St. Michael and the People Who Claim to Talk for Him

I've been interested in St. Michael for a long time, so naturally I've done a lot of research on him. And there's a phenomenon on the rise that I think can be blamed on the rise of the internet and the free exchange of information. This phenomenon, of course, is people who say he's in constant contact with them because he wants them to impart his messages on the world. These people are a dime a dozen, but what's really amazing is that they don't seem to know about everyone else making similar crackpot claims.

(Seriously, did these people all wake up today and have a heaping bowl of Crazy O's?)

Interestingly enough, everyone's channelled messages basically start the same way: "You're my children, I love you, I don't expect you to believe everything I say, blah blah blah blah blah. Usually "Michael" refers to God as "the Creator," never as "Father" or "Lord." Then his "chosen" medium goes into a hippie, esoteric diatribe about the nature of the universe; his descriptions and directions for living are detailed enough to fool people into thinking they're real, but vague enough to allow his "chosen" mediums wiggle room. By that, I mean they make outrageous claims that can't be proven or disproven.

I spoke to one of Michael's "chosen" people once, a woman named Carolyn Ann O'Riley, and everything went swimmingly at first. She was forthcoming with advice. She was so friendly, and some of the things she told me about Michael mirrored my own life, so I vaguely believed she really talked to him. But when I asked her how her channeling worked, not out of skepticism but pure curiosity, she became hostile and defensive. She told me she would not tell me how the channelling worked, and that she never wanted me to contact her again. Well, that screamed fake to me, and I sent her one last email to tell her so. I also made it very clear that she should be ashamed of herself for preying on gullible people who looked to people like her for comfort and a sense of connection to something greater than themselves.

My favorites among these new species of pond scum are the ones who charge you to talk to Michael. Part of me is tempted to pay their fee just so I can have the pleasure of catching them in a lie. The amounts they charge vary in price, but I've seen it fluctuate from $150 to $1,500 (Ms. O'Riley charges). Yeah, that definitely strikes me as something the real Michael would encourage...

I try to avoid these people like the plague because they make me so mad, but today I accidentally came across an entire book dedicated to Michael's "thoughts" on the so-called 2012 apocalypse and how he says it will happen. Listen, I don't know what we can expect in 2012. Part of me says this is a repeat of the Millenium hysteria, and part of me, the part that's also studying worldwide apocalyptic literature, can't ignore how all the world's prophecies seem to be converging at that same point in 2012. So honestly, I don't know if I should scoff or panic at the idea. But I do know this: the Bible says that nobody but God, not even Jesus, is privy to the date of the Apocalypse. So if Jesus doesn't know, Michael doesn't either. The fact that this woman doesn't know or remember that little tidbit of info automatically discredits her.

But what bothers me the most are the droves of people who are willing to hang on these so-called mediums' words without so much as an ounce of skepticism. Their lives are so sad, so unfulfilled, so longing for divine approval, that they forget to put their blinders on. I mean, I get that, I really do. I search for Michael for the same reasons. But unfortunately, I also know that most people are liars. So every piece of evidence I find concerning him must be taken with a grain of salt. But these sheep who blindly listen to these messages from "Michael" just automatically believe everything they hear.

Okay, so yeah, I'm a little jaded. I've been studying St. Michael for the last fifteen years, since I had my own mysterious encounter, and I've never found any solid, convincing evidence that anyone can channel him. As far as I can tell, if he wants someone to know something, he shows up alive and in the flesh to tell them. If everything we know about him is true, if he is indeed the archetypal knight in shining armor and most devoted of God's servants, then it stands to reason he's not shy.

And how do I know he doesn't really talk through someone? Admittedly, I don't. He may very well have one or two people he's handpicked for this mission. I can't say for certain that he hasn't because I personally don't know the guy. But again, these "chosen" people can be found in hordes on the internet. I'm pretty sure at least 99% of them are fake. I seriously doubt Michael has enough time in the day to talk to the millions of crackpots claiming to speak for him while still managing to battle demons and whatnot.

In short, if you see someone on the internet claiming to channel St. Michael, you are obliged to call bullshit.

The Hypocrisy of the So-Called Faithful

You know, I have this theory that organized religion could almost be tolerable if we could somehow just get rid of that pesky human element.

I sometimes have to resist the urge to go up to one of the "devout" and just shake the hell out of them until enough room opens up in their pea-sized brains that a modicum of common sense can sift through. I want to literally smack them in the face with a copy of the Bible and ask them if they've ever actually opened it.

I, of course, do not refer to the moderate believers, the people who are basically good people trying to do the right thing in a very scary, screwed up world. I don't believe a few bad apples can spoil the whole bunch, just like I don't believe a handful of fanatical nutcases should ruin the reputation of decent, morally centered people. I'm directing tonight's indignation against the people who think Jerry Falwell was the second coming of Jesus, okay? Let's be clear.

My husband comes from this crowd, and while I try to play nice with my in-laws, there are times I rage inside about the ignorance and intolerance that abounds. You wouldn't believe the arguments we've had about evolution and homosexuality. One time, his grandmother hatefully insisted that the Christmas song, "Jingle Bells," was satanic and glorified the Devil (yeah, I'm still scratching my head over that one). Another time, she insisted there is no such thing as ghosts. "But, don't you worship the Holy Ghost?" I asked. She didn't appreciate my snarky tone. But today, it's not them I rail against. It's actually the members of their congregation, these so-called soldiers for Christ.

My teenage niece, Becky, who is very active in her church's youth ministry, got shingles. Now, I know not everyone who reads this is medically saavy, so let me spell it out for you in layman's terms. When you get a virus like chicken pox, you rarely get it again. But sometimes, due to stress, a weak immune system, or whatever, the chicken pox virus will manifest itself again. Shingles, therefore, is essentially the chicken pox virus that has manifested itself in the body's nerves. You even get the chicken pox rash, but the blisters follow your nerves. My dad's gotten it several times, and each time he looks like a weird roadmap of blisters, or that one stripey guy on Seaquest. Old people are usually the ones to get shingles, so it's a little unusual that Becky contracted it. Here's the thing, though. If you've had chicken pox before, and who hasn't in this day and age, or at least gotten the vaccine, you're safe.

But as far as Becky's church is concerned, she's the great, unwashed she-demon come down to infect that masses with her evil microbes.

This intolerance really pisses me off. I've battled with it since I married my husband. They think I'm the Devil because I'm a Catholic, and not a very good one at that. I drink wine, I dance (badly, but it counts), I worship idols, I believe in such gosh-darn, irrational things like science, I finished high school, heck, I finished junior high, I'm not married to my cousin, etc. I feel terrible that she's now on the receiving end. See, I can take it because I consider the source. But this church is her whole life, and she really respects their opinions. So it irks me how these people are supposedly her friends, but they are treating her like a leper. They've kicked her out of her youth group and have stopped talking to her altogether. Their parents confronted my brother and sister-in-law, telling them that she shouldn't be allowed to leave the house.

Okay, I understand not everyone's had chicken pox and so yeah, she could potentially infect someone else. Keep her home to be safe. But to treat her like a social pariah for it?

It takes me back to my childhood. I have terrible excema, and when I was very little, AIDS was still a great mystery to doctors. One of the only things they knew about it was that it was highly contagious and that it caused a rash. My second grade teacher saw my excema rashes, panicked, and thought I had AIDS even though I told her what it really was. Incidentally, excema isn't contagious at all. Still, she freaked and launched a crusade against me to get me expelled from the school. She tried to browbeat the principal and she made sure to warn all the parents about me. As a result, many of my friends were forbidden to go near me. I came this close to being kicked out of school. When my mom got wind of it, she brought in my doctor's extensive explanation stating my disease, albeit terrible, wasn't AIDS and certainly wasn't contagious. Still, the damage was already done. And the teacher, even with the evidence weighing in my favor, never quit treating me like a leper.

But that brings me back to the issue of the "devoted." See, the woman who campaigned against me was merely a teacher, and look what kind of trouble she caused in my life. She wasn't an entire church. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Jesus put his hands on lepers without a single ounce of worry for his safety, or one judgmental thought?

Yes, but Katie, that's Jesus. Of course he wouldn't be afraid. God would protect him from leprosy and other contagious diseases!

Okay, in the interest of fairness I can't play the Jesus card, but what about truly good Christians like, say, Mother Theresa? Isn't it amazing that in all that time she touched and hugged lepers, she never got sick with it herself?

Of course, one doesn't have to be Jesus or Mother Theresa to be a good Christian. They just need to open up their Bible and actually read it. I seem to recall Jesus saying something along the lines of the Golden Rule; treat others how you want to be treated. I also remember a parable about a good Samaritan. Gosh! When you really start to look at Jesus and his messages in totality, there isn't really anything condoning hatred and condemnation of your fellow man for any reason whatsoever. I'm just so shocked that Christianity's numero uno religious figure didn't advocate being a douchebag to your neighbor.

Actually, it IS kind of shocking when you consider that so many Christians are douchebags.

The bottom line is, how can you call yourself a Christian if you don't heed Christ's words?

The BBC Version of Robin Hood

Summer is my off time from school, and although I probably should be reading more books than I do, I actually prefer to veg out in front of the TV. My brain needs the time off worse than I do! Anyway, a few weeks ago, I discovered the BBC's version of "Robin Hood" on Netflix. Seeing as how Robin Hood is a Trickster figure, and my Master's thesis will be about Tricksters, I thought I'd give it a whirl.

And I loved it!

You know, the danger of doing Robin Hood, apart from the fact that it's been done a thousand times, is that his character risks being too goody goody and self-righteous. I can't stand characters who essentially have their hands on their hips, smiling broadly, with a light glinting off their flawless teeth. I like characters, especially good guys, who have dirt on their noses. This version of Robin Hood, played by Jonas Armstrong, is different in that he isn't Captain America (or England, as it were). I get the feeling that he's not altruistic and completely selfless. He helps people because it's the right thing to do, sure, but also because he wants their adoration. I find this unusual deviance wonderfully complex, and it colors him with more richness than I've seen in previous versions.

But as well-developed of a character as Robin is, the Sheriff is the most compelling villain I've ever seen in the Robin Hood myth. In prior versions, I've never really understood the oppression the peasants endured under his patronage. Sure, he's been a rat bastard in previous incarnations, but it's never been very convincing. This Sheriff, played by Keith Allen, truly makes me believe that he's the epitome of evil, like Nottingham's version of Hitler. Some examples from his long list of cruelty include cutting out tongues and breaking prisoners' legs. He frequently threatens to execute peoples' family members to coerce them into betraying Robin Hood and the Merry Men. But his evilness is unique because his cruelness is surpassed by vicious cunning. He's not a bumbling moron like many of his predecessors. He knows how to push peoples' buttons and he doesn't hesitate to do it. He is truly the perfect nemesis to Robin.

One of my favorite aspects of this new version of Robin Hood is how Marian is portrayed. In prior versions, she's been essentially a weak female character. As I write this, I keep thinking of Disney's cartoon version with Marian running from the guards yelling, "Robin, help, help!" Other versions are equally guilty of making her helpless and dependent on our hero to save the day. Blech! As a woman, as a feminist, I get tired of that crap. Thankfully, the BBC gave Marian a 21st century attitude. She doesn't automatically run into Robin's arms with gratitude and relief the moment he arrives back in Nottingham. In fact, she gives him quite a lot of hell before she warms up again to him. Eventually, they become lovers as the Robin Hood legend prescribes, but she's not dependent on him. They're equals, with him helping her and her helping him. She also does things that aren't "girly." She knows how to ride horses, fight with swords and knives, shoot a bow, etc. In spite of her considerable skills, the men around her frequently underestimate her, and she uses this to her advantage. This is a Marian with a brain and a considerable amount of brawn. She's definitely not the typical rendition of Robin's lady love.

The other supporting characters, while obviously not as well-developed as Robin, are equally interesting. They're not mindless automatons who blindly take orders. They have real thoughts and emotions, and distinctly unique personalities that I've never seen before in past incarnations. These personalities are new twists on ancient character archetypes. For example, Little John isn't Robin's best friend, and in fact, he doesn't always like his new leader. Robin's best friend is Much, a character mentioned in the earliest written legends but who gradually faded from the literature with time. Much, in this version, is fairly fussy, but he provides nearly all the comic relief of the show. Allan a'Dale is the con-artist who really wants something in return for all his do-gooding. Will Scarlet is the shy, quiet carpenter who gets involved with Robin after being wrongfully condemned to hang. The last familiar face is Tuck, who, in this version is a black warrior priest, a far cry from the drunk we're so familiar with. There have been a couple of female gang members not seen at all in prior versions: Djaq, the Saracen captive Robin rescues, and Kate, the villager who wants revenge for her brother's death. These two, like Marian, are strong women with brains and abilities that surpass their looks.

The show has been off the air for a couple years now, so obviously I'm a little late getting involved with it. But it's definitely worth watching if you can.