on the right hand of the majesty on high. <i>Being made so much better than the angels, as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they</i>” (Heb 1:2-4).<br /><br />3. If we attain eternal life (sainthood), we will become “Christs”, sharing in His divinity. “The Word became flesh to make us "<i>partakers of the divine nature</i>": "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God." "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God." "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods." (CCC # 470). <br /><br />Whilst angels reflect the glory of God, and, indeed, live in Him (and He in them – which is why we praise Him “in His angels and in His saints”), I think it is debatable (?) whether they “become God” in the sense that we do. What I’m wondering is whether angels, whilst being beloved <i>creatures</i> of God, can be considered equal to <i>children</i> of God. At least one Catholic priest seems to <a href="http://en.allexperts.com/q/Catholics-955/2009/8/saints-higher-angels-1.htm" rel="nofollow">“imply”</a> that they can’t: “<i>In the hierarchy of Grace and Salvation</i>, saved human souls are "higher" than Angels. This is in contrast to a question simply of the nature of the beings apart from a consideration of God's Grace, in which the Angelic nature is of a higher order than the human nature.”<br /><br />4. According to Jesus, saints in heaven are equal to angels. "Neither can they die any more: <i>for they are equal to the angels</i>, and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection (Luke 20:36)." Are Jesus’ words here related solely/predominantly to saints in heaven not being subject to death?<br /><br />Whatever, I’d like to place on record that I’m not at all fussed either way who is superior to or higher than me in heaven. If I can make it there, I’d be happy in whatever position I was placed! Some years ago, a friend of mine wrote to say she’d like to live in Jesus’ shirt pocket - so she could be constantly soothed by the sound of the beating of His Sacred Heart! :) To which I replied I’d be content merely to be a speck of dust under one of his toenails! My logic was a) that way I’d always have a hard, protective roof over my head and b) wherever Jesus went, I’d be carried along effortlessly. Then I could peer out from under the safety of the nail and see and hear whatever my Master was seeing and hearing! That’s my story and - timid me, amidst all of this high stakes celestial drama - I’m sticking to it! :)Francis Choudhuryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01146223983345452362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-77542910066139776692014-03-25T03:44:06.722-07:002014-03-25T03:44:06.722-07:00Did you mean to say angels are pure spirits withou...Did you mean to say angels are pure spirits without bodies, and human are body and spirit? Crystal Pintohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16992852313370475422noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-83392630820275972602014-03-24T23:00:28.112-07:002014-03-24T23:00:28.112-07:00From someone way smarter than I:
Here's the d...From someone way smarter than I:<br /><br /><i>Here's the dogma, what is most certain: Angels are higher than men. They were created endowed with sanctifying grace, their end is the immediate vision of God. (They had a period of probation, the bad angels rejected this, as you covered, became evil by their own fault.) The primary task of the good angels is still the glorification and service of God. Their secondary task is the protection of men and care for their salvation. There is an order to the choir of angels, the highest ones are with God, the lowest ones are the guardian angels, who are sent by God to help us. <br /><br />Christ, God become man, is higher than all the angels, but Christ is not a creature. He's God Incarnate. <br /><br />Some theologians did envision (theological opinion) that when a human is consecrated and purified and led to Heaven by the angels to the Beatific Vision, to stand before God, that the good angels marvel at the man who is like Christ. They sing praises. The ascension of the soul even throughout life in the Sacraments has been referred to as reflective of the ascension of Christ. <br /><br />There are scriptures that refer to angels telling men not to bow before them, but it isn't because man is above them. It is because they know that no one should be worshiped but God and they won't tempt a man to worship them. This is why all but the arch-angels don't have names, they don't want to risk being worshiped. This is also why some the Church advised not to even name your guardian angel. To avoid the temptation to worship the angel. <br /><br />Men are not higher than angels, but Christ became man so the angels love to serve us because they first serve God. Mary does have a special place as the highest creature of all, even above the angels, but she's the Mother of God. The rest of us, not. </i>Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.com