The fundamental question of whether the Enochian entities are “good” or “bad” spirits is complicated by the nature of the communications themselves and the reactions of the two primary participants, which often vary significantly and reflect their own beliefs, experiences, and emotional states. These entities, as described in various Enochian texts, present themselves in multifaceted ways, leading to interpretations that can either exalt their benevolence or emphasize a more malevolent essence.
As practitioners engage in these interactions, their personal biases affect their views, which can lead to an unfair judgment of the entities’ intentions. Additionally, the historical background and changing nature of Enochian magic make this inquiry more complicated, as the meanings of “good” and “bad” can vary based on different cultural and spiritual perspectives.
Arguments for the Celestial (Good) Nature
John Dee maintained until his death that the spirits were “Good Angels” sent by God. His evidence for this benevolence rested on several factors:
- Theological Orthodoxy: The spirits often delivered sermons on the importance of faith, the necessity of prayer, and the impending judgment of the world.
- Transformative Goals: The stated purpose of the system was the “Great Work”—the spiritualization of human consciousness and the recovery of divine wisdom.
- Apocalyptic Utility: The spirits claimed the Enochian language would provide humanity with the tools to survive the “Deluge” of the end times.
Arguments for the Malevolent (Bad) Nature
Conversely, several aspects of the scrying sessions suggest a more sinister or deceptive presence.
- Intrusive Entities: Throughout the sessions, explicitly demonic beings appeared, such as Gargat, who told Dee he was “damned forever” and sought Dee’s own suffering. Another spirit, Lundrumguffa, was identified as a haunt seeking to harm Dee’s family.
- The Command of Madimi: In 1587, an entity appearing as a young girl, Madimi, ordered Dee and Kelley to “sleep with each others’ wives” for the conversations to continue. Kelley immediately denounced the spirit as “nefarious” and argued that they had been deceived by “lying spirits”.
- Linguistic Deception: The spirits claimed Enochian was the language of Adam, a claim that conflicted with 16th-century theological beliefs that Adam spoke Hebrew. Furthermore, many of the spirits’ promises—such as the location of hidden gold or lost books—never materialized.
The “Fallen Angel” Theory: The Watchtowers as Cages
A pervasive theory among modern occultists, particularly those influenced by the “Hermetic Myth,” posits that the Enochian entities are actually “fallen angels” who were cast out of heaven and bound into the elements of the Earth. In this interpretation, the Watchtowers are not just portals but “prisons” or “cages” designed by God to restrain these powerful, chaotic forces.
If this theory is correct, the Enochian rituals do not “summon” angels in the traditional sense; rather, they “unlock” the cages of elemental spirits who are inherently indifferent to human morality. This would explain why Enochian entities are often described as “autistic algorithms” that will grant a magician’s request regardless of whether it leads to the practitioner’s destruction.
Theological Critiques: Abomination and Demonic Deception
From the perspective of institutional Christianity, both during Dee’s time and today, the practice of Enochian magic is viewed as a dangerous rejection of divine authority.
Scriptural Condemnation
Theological critiques often cite Deuteronomy 18:10–12, which condemns “anyone who casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead” as an “abomination” to the Lord. The use of crystals and occult languages is seen as a “counterfeit gospel”—an attempt to obtain knowledge through demonic shortcuts rather than through the Word of God.
The Lutheran and Catholic Perspectives
In the post-Reformation era, different denominations viewed Dee’s work with varying degrees of hostility.
- Lutheran Perspective: Confessional Lutheran theology often views such manifestations as “lying spirits” whose sole intent is to terrify and deceive. Martin Luther himself argued that magic was a “degeneration of traditional roles” and that magicians were quasi-demons.
- Catholic Perspective: While the Catholic Church condemned the practice, some Renaissance figures like Marsilio Ficino attempted to distinguish between “natural magic” and the “invocation of malevolent spirits”. Dee, however, walked a fine line by actively invoking spiritual entities outside of Church sanction.
Critics argue that the “fruits” of the Enochian sessions—the mental illness of Kelley, the financial ruin of Dee, and the scandalous “wife-sharing” command—are proof of their demonic origin. They suggest that the entities used “true things” to gain Dee’s trust only to bind him more tightly into a state of spiritual bondage.
Conclusion: A Mirror of the Soul or a Modern Myth?
Ultimately, the Enochian entities remain as enigmatic today as they were when they first whispered to Edward Kelley through a crystal ball. Whether they are celestial messengers of the “Great Work,” elemental forces bound in cosmic cages, or sophisticated psychological projections, their impact on Western occultism is undeniable. They occupy a gray space where high theology meets raw, chaotic magic—a realm where the line between divine revelation and demonic deception is razor-thin. Perhaps the true nature of these entities is less about what they are and more about what they reveal in those who seek them: a reflection of our own desire for forbidden knowledge and the inherent risks of peering behind the veil.
Share Your Thoughts
The mystery of John Dee’s “angels” continues to spark intense debate among historians, theologians, and practitioners alike. Do you believe Dee was on the verge of a divine breakthrough, or was he the victim of a grand, spiritual ruse?
Drop a comment below with your theory, and don’t forget to subscribe to the newsletter for more deep dives into the world’s most haunting occult mysteries!
Leave a Reply