So, angels, eh? We probably think of them as “supernatural.” But it really depends on how we define “supernatural,” no?
Google’s definition is the stupidest: “(of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.” Way to include what is to be defined in the definition itself.
Webster’s is better [in my opinion]: “of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe especially : of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil.” That would [I think] encompass angels, except to the extent we think angels are part of the visible observable universe. Normally we think of them as invisible, but we have stories about visible angels, so not always, eh?
Anyway – we think angels are created, right? So … my point … they’re not as supernatural as God.
On that logic, “[created] nature” includes “the angels.”
Just marveling at that with some delight this morning.
Image: “The Wounded Angel,” Hugo Simberg, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Matters of Interpretation 
