Over the last few years angel mania has jumped the Atlantic from the U.S.A. and swept the U.K. There are now a whole plethora of books about angels ranging from which angels do what, in the angelic hierarchy, to what you have to do to receive angelic help. Angel talks and workshops abound, and are being led by people who are totally convinced as to the reality of what they teach and the effectiveness of what they do. Angels are however, not new. Comments about them are to be found deeply entrenched in the Jewish, Christian and Islamic traditions and teachings. Peake's Commentary on the Bible has 224 angel references. The Analytical Concordance to the Bible has 280 angelic references. Even in this Unitarian church, of the 476 hymns in the hymn book, 26 have an angel reference in the text. In my Unitarian childhood and for many today, angels seemed to be relegated to textual or story props for significant biblical events and as such are viewed almost entirely as myths. Angels were considered to be of little or no consequence, not relevant or an historic religious anomaly which sooner or later would fade away entirely. Is this right? Are angels only figments of imagination or are they real? Should our thinking and experience take note of them? What is it that, at this time, has brought angels to the fore in at least a significant section of the public consciousness? Are angels just a fad of the moment to revel in and to make money out of? Mmm. Lots of questions. So what is said about what are angels? In the Christian Testament these celestial beings are divided up into seven orders called angels, archangels, principalities, powers, virtues, dominions and thrones. These are added to the two orders of cherubim and seraphim of the Jewish Testament. Later Christian theological thought regrouped these nine 'choirs of angels' into three orders. Whichever system you follow the word angel is used in both a generic sense as well as to identify a specific angelic group. This hierarchical and organisational structure, to my mind smacks of human rather than the divine, as it seems to reflect societal power structures. Does, therefore, the angelic hierarchy reflect a true reality or is it the desire of early church to bolster a rigid societal power structure? Was this done on the basis of... 'well if the angels are organised like this then it must be all right for us to be organised this way'? This must have been very useful for popes, kings, princes and all the other levels below them, except perhaps for those at the bottom of course. So, personally, I am not keen on the way that angels are structured. But what do angels actually do? What is seen as their function? Nearest to God, in the first division so to speak, are the seraphim whose role is to make music and to pass on God's 'love and light' down to the lesser ranks. The cherubim are there to make sure that the universal law of divine love is kept. While the thrones are responsible for seeing that divine justice is done in all situations in order to keep cosmic harmony. The second division includes the dominions whose job is to supervise the duties and actions of the lower angels. The virtues organise miracles and bestow grace and courage on those of us who need it. The powers bestow the strength to stand up for ourselves. The lower division is made up of the principalities who are like guardian angels for our planet or parts of it while the seven archangels have specific tasks for which they are responsible. These include helping us to oppose evil, that's Michael, bringing us good news (Gabriel) or helping people to be creative and to pass such knowledge on (Uriel). Haniel is the guardian of all the kinds of love while Metatron helps us to bridge the gap between us and the divine. Auriel is the general protector of Earth and night and lastly Raziel is the guardian of inner knowledge and mysteries. The lowest of the angelic ranks are called angels. These look after us on an individual basis, our own guardian angels. I find that the more I read about the angelic host the more I become muddled and confused. The angelic system seems very complex with all sorts of overlapping inter-relationships, roles and sub roles of which I have referred to only in a limited way. In a sense the first division oversees the law, the second division make sure the law is carried out and the third division are the day to day workers. To a large extent I am left further from understanding than I thought I was at the beginning. This information, to me, reinforces the humanness rather than the divineness of the structure. It seems almost pantheistic like Hinduism with its myriads of god lets each with their own roles and uses. Is that what angels are all about? Are angels only the remnants of an earlier and more primitive religious belief structure which has been passed down to us? I rather think that this may be true but I also think that there may be actual, practical and down to earth reasons why the concept or the reality of angels has survived. The concept of angels I believe would probably disappear unless there is something happening which keeps it alive. Initially, and for many centuries, the idea of angels was kept alive by the Christian church and during this period angels spread throughout our folklore. Over at least the last two hundred years, however, Christianity, under the influence of science, has slowly moved to marginalise angels within its teachings. After this period of time there should be little left of angels within the public consciousness. But there isn't. It seems to be or it wouldn't be possible for publishers to give it so much prominence in their drive to make money. Angels therefore must be very firmly bedded into our culture and beliefs. A surprising thing considering how the established church and science has been doing its best to 'pooh-pooh' them. It seems likely therefore, that angel belief must, at some level, be related to the real experience of our population as a whole as little else would account for its survival following sustained suppression. What I mean is that people are actually experiencing angels. Interest in angels has been growing in this country for the last ten years or so. A useful product of this more public acceptance has been a raised profile of angels as being an acceptable area of academic research. Yes, some people have actually been doing research about angels. The one I am going to quote today is Emma Heathcote-James who has been working on angels for some time and at the time of publishing her book -Seeing Angels- last year was putting together her doctoral thesis on this subject. Her book gives lots of examples and useful statistics. In over 800 accounts received from all parts of the U.K., from different religious backgrounds and across all ages, one thing was common to all. Those involved were absolutely certain that their experiences were of an angelic nature. No ifs, no buts, just certainty. Most had been the butt of or feared ridicule and yet still believed that their experience was true and not an hallucination. These accounts showed a number of common patterns. Nearly a third involved seeing the traditional angel form i.e. a figure dressed in white with wings. Other experiences involved a human form or scent, light, sound, physical, internal or other sensations. The importance of the experiences was seen to be that there had been a positive after effect. In this context comfort and reassurance was the most common experience. This was followed by direct protective and often physical intervention including life saving act by the angel. The next most common was delivering of meaningful messages. Closely following this was the more general comfort and hope received in the midst of death or illness. What seems clear is that a small part of the population in this country is actually having an angel encounter. If this is true now then there is no reason to believe that it wasn't true in the past. Perhaps there have always been some who have had angelic encounters. It is likely that such ongoing experiences are actually responsible for the continued acceptance of the idea of angels. This is so in spite of the efforts of science and religion to marginalize this issue. The question is however, are angels really real? Those who experience them are absolutely certain. Can those of us who have not had an angelic experience find a basis for the acceptance of such experiences. The first thing I have to say is that I have always been a bit of a 'doubting Thomas' which in my case makes it more difficult to accept someone else's reality. But I will try. My first thought is to ask myself if I have had any unusual experiences in my life, which I have not put down to angelic influence but which another person might. Like many people I have to admit that I have. For example, when out rock climbing many years ago, without thought and before I was aware of what I was doing, I lifted up my climbing partner and pulled him to one side and safety with only my left hand, when a section of the quarry face of some tons in weight broke free. It was done immediately. Such unexpected strength in an emergency is not unknown in this world and personally I look on this event as being more likely to be untapped bodily ability rather than divine or angelic intervention. At another time and place I heard a voice. Now I often hear a voice in my head but it is my own voice and it goes on most of the time. There is always some general background noise. That I believe is fairly normal. On this day I had been driving down south from my home very early in the morning after having had little sleep the night before. I was tired but the journey was over and I was relaxing with a book. I was finding the book hard going and had to keep stopping and thinking about what I had just read. In one of these reading pauses my ongoing 'brain noise' stopped, tuned out like a pre digital radio coming onto station. I then heard three words in a calm quiet masculine voice, well predominately masculine. It said "Well done Joe". After a slight pause my 'brain noise' started up again. I was flabbergasted. It took a moment or two to realise what had happened. What was interesting was that for the rest of that day I felt I was on a high, everything around me looked new and shiny ... special. At the time I thought it might have been God but I didn't 'know'. Since then I realise it could equally be put down perhaps to a personal spiritual guide or helper. Not once did I think angel. I understand, however, that an angel believer would immediately brand that experience as being angelic. In the third event or events I had allowed myself to get into potentially difficult, perhaps life threatening, situations. As each situation developed I found that I had an overwhelming desire to stop, to go, to get away, to get out. I was filled with the feeling that all was not right and I must do something.... now, which I did. This has happened three times on three different occasions. What was interesting was that what I felt seemed to come from outside rather than within myself. But I did not once think angel. The fourth series of events arose from my Reiki. When in healing mode, during these years my perception, has changed slowly and subtly to incorporate a physical feeling of another's energy field or aura, the hearing of words in my own voice indicating where hands should be placed, a system in which I can ask questions (and receive answers) and an element of 'guided ness'. This last takes the form of either showing me where I need to be next or by direct intervention where my hands are taken over and do, sometimes, things about which I have no prior training or knowledge. When I ask for this last to happen I get the distinct impression that it is not me that is using my hands while always retaining the control of stopping the process at all times. Although I accept the reality of 'guided ness', never once have I thought that angels were involved. Recently I had my 'between lives' events, sparked off by regression and later meditation on the death process. Even here, during these experiences, faced by a white human-like shape I did not think angel. Though I am sure that others would. So where does that leave me in trying to make sense of this angel thing. A lot of things are said about angels and what they do but I have no real basis for accepting or rejecting any of them. They have a long history within a number of different cultures. Quite a few people believe angels exist. Some people have had meaningful angelic experiences from which they cannot be persuaded. I, like many others have had some unusual experiences that angel believers would call angelic episodes but I am not convinced because they could quite easily be classed as higher self, spirit guide, or spiritual helper involvement, if you are in to that sort of thing. Does science have anything to add that could help? I suppose the medical profession, when commenting on the strength event, would say that I was tapping into my body's reserve of strength in some way. This has been noted on a number of occasions where danger is to yourself or another. People have lifted cars to save children etc. They may even be right but as far as I know, no one has come up with where the extra energy is and how it is accessed. Perhaps in the third of my experiences someone is bound so say that my experience is somehow tied into a basic fight or flight response in response to high stress levels caused by perceived danger. In the second, third and fourth events psychologists would say that I was giving advice to myself. They might even draw in such concepts as conscience, the subconscious, higher consciousness or higher self or psyche that are all ways of saying that the experience is what we call 'mind' based in some way. It would be said that one part of the mind was talking or influencing another part. There are lots of explanations but no basic proof and perhaps, it could be argued, such are just ways of excluding or ignoring the possibility of outside intervention by guides or angels. Where does that leave us? With the idea that such experiences might by induced by my body and mind, in response to certain situations. So what else is there. Well Emma Heathcote-James' research also pointed out that the majority of the angel experiences occurred when either the person was actually in danger, highly stressed or in what she called the 'twilight' state which occurs in meditation, prayer or just before sleep. But what is special about these states of mind? Brain activity is measured by an EEG which measures the speed at which brain neurons fire in cycles per second. In the normal healthy relaxed person's brain, governed by the thalamic pacemaker, neurons will be firing off at between 7 and 12HZ (cycles per second). This is called the alpha state. In the twilight or theta state the brain neurons are working at a much slower rate, that of 4 to 7HZ. This state is seen as that which we go through on the way to deep restorative sleep. In this state we seem to open the gateway to learning and memory, our visual imagery is more acute. It is in this state that our intuitive abilities open up. It is also the state we go to when we employ relaxation techniques, meditation, hypnosis and deep silent prayer where the presence of God is felt. This is the state that many receivers of Reiki describe as 'not awake but not asleep'. This is the state that many angelic experiences are seen to probably occur, but not all of them. Not the angelic experiences during times of immediate danger when the brain is in the beta state (13-40Hz) associated with peak performance, concentration, heightened alertness and visual acuity. So some angelic experiences are involved with a specific brain function. Some would therefore say that because of this link, it is likely that all such occurrences are brought about by our own brains. But this is not necessarily so. It would be a mistake to assume that because the physical brain is involved in angelic occurrences it therefore means that it is necessarily the brain that controls them. That is not at all certain. It is like a child looking at the arrival of mail through the letterbox of a solid door saying that the letterbox is somehow controlling the arrival of the mail. I suspect it may be much more complicated and we haven't even begun to understand what is really going on. But it certainly leaves me with a quandary. For some, angelic experiences really happen, as do experiences of being communicated to by a spirit guide or spiritual helper. What I do think is that there is something going on that we have not explained. To some extent it is a problem of language... angel... spirit guide... spiritual helper... personal guide. Are these just words for explaining the same experience. Are we more likely to see angels if we are from a Jewish, Christian or Islamic background and if we are from the East are we more likely to see our personal guide. I think that is likely. I think that when we undergo an experience of this kind our brains try to make sense of it. That is what brains do. That is their function. But there is a problem with this. Our brains can only do this on the basis of pre existing experience and knowledge. Pictorial illusions show that the brain works in this way. A black and white picture of a black ornate wine glass may switch to a picture of two white outline faces turned inwards. Our understanding of such a picture can switch backwards and forwards at random. Our brain trying to create an understanding of reality. So an angel experienced by one, could be the guide experienced by another. However, the understanding that their brain creates might still not be the truth. Perhaps the reality of such experiences is something different again. Does this destroy the validity of angel or guides. No it doesn't. That experience is reality for that person. Help is still received. Prayers are answered. Healing occurs. God is experienced. Yes this might still be an untapped function of the brain or mind. But at the moment I don't think so.... And does it matter anyway? What happens works. Danger is averted or survived. Information received is understood. Comfort is experienced. It is useful. Angelic experiences are seen as a touch of the divine. For that person it is reality, a part of their belief system and a part of their religion perhaps. Such people do not sway from that belief no matter what. They are secure. Guide experiences tend to be kept separate from religion in a separate compartment. I wonder which is the better way and what as a church should we do about it? Joe Potter