The Cauldron: A Pagan Forum

Since Gabriel is associated with either Water, the pillar of Fire during night, or a revelatory/mystagogic function in general, I wouldn't worry about any intense interaction between him and Gaia. Uriel, on the other hand...

Gaia presumably has her own messenger emanations if she wants them, why would she be dependent on someone else's?  That doesn't make any sense.

I try again. First subject: Ideas about the Abrahamitic God changed with time.

The way people believed about YHWH before 600 BCE is not the same way modern Jews, Christians and Moslems believe about God - and has not been, since the time the latter chapters of the book of Isaiah were written in the 5th century BCE.

The difference between the early beliefs about YHWH and the later beliefs about God increased during the times of Philo of Alexandria (Jew, ob. c. 50 CE), St. Clement of Alexandria (Christian, ob. c. 215 CE), St. Gregory Nazianzen (Christian, ob. 390 CE), St. John of Damascus (Christian, ob. 749), Moses Maimonides (Jew, ob. 1204) and Ibn Arabi (Moslem, ob. 1240).  
 
Second subject: Layers of existence in a Pagan world-view (an idea later shared with some Abrahamitic philosophers).

It is a rather widespread idea, that existence is graded in several layers of existence. Even ancient Pagans (in Greece, Rome and Egypt) made a distinction between gods/spirits belonging to one of these layers of existence and those gods/spirits belonging to another layer of existence.

Greek-speaking Pagan philosophers in Greece, Rome, Egypt and Syria increasingly held the idea, that all deities come from an ultimate source, but Stoic philosophers, Peripatetic philosophers and Platonic philosophers didn't agree about the details.

In the system of Agrippa, Uriel is supposed to exist on a higher plane of existence than Gaia, so if any commanding around is expected, it is the other way round. Iamblichus wouldn't agree with Agrippa.

The idea is, however, not New Age. Agrippa lived in the 16th century, while New Age emerged in the 1960s, and didn't morph into its contemporary commercial shape until the 1980s.

Agrippa (1486-1535) was a German nobleman who preferred reading old Greek pagan philosophers, Christian Church Fathers, Jewish books about Kabbalah and magical grimoires (and discussing angels with a Benedictine abbot called Trithemius) to doing such pastimes other noblemen of his time and age pursued.

So he wrote a big book (in three parts) called Three Books on Occult Philosophy, which became very, very influential on later Christian magic in Europe, though very few ceremonial magicians follow him in every detail.

In the 19th century, there was a noticeable split between French-speaking Occultists and English-speaking Occultists. They interpret and apply Agrippa's ideas in different ways. If you read webpages about magic in English, it is likely that you have encountered the British way of applying Agrippa. English-speakers are usually less familiar with the French magical tradition, which is a pity, since it is rather nice.

An afterthought. An old translation is online:

http://esotericarchives.com/agrippa/index.html

And the same website have one of Proclus' works in an old translation:

http://esotericarchives.com/proclus/metaelem.htm