Any one have any true stories of St. Michael the Archangel?

I knew that this question would attract athiests and protestants. All I want is someone to tell me an experience ofMichael the Archangel (If you prefer protestants, it does not really matter) in their lifes. He is the protector of the Catholic church. He has freed many people under the influence of all kinds of evil. God bless ya all and peace!

Doug Lawrence that was a great true story! A seminarian friend told me a similar one. Keep the faith my friend. Everyone wants to attack the Catholic church now a days. But like yourself I know Mother Mary and St. Michael have our backs covered. I hope the protestants and Athiests read the true story.

Totus Tous Maria!

I liked Zorros comment, "BTW Saint just means holy, and Michael the Archangel sure is holy, don't you protestants know English?"

Classy jazz read: - "Behold, from now on will all ages call me blessed." Luke 1:48 - Thus the church has continued to fulfil this bibilical prophesy! Do not mess mother Mary the Mother of Jesus it upsets me. Jesus honors his mother throughout the generations through his Holy Catholic Church by obeying the 4th commandment "Honor your Father and mother" Now Jesus being perfect in everything is going to show respect an honour to his mother otherwise he is not fulfilling his own commandment! So why attack people who love Mother Mary. My protestant friend you say why ask Mary for help or the angels and saints. I could ask you why do ask your pastor or a good person to pray for your intentions? Trust me Mother Mary was declared By Archangel Gabriel "Hail, full of Grace! The Lord is with you." Luke 1:28 If someone is full of Grace how can they have sin in them? This is the Mother of Jesus, God Himself - so his mother who is not God was made without sin. She is forever before the Lord.

Jazzy if Mary is full of Grace and without sin Luke 1:28 then I will and so do millions of Catholics ask Mary to present our intentions before Jesus her son! Mary always listens to his mother obeying the 4th commandment perfectly! Do you not read the Bible?

"Wheen Jesus saw his mother and the disciple there whom he loved, he said to his mother, 'Woman, behold your son.' Then he said to the disciple, 'Behold, your mother.' And from that hour the disciple took her into his home. John 19:26-28

I am sure you are at least aware that the disciples who are the early church represent us. Hence Jesus not conten in giving his very life and Holy Spirit to us also gave us his very own mother. And thus we are further obliged to fulfil the prophetic words of Mother Mary who stated "Behold, from now on will all ages call me Blessed". And you what my protestant friends I have yet to meet a protestant who fulfills this Biblical prophecy. Only the Catholic Church has fulfilled this Prohecy.

Jazzy, if you did not know Why do Protestants believe in the Bible alone when the Catholic Church put together the Bible?

Protestants believe that the Bible is the only authority on Christian faith, but it was the Catholic Church who put all the books in the Bible together from their own authority as the original Church of Christ.

Catholic Bishops in:

-Council of Rome (382 A.D.) wrote a list of the 73 books of the O.T. and N.T.

-Council of Hippo, North Africa (393 A.D.) approved the list of books

-Council of Carthage, North Africa (397 A.D.) also approved the cannon of O.T. and N.T. books

and finally:

- Pope Innocent I (401-417 A.D.) approved the 73-book cannon in the year 405 A.D. and closed the cannon of the Bible forever.

If you reject the authority of the Catholic Church then you reject the Bible as the word of God because the church decided which gospels and letters were inspired by God.

Dear Jazzy the Dead Sea Scrolls prove once again that the Catholic Bible is the best and original bible. Discovered by a young shepherd in 1947 near Qumran, Egypt, the contents of the Scrolls are so fantastic that it's hard to overstate their importance. Like a sacred time capsule of the early Christian era, they provide an invaluable window on the past that has revolutionized the way biblical scholars think about 1st century Judaism. According to Michael Barber, it's the next best thing to taking a time machine to Jesus' day.

the Dead Sea Scrolls demonstrate the accuracy of modern Catholic Bibles, how the evidence of the Scrolls put an end to the issue of the canon of Scripture, how the teachings of Jesus reflect the theology of His day, and how the biblical Covenants are the key to understanding the story of the Old Testament and its fulfillment in the New Testament.

To cut a long story short the protestants cut books out of the bible to suit their beliefs! The dead sea Scrolls prove that the original old testament texts of the Catholic Bible are in the Dead Sae scrolls of the Jews of Jesus time.

And again If you reject the authority of the Catholic Church then you reject the Bible as the word of God because the church decided which gospels and letters were inspired by God.

Can't you see the division in the protestant church there are over 100, 000 different protestant churchs with all different takes on what passages of the bible mean etc. At times it would seem with a 100, 000 different translations. The Holy Catholic Church is one. "I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, so that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me." John 17:20-22

Jazzy you must be reading some protestant ranting about the evil Catholic bible? This is wat it says in John 1 in my Catholic Bible and please look at the capital letters were appropriate "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." John: 1

Please do your research before making incorrect attacks against the Holy Catholic Church.

Jazzy... By the way Jazzy this is in no way an attack on you. I admire your zeal for the Lord and your hunger for truth.

To answer your 'Roman' question:

A qualification of the name Catholic commonly used in English-speaking countries by those unwilling to recognize the claims of the One True Church. Out of condescension for these dissidents, the members of that Church are wont in official documents to be styled "Roman Catholics" as if the term Catholic represented a genus of which those who owned allegiance to the pope formed a particular species. It is in fact a prevalent conception among Anglicans to regard the whole Catholic Church as made up of three principal branches, the Roman Catholic, the Anglo-Catholic and the Greek Catholic. As the erroneousness of this point of view has been sufficiently explained in the articles CHURCH and CATHOLIC, it is only needful here to consider the history of the composite term with which we are now concerned.

In the "Oxford English Dictionary", the highest existing authority upon questions of English philology, the following explanation is given under the heading "Roman Catholic".

The use of this composite term in place of the simple Roman, Romanist, or Romish; which had acquired an invidious sense, appears to have arisen in the early years of the seventeenth century. For conciliatory reasons it was employed in the negotiations connected with the Spanish Match (1618-1624) and appears in formal documents relating to this printed by Rushworth (I, 85-89). After that date it was generally adopted as a non-controversial term and has long been the recognized legal and official designation, though in ordinary use Catholic alone is very frequently employed. (New Oxford Dict., VIII, 766)

Of the illustrative quotations which follow, the earliest in date is one of 1605 from the "Europae Speculum" of Edwin Sandys: "Some Roman Catholiques will not say grace when a Protestant is present";

while a passage from Day's "Festivals" of 1615, contrasts "Roman Catholiques" with "good, true Catholiques indeed".

Although the account thus given in the Oxford Dictionary is in substance correct, it cannot be considered satisfactory. To begin with the word is distinctly older than is here suggested. When about the year 1580 certain English Catholics, under stress of grievous persecution, defended the lawfulness of attending Protestant services to escape the fines imposed on recusants, the Jesuit Father Persons published, under the pseudonym of Howlet, a clear exposition of the "Reasons why Catholiques refuse to goe to Church". This was answered in 1801 by a writer of Puritan sympathies, Percival Wiburn, who in his "Checke or Reproofe of M. Howlet" uses the term "Roman Catholic" repeatedly. For example he speaks of "you Romane Catholickes that sue for tolleration" (p. 140) and of the "parlous dilemma or streight which you Romane Catholickes are brought into" (p. 44).

Thus Philpot represents himself as answering his Catholic examiner: "I am, master doctor, of the unfeigned Catholic Church and will live and die therein, and if you can prove your Church to be the True Catholic Church, I will be one of the same" (Philpot, "Works", Parker Soc., p. 132). It would be easy to quote many similar passages. The term "Romish Catholic" or "Roman Catholic" undoubtedly originated with the Protestant divines who shared this feeling and who were unwilling to concede the name Catholic to their opponents without qualification. Indeed the writer Crowley, just mentioned, does not hesitate throughout a long tract to use the term "Protestant Catholics" the name which he applies to his antagonists. Thus he says "We Protestant Catholiques are not departed from the true Catholique religion" (p. 33) and he refers more than once to "Our Protestant Catholique Church," (p. 74)

On the other hand the evidence seems to show that the Catholics of the reign of Elizabeth and James I were by no means willing to admit any other designation for themselves than the unqualified name Catholic. Father Southwell's "Humble Supplication to her Majesty" (1591), though criticized by some as over-adulatory in tone, always uses the simple word. What is more surprising, the same may be said of various addresses to the Crown drafted under the inspiration of the "Appellant" clergy, who were suspected by their opponents of subservience to the government and of minimizing in matters of dogma. This feature is very conspicuous, to take a single example, in "the Protestation of allegiance" drawn up by thirteen missioners, 31 Jan., 1603, in which they renounce all thought of "restoring the Catholic religion by the sword", profess their willingness "to persuade all Catholics to do the same" and conclude by declaring themselves ready on the one hand "to spend their blood in the defence of

"to spend their blood in the defence of her Majesty" but on the other "rather to lose their lives than infringe the lawful authority of Christ's Catholic Church" (Tierney-Dodd, III, p. cxc). We find similar language used in Ireland in the negotiations carried on by Tyrone in behalf of his Catholic countrymen. Certain apparent exceptions to this uniformity of practice can be readily explained. To begin with we do find that Catholics not unfrequently use the inverted form of the name "Roman Catholic" and speak of the "Catholic Roman faith" or religion. An early example is to be found in a little controversial tract of 1575 called "a Notable Discourse" where we read for example that the heretics of old "preached that the Pope was Antichriste, shewing themselves verye eloquent in detracting and rayling against the Catholique Romane Church" (p. 64). But this was simply a translation of the phraseology common both in Latin and in the Romance languages "Ecclesia Catholica Romana,"

or in French "l'Eglise catholique romaine". It was felt that this inverted form contained no hint of the Protestant contention that the old religion was a spurious variety of true Catholicism or at best the Roman species of a wider genus. Again, when we find Father Persons (e.g. in his "Three Conversions," III, 408) using the term "Roman Catholic", the context shows that he is only adopting the name for the moment as conveniently embodying the contention of his adversaries.

Once more in a very striking passage in the examination of one James Clayton in 1591 (see Cal. State Papers, Dom. Eliz., add., vol. XXXII, p. 322) we read that the deponent "was persuaded to conforme himself to the Romaine Catholique faith." But there is nothing to show that these were the actual words of the recusant himself, or that, if they were, they were not simply dictated by a desire to conciliate his examiners.

The "Oxford Dictionary" is probably right in assigning the recognition of "Roman Catholic" as the official style of the adherents of the Papacy in England to the negotiations for the Spanish Match (1618-24). In the various treaties etc., drafted in connection with this proposal, the religion of the Spanish princess is almost always spoken of as "Roman Catholic". Indeed in some few instances the word Catholic alone is used. This feature does not seem to occur in any of the negotiations of earlier date which touched upon religion, e.g. those connected with the proposed d'Alencon marriage in Elizabeth's reign, while in Acts of Parliament, proclamations, etc., before the Spanish match, Catholics are simply described as Papists or Recusants, and their religion as popish, Romanish, or Romanist. Indeed long after this period, the use of the term Roman Catholic continued to be a mark of condescension, and language of much more uncomplimentary character was usually preferred.

It was perhaps to encourage a friendlier attitude in the authorities that Catholics themselves henceforth began to adopt the qualified term in all official relations with the government. Thus the "Humble Remonstrance, Acknowledgment, Protestation and Petition of the Roman Catholic Clergy of Ireland" in 1661, began "We, your Majesty's faithful subjects the Roman Catholick clergy of Ireland". The same Practice seems to have obtained in Maryland; see or example the Consultation entitled "Objections answered touching Maryland", drafted by Father R Blount, S.J., in 1632 (B. Johnston, "Foundation of Maryland , etc., 1883, 29), and wills proved 22 Sep., 1630, and 19 Dec., 1659, etc., (in Baldwin, "Maryland Cat. of Wills", 19 vols., vol. i. Naturally the wish to conciliate hostile opinion only grew greater as Catholic Emancipation became a question of practical politics, and by that time it would appear that many Catholics themselves used the qualified form not only when addressing the outside