Things I Did Not Used to Know About the Rosary

It may be news to some that when the Rosary is prayed, with all its “Hail Mary's,” the meditations for it are various events in the Life of Jesus. Your mind is supposed to be on Jesus, not Mary. Father John told our class that the words are not really the point. They words are spoken to help you shut everything else out and focus on “The mysteries” which are key events in the life of Jesus from conception to Resurrection. The Hail Mary's are indeed inane repetitions, and that is because “Hail Mary's” aren't what the rosary supposed to be about. You're supposed to concentrate on “The Mysteries,” imagining like you were standing there seeing it, as vivid as possible, to make it really real to you. You start out saying the creed, like what the band Third Day put to music once, the object of the Rosary is to nourish one's faith in Jesus.
In light of that, I sort of understand why there are so many Hail Mary;s and the prayers to God are fewer. The ones to God are not supposed to be white noise you make to drown out your actual surroundings, and the Hail Mary's are. I still find it more effective, most of the time, to just say the verses that tell the story I am trying to imagine, though, or the Glory Be: “Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end, amen.” That prayer is included in the normal Rosary practice too, but not as much as the Hail Mary.
The original Catholic rosary was, in fact, recitation of Scripture. They said all of the Psalms. It went through a lot of changes over time. Even after it was pretty much in its present form, for a long time the mysteries stopped at the crucifixion, and within the last couple hundred years one of the Popes added “The Glorious Mysteries” about the resurrection and the coming of the Holy spirit and stuff. He was pointed out that Without the resurrection, all the rest would be powerless and meaningless. He was like, "Why are we stopping there?” I think that was a really good move. I expect the reason is was stopped at the crucifixion for so long is because it started as a recitation of the Psalms. There are 150 psalms. That 150 Psalms became 150 "Hail Marys", and there were 15 "mysteries" with ten "Hail Mary's" a piece.
The words coming out your mouth are the same, but the Mysteries you Meditate on are what will vary. They Mysteries are in groups of five,
 "The Joyful Mysteries - The Annunciation, which is when the Angel appears to Mary and lets her know God's plan,and she agrees to answer the call. The Visitation when Mary visited her cousin who was pregnant with John the Baptist and Elizabeth prophesied that Mary's baby was the Lord, The Nativity when Jesus is born in Bethlehem, the The Presentation at the temple when the prophetess Anna and the prophet Simon basically said "This is the Messiah, I can die in peace now that I've seen him.", and the Finding of Jesus in the Temple, when He said,"Didn't you know I needed to be about my Father's business?"
Then there are the Sorrowful Mysteries: The Agony in the Garden (Gethsemani), The Scourging at the Pillar, The Crowing with Thorns, The Carrying of the Cross, and The Crucifixion, When he was nailed and hung until He died.
Glorious Mysteries: The Resurrection, The Ascension, the Coming of the Holy Spirit, The Assumption (a Marian Dogma event), and the Coronation (which has to do with the Catholic interpretation of Revelation 12:1), In total, the Joyful Mysteries, The Sorrowful Mysteries,and the Glorious Mysteries  made 150 Hail Mary's, which when they first started doing the Rosary, was the 150 Psalms.
They added the five Lumious Mysteries,which are optional in 2002 according to the suggestion of Pope (Saint) John Paul II.
The Luminous Mysteries are: The Baptism of the Lord, when the Holy spirit came down in the form of a dove and the voice came from heaven saying Jesus was God's son. The Wedding at Cana when He turned water into wine. The proclamation of the Kingdom, when He began his ministry and went out saying "Repent, the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand,"and went around healing the sick and the demonized. The Transfiguration, And The Institution of the Eucharist, when he said,at Passover "This is my body... this is my blood..."
Therefore now, if you go through all of the Mysteries in one sitting, which would mean going around all the Rosary beads four times, you will now say 200 Hail Marys. Usually, you only do 50 though, because most people just go through one set of five mysteries every time they say it.

So that is what the Rosary is about, and all those Hail Mary's. I personally, do not use the Hail Mary very much, even when I say the Rosary, but that is a story for another day.
I will say, on the note of personal testimony, that I do have a greater sense of God's presence in my life and usually do better at resisting various besetting sins in my life when I pray the Rosary fairly frequently, like about every day.

Godspeed.

~Mother Star

Adventures in RCIA - The Bible: Things I Wonder About The Book of Sirach

Jesus son of Eleazar son of Sirach, or Yeshua ben El-azar ben Sira in his mother tongue, was a great scholar and Rabbi, and the author of the "Ecclesiasticus" or the book of Sirach. He wrote and taught in Jerusalem prior to 180 B.C. The Septaguint used a Greek translation, written by ben Sira's grandson, of  writings. The grandson wrote an introduction to the Greek rendering. The intro by ben Sira's grandson states that "You are invited to read with good will and attention. and to be indulgent in cases where, despite our diligent labor in translating, we may seem to have rendered some phrases imperfectly. For what was originally expressed in Hebrew does not have exactly the same sense when translated into another language."  The Hebrew text was totally lost to the Western world from about 400 to 1900 A.D. We have about two-thirds of the Hebrew text now, recovered from various places around the Middle East. All this I learned in an additional intro to the book by the scholars who wrote commentary in this particular annotated Bible. They also stated that the Jews never, ever considered this particular book to be canonical. Very powerful and valuable, yes. Authoritative scripture? No, never. The early Christians did, though, so depending on how much weight you give to which of those...

The intro to the book of Sirach in my New Oxford Annotated Bible, NRSV with Apocrypha/Deuterocanonical books, says that reading from start to finish is not the best way to approach Sirach. They recommend reading chapters 1 and 24 first, and then the hymn of praise to Isreal's ancestors in 44:1-49:16. The Oxford commentators said Sirach is divided into three major blocks of teaching: chapters 1 - 23, chapters 24:1 - 42:14, and chapters 42:15 - 50:24. This is such a long book, I am going to write a synopsis of at least those three parts rather than doing the whole thing in one shot. This piece is not a synopsis, but a reflection on chapters 1 and 23.

The grandson who did the translating was a teacher and scholar himself. He translated the book while living in Egypt because he felt it would be extremely helpful for "Those living abroad who wish to gain learning and are disposed to live according to the Law." He said that not only his grandfather's book, "but even the Law and the Prophecies and the rest of the books differ not a little when read in the original." I am, like most Westerners from well before Luther's time to the present, reading a translation of a translation because that is what we have to work with. Nevertheless, here goes:

Sirach 1:1 "All wisdom is from the Lord, and with Him it remains forever." This was very striking to me. I was thinking about how Lady Wisdom in Proverbs 8 occurs in chapters 1 and 23 in Sirach.

One of the most powerful teachings on Lady Wisdom (Proverbs 8 and 9:1-6) I ever heard explained that she was a type of Christ and/or the Holy Spirit.
Excerpts from Proverbs 8 "Counsel is mine, and sound wisdom. I am understanding, I have strength. By me kings reign, and princes decree justice. I love them that love me, and those that seek me early shall find me... The Lord possessed me, in the beginning of His way, before His works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there was no depths, I was brought forth, when there were no fountains abounding with water. Before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth. While as yet He has not made the earth, nor the hills, nor the fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world. When He prepared the heavens, I was there, when He set a compass on the face of the depth, when He established the clouds above,when he strengthened the fountains of the deep. When he gave to the sea His decree that the waters should not pass His commandment, when He appointed the foundations of the Earth, then I was by Him as one brought up with Him, and I was daily His delight, rejoicing always before Him, rejoicing in the habitable part of His earth, and my delights were with the sons of men... Blessed is the man that heareth me, watching daily at my gates, waiting at the posts of my doors, for whoso findeth me findeth life, and shall obtain favor of the Lord. All they that hate me love death."
In chapter 9, it continues, "Wisdom hath builded her house... She hath killed her beasts, she hath mingled her wine, she hath also furnished her table. She hath sent forth her maidens; she crieth upon
the highest places of the city, '... come, eat of my bread, and drink of the wine which I have mingled. Forsake the foolish and live, and go in the way of understanding." Sure sounds like Jesus to me.

Furthermore, 1 Corinthians 1:30 says that Christ became wisdom from God to us, and in context from v. 20 to 31, especially v. 26, it is mentioning God revealing His wisdom to/through those who lacked it, calling those who were simple and lacked understanding, though it puts it differently. Paul's new testament revelation on the wisdom of God speaks a lot more about of why God chose to call the foolish and simple of the world. Nevertheless, Christ is the Word, who was in the beginning with God (John 1), who was before all things and by whom all things were made (Col. 1:17). Jesus calls us who are unworthy and clueless to the banquet He prepares for us, and the one who is building the spiritual house referred to in Hebrews 3. I do believe Lady Wisdom in Proverbs 8 is a type of the second person of the Trinity, Jesus Christ, and/or the Holy Spirit.

Excerpts from Sirach 24 seem to go along with this: " In the presence of the Most High she opens her mouth, and in the presence of his hosts she tells her story, 'I came forth from the mouth of the Most High, and covered the earth like a mist. I dwelt in the highest heavens, and my throne was in a pillar of cloud. Alone I compassed the vault of heaven and traversed the depths of the abyss, over the waves of the sea, over all the earth, and over every people and nation I have held sway..." Yep, sounds like YHVH, like the Spirit of God and Jesus.

The problems I run into here are with translations. I wish the deuterocananical books had not been tossed out before Dr. Strong wrote his concordance. I cannot check when I see a statement in English in both books to see if the original text uses the same word or was even talking about the same thing. I really wish I could look up the word used in the original text when studying the disputed books, especially this one. The NRSV version of Proverbs 8:22 says "The lord created me in the beginning..." where the KJV I am used to says "The Lord possessed me..." I looked this word up the in the Strong's:
QANAH {kaw-naw'} Strong's Hebrew #07069 Definitions: a primitive root; to erect, i.e. create; by extension, to procure, especially by purchase (causatively, sell); by implication to own:--attain, buy(-er), teach to keep cattle, get, provoke to jealousy, possess(-or), purchase, recover, redeem, X surely, X verily.
The stuff that comes after "--" in the Strong's expositions on these words are ways this word has been translated in the (Protestant) Bible.

A word that comes from "QANAH" seems, to me, like it might illustrate what was brought to mind for those who spoke and wrote QANAH in Hebrew:
QANEH {kaw-neh'} Strong's Hebrew #07070 
Definitions: from Strong's HEBREW #7069; a reed (as erect); by resemblance a rod (especially for measuring), shaft, tube, stem, the radius (of the arm), beam (of a steelyard):--balance, bone, branch, calamus, cane, reed, X spearman, stalk.

I see this and think of where Jesus was referred to in prophecy as a branch and as a root. He is also symbolized by water, "The water of the word" and when he says he gives us water where we will never thirst again, the Water he gives us is Himself.


I am not yet certain if the deuterocanonical books are inspired and hold the same weight as the books I grew up with, but I will go ahead and read them prayerfully. My problem with Sirach, from the other parts I have read, is that he was (from what we can tell by the translations anyway) a total misogynist, but I will address that when the relevant passages actually come up. I have struggled long and hard with issues of misogyny in church and in the Bible, and if Sirach is to be taken as authoritative, then I may have to start all over.
If anyone has any thoughts on any of this, please feel free to comment below. Also if any questions come up for clarification of anything I have stated,please feel free to let me know.
Godspeed.

~Mother Star

Adventures in RCIA - The Wisdom of Solomon

The Wisdom of Solomon is another book from the Catholic and Orthodox and Coptic Bible I have never been exposed to before. I just finished reading it.
It is a little like Proverbs or Ecclesiastes, and a little like Psalms also.
It starts out discussing the benefits of fearing God and doing right versus being terrible.
Parts of it seem very prophetic. It talks about how people who love and follow God will never really die. They go to peace when they die, death holds no terror for them, but it is a loss to die on bad terms with God. I think the Jews just believed the dead all went to Sheol. I am pretty sure that this concept about righteous souls going to peace and the evil people having a different afterlife was an unusual thing to say in Judaism - and that may be why the Tanakh does not include it. It goes very well with Christianity though. In this book's case, I strongly doubt that the Hebrew Bible not having it is a good reason to throw it out...
It has some things to say about idolatry, similar to what Isaiah had to say. It points out how stupid it is to ask for life from something that is dead, and to ask for strength from something that has no strength, and for guidance from something that can go nowhere - namely, an idol.
The last several chapters discuss God's works when getting the Israelites out of Egypt and into the promised land. This section is addressed to God, and reads like a worship song - a very long one! It mentions the serpent that people looked upon when bitten by snakes, and God would heal them from the snakebites. It says the statue of the snake did not do the healing, but God did the healing.
It does not cover all these things in chronological order, it seems to be like the writers flow of consciousness.

Now, for the controversial parts (for me): It says the offspring of adulterers will not live long, just like it says that adulterers will not. Parts of the Protestant Bible also say negative things about the children of immoral people. A passage in Isaiah calls people coming under judgment "the seed of the adulterer and the whore..." also some sections of the Psalms ask God to bring destruction on enemies, and talks about their kids. There are such things as generational curses, and God even mentioned that when He revealed himself to Moses, when Moses had asked to see God's glory. Therefore, I guess it is not grounds to doubt the inspiration of this book.
Obviously, the punishment going through generations is not God's favorite thing, by any means. That is why Jesus came, to break the curse off the sinner and their generations, and there are indeed curses like that to be broken. So, though I do not like it (clearly God feels the same way), but I think this is indeed sound doctrine, and can be verified by other scripture from several books that no Christian community has ever disputed, and which Jews also revere.

At the end, there is a part that says God can reverse the whole setup of creation, and make birds fly through water and fish swim through air if he should choose. The wording, in English at least, is confusing at that part, but I think he may be saying that this actually happened when the Red Sea was parted. I do not know af any other passage that says this was the case, but I can see it happening. The water might have been standing up pretty high, and birds could have run into it and been guided right through it and back to the air on the other side by God, The fish may well have fallen out of the water and been carried along in the wind to the other side where they were in water again,  as safely as the children of Israel were being taken across the sea bed. Now that I have actually written all that out, it even seems likely. Therefore, I see no particular issue with this. It could also be interpreted as a poetic device, painting an image of the situation with more vivid, though perhaps imagined, detail.
Psalm 18 describes God riding on angels, which I think God is way bigger than and is far too big to ride them. That is a poetic device used in a worship song, as could be this imagery of swimming birds and flying fish in this worshipful poetry.

So with that, I find prophetic statements in here that are not part of the religion that the book was connected to, but are central to Christianity, such as the afterlife, and how friends of God never die, but pass from this life to new peace in a new life. That concept was alien to Jews, but as Christians, this is our Blessed hope. Therefore, I firmly believe this book is inspired, if no other disputed book is. I based my conclusion about the other ones on how I felt and thought about them and on whatever measure of discernment I have;  I admit this is no more infallible than Martin Luther doing the same thing. This book is different though, this one is without a doubt sacred, because there is no other way a Jew in Greece could have said some of what was said in here.

Godspeed.

~Mother Star