I wonder if you’d permit me to address a couple of matters that emerge from answering the “Contact Us” email. One is the matter of asking me to cease addressing Archangel Michael as “Lord.”
There are several traditional attitudes that people adopt in their devotional relationship with the Divine. Hindus have studied this subject the most deeply, in my opinion.
These attitudes reflect one’s own temperament and perceived connection with God or with his angels. One is the friend, another the lover, the parent, the child, etc. And one is the servant.
I am a servant of Archangel Michael. That doesn’t mean that you are or have to be. But I am. And to stop addressing Archangel Michael as “Lord” would be like asking me to do something untoward or reprehensible.
Please know that I feel exposed enough as it is having landed in a society that does not value the word “Lord” without taking up that practice myself.
How others proceed is up to them. This is (becoming) a free society, where we don’t ask people to conform to our usage, providing theirs is not causing harm.
The use of the word “Lord” in relationship to the archangels meets with a response from my heart, a flood of love, a sense of true proportion.
It honors the very wide gulf there is between the manner in which Archangel Michael sees and the manner in which I see. And it honors the fact that I serve him. It’s “proportionate” to me. It feels appropriate or fitting. It may not feel the same to you and I honor that.
In India, where the traditional devotional attitudes towards the Divine are well known, one does not ask a devotee to stop talking to Krishna as if he were one’s child. One allows to each person the form of their relationship with the Lord that they choose.
I’d be happy to see us start doing that in the Western world as well – to allow each person the form of their relationship with God that they prefer, rather than asking one person not to relate to God or the archangels in the way that he or she wishes.