Im really confused and would appreciate any help… I
Am I correct that the idea of God creating the world through Angels is Neo platonic? Is it also Gnostic?
What is the Catholic view? I saw a quote saying its not heretical and another quote saying it’s wrong and God made the world immediately. What is correct? I’m looking for doctrine but also if the idea is actually neo platonic. Is it part of neo Platonism that was similar to Christianity or the Gnostic part? Also was the idea eventually rejected in a Church council?
Am I correct that some parts of neo Platonism were accepted by the Church and others werewere Gnostic?
I don’t think any genuine Neoplatonist would have put it that way (that God created the world through angels), but there is certainly a resemblance in such a view to Neoplatonic thought.
Plotinus (A.D. 204/5-270), the founder of Neoplatonism, held that there is a unique Principle, that he calls the One, from which emanate an Intellect and (through the Intellect) a Soul. From the Soul, in turn, come all the human souls as well as material beings. (As you can see, there is a superficial resemblance to Trinitarian theology here, but we have to keep in mind that the Intellect and the Soul are strictly subordinate to the One, a view that is contrary to orthodox Christian teaching.)
Plotinus does not really speak of “creation,” because the emanations are necessary: they are not a free action on the part of the One, but simply flow out spontaneously, as it were.
It is possible that some Christian writer may have taken a cue from Neoplatonism and posited that creation takes place by the mediation of angels. Avicenna (the Muslim Persian philosopher Ibn Sina, 980-1037) held a doctrine that was more or less similar to this. However, this is not the orthodox teaching about creation: creation is always direct from God and “ex nihilo.” God simply creates; He does not use a pre-existing material.
Thomas Aquinas refutes the proposition that God can “delegate” the power to create to the angels in
, I, q. 45. a. 5Summa theologiae.
Gnosticism is a very broad category, but Valentinian Gnosticism, arguably the most typical form, did have a doctrine that resembled Neoplatonism: they posited an utterly ineffable Principle from which all beings emanate, and to which all eventually return.
A lot of good concepts, however, are taken from Neoplatonism. For example, the idea of “procession from” and “return to” the Creator (which is inspired by Neoplatonism) can be perfectly orthodox, provided the “procession” consists in a true and free creation and the “return” respects the legitimate autonomy of creatures. (Valentinian Gnosticism fails on both counts: the “procession” is a necessary emanation, and the “return” consists in a fusion with the Principle.)
The terminology used for Trinitarian dogma is probably inspired by Plotinus: the name he gave to the One, Intellect, and Soul is “hypostasis,” the same term used for the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in Greek. (Plotinus, in turn, gets this term from Aristotle.) As I noted, however, authentic Trinitarian theology is fundamentally very different from Neoplatonism.
Aquinas’ doctrine of the intrinsic principles of being (the so-called “act of being”) is largely inspired by the Neoplatonist Christian writer called Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite (ca. A.D. 400).
I believe what the Church teaches