New Rosary Mysteries

  • Thread starter Thread starter adstrinity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I had already posted a link to this; not that I’m trying to take credit for already doing this. Just sometimes this is the kind of stuff that makes me think my posts for the most part just get ignored. :o
Dear Elizabeth,
I am sorry I missed it. I did not mean to intentionally ignore your posts. I do read them. I wish I had caught that one earlier. But I will admit sometimes I skim through a thread and do not catch everything that was posted previously.:o
For what it’s worth, thank you also for posting it.🙂
 
Dear Elizabeth,
I am sorry I missed it. I did not mean to intentionally ignore your posts. I do read them. I wish I had caught that one earlier. But I will admit sometimes I skim through a thread and do not catch everything that was posted previously.:o
For what it’s worth, thank you also for posting it.🙂
That’s OK simple soul; I feel rather embarrassed for mentioning it. By the way your posts makes perfect sense. Thank you.
 
Thank you for your thoughtful answer. God love you! Any thoughts on Psaltery of Our Lady:
**" “the Psaltery of Our Lady—150 Hail Mary’s.” The reference to the Psaltery is telling, for the traditional Rosary is modeled on the ancient Psalter of 150 Psalms: 150 songs to Mary; fifty Aves for each of the triad of mysteries—the Joyful, the Sorrowful, the Glorious; a triune prayer addressed to the Mother of God.

The reference to the Psaltery is telling for another reason: It is indirectly an unfavorable comment on the “new” Rosary of John Paul II, which added five “luminous” mysteries, and thus 50 more Aves, to the traditional Rosary. That makes a total of 200 Aves, which would destroy the Rosary’s ancient correspondence to the 150 Psalms of the Psalter; the Rosary would no longer be “the Psaltery of Our Lady.” Then, of course, the “new” Rosary would no be longer triune, but rather would have four parts involving 50 Aves each: Joyful, Sorrowful, Glorious, and “Luminous.” **

I would really like to know what everyone in this tread thinks of this matter.
For the whole story here: remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2010-0615-ferrara-rosary.htm
Dear PioKolby,
I am not familiar with this. So I will see if I can find some one who is and see if they can offer their insight on the matter.
*
 
That’s OK simple soul; I feel rather embarrassed for mentioning it. By the way your posts makes perfect sense. Thank you.
Please:o I hope so, well in my head they do.😃 But sometimes I wonder about my head.:o
Please do not be embarrassed. I should not have missed something so very beautiful.
Thank you for your posts too. They have been very helpful for me.
 
Dear PioKolby,
I am not familiar with this. So I will see if I can find some one who is and see if they can offer their insight on the matter.
*
That “newspaper” is not remotely orthodox. They are of the school of thought that the Novus Ordo is heretical, and their knowledge of Church history is obviously lacking. Therefore the source is dubious and to be rejected.
 
That “newspaper” is not remotely orthodox. They are of the school of thought that the Novus Ordo is heretical, and their knowledge of Church history is obviously lacking. Therefore the source is dubious and to be rejected.
I believe this is so. besides that the psalter has been addressed/debated starting back in page 2.
 
Dear Elizabeth,
I am sorry I missed it. I did not mean to intentionally ignore your posts. I do read them. I wish I had caught that one earlier. But I will admit sometimes I skim through a thread and do not catch everything that was posted previously.:o
For what it’s worth, thank you also for posting it.🙂
I read your posts ElizabethPH. I remember you posting that the Luminous Mysteries were “beautiful” ( and that part has stayed with me). Also, what I posted about the *Hail Holy Queen *'s origins, was in response to the question you posted in post # 64.

I think it’s fair to say that in our eagerness to respond/participate sometimes, we don’t take the time to read each post before responding , particularly if we get an urge to respond to a most recent post- especially if the thread has generated a few pages. It happens to me sometimes that I see an answer very similar to something I’ve posted earlier. I also skim sometimes to try and get up to speed … and miss certain things as a result.😊

Your posts aren’t ignored … 🙂
 
Thank you for your thoughtful answer. God love you! Any thoughts on Psaltery of Our Lady:
**" “the Psaltery of Our Lady—150 Hail Mary’s.” The reference to the Psaltery is telling, for the traditional Rosary is modeled on the ancient Psalter of 150 Psalms: 150 songs to Mary; fifty Aves for each of the triad of mysteries—the Joyful, the Sorrowful, the Glorious; a triune prayer addressed to the Mother of God.

The reference to the Psaltery is telling for another reason: It is indirectly an unfavorable comment on the “new” Rosary of John Paul II, which added five “luminous” mysteries, and thus 50 more Aves, to the traditional Rosary. That makes a total of 200 Aves, which would destroy the Rosary’s ancient correspondence to the 150 Psalms of the Psalter; the Rosary would no longer be “the Psaltery of Our Lady.” Then, of course, the “new” Rosary would no be longer triune, but rather would have four parts involving 50 Aves each: Joyful, Sorrowful, Glorious, and “Luminous.” **

I would really like to know what everyone in this tread thinks of this matter.
For the whole story here: remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2010-0615-ferrara-rosary.htm
Our Lady is not the one being contemplated and honored when we say the rosary. It is her Son, Jesus. Therefore, we don’t have to worry that the addition of the Luminous Mystery upsets Our Lady’s Psaltery. Our Lady is tremendously pleased that John Paul II added these mysteries. Consider the new rosary as Our Lady’s Psaltery plus 50. If we want to please Mary, then don’t ignore her Son’s public ministry when contemplating His life as we pray the rosary. The rosary is a sacramental. It remains a sacramental with the addition of the Luminous Mysteries. No dogma of the Church is being changed. How can this upset anyone who is trying to please the Lord?
 
Our Lady is not the one being contemplated and honored when we say the rosary. It is her Son, Jesus. Therefore, we don’t have to worry that the addition of the Luminous Mystery upsets Our Lady’s Psaltery. Our Lady is tremendously pleased that John Paul II added these mysteries. Consider the new rosary as Our Lady’s Psaltery plus 50. If we want to please Mary, then don’t ignore her Son’s public ministry when contemplating His life as we pray the rosary. The rosary is a sacramental. It remains a sacramental with the addition of the Luminous Mysteries. No dogma of the Church is being changed. How can this upset anyone who is trying to please the Lord?
Umm, the Rosary was called “Mary’s Psalter” almost from the beginning, so I think that 150 Aves –> 150 Psalms is more than just a specious argument.
That, and yes, I do think there is some merit to saying “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” with something that has worked well for several hundred years.
There’s also the whole Fatima thing… where Mary specifically talks about the 15 Mysteries of the Rosary. Now we are getting into the origin of the rosary. If the rosary come to us from the Psalter exclusively then the new mysteries fundamentally change the rosary. Tradition does hold that St. Dominic (d. 1221) devised the rosary as we know it. Moved by a vision of our Blessed Mother, he preached the use of the rosary in his missionary work among the Albigensians, who had denied the mystery of Christ. Some scholars take exception to St. Dominic’s role in forming the rosary. The earliest accounts of his life do not mention it, the Dominican constitutions do not link him with it and contemporaneous portraits do not include it as a symbol to identify the saint. So if one excepts the later story about St. Dominic and the vision what the Pope did was change something directly from heaven. If one excepts the former story again the Pope fundamentally changed the connection to the Psalter with the connection to the 150 Psalms and the Trinity. Which in the mind of the Church connected the prayer of the Church (the liturgy of the hours)which the Clergy pray daily to Mary’s Psalter or “the rosary” which connects us together in thought and prayer which ultimately connects us to almighty God. So does a Pope have the authority to make a change like this? yup sure does. Does that authority automatically make the change a good pastoral move? No it doesn’t. Pope John Paul II was a profoundly Holy man. I love him. I respect him. I submit to his authority when I must. This is one area I am free to make the call. I am not bound to pray the new rosary. Just as others are not bound to pray the rosary as it has always been prayed. I will stick to what has made saints. The rosary and the Latin Mass. I am not playing games with my soul or those of my family just because it is “new” Please pray for me and I will pray for you. God love you.
 
Umm, the Rosary was called “Mary’s Psalter” almost from the beginning, so I think that 150 Aves –> 150 Psalms is more than just a specious argument.
That, and yes, I do think there is some merit to saying “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” with something that has worked well for several hundred years.
Dear PioKolby,
Are you saying that the Rosary did not work before St. Dominic devised the Rosary as we knew it before the addition of the Mystery’s of Light?

There’s also the whole Fatima thing… where Mary specifically talks about the 15 Mysteries of the Rosary.
How did Mary ask us to pray the Rosary. Did she really say only pray the Rosary as St. Dominic taught you?
If one excepts the former story again the Pope fundamentally changed the connection to the Psalter with the connection to the 150 Psalms and the Trinity.{/QUOTE]
How is this different than what St. Dominic did to the Rosary?
PioKolby;7104768:
Which in the mind of the Church connected the prayer of the Church (the liturgy of the hours)which the Clergy pray daily to Mary’s Psalter or “the rosary” which connects us together in thought and prayer which ultimately connects us to almighty God.
So maybe in the mind of the Church there are good reasons that this change was made also.
So does a Pope have the authority to make a change like this? yup sure does.
I so agree with you here.
Does that authority automatically make the change a good pastoral move? No it doesn’t.
Pope John Paul II was a profoundly Holy man. I love him. I respect him. I submit to his authority when I must. This is one area I am free to make the call. I am not bound to pray the new rosary. Just as others are not bound to pray the rosary as it has always been prayed. I will stick to what has made saints. The rosary and the Latin Mass. I am not playing games with my soul or those of my family just because it is “new” Please pray for me and I will pray for you. God love you.
For you to claim out of your mouth that the Pope is a Profoundly holy man and then say what he did was not good. Is telling me that you believe that you are more profoundly holy than he is. Who should I believe? Our Apostolic Leaders or you?
I understand that you are not bound to follow his leadership. We all have free will to follow God’s Will. That is something God does not infringe on. So why would our Apostolic Leaders?
God Love you too.
 
Thank you for your thoughtful answer. God love you! Any thoughts on Psaltery of Our Lady:
**" “the Psaltery of Our Lady—150 Hail Mary’s.” The reference to the Psaltery is telling, for the traditional Rosary is modeled on the ancient Psalter of 150 Psalms: 150 songs to Mary; fifty Aves for each of the triad of mysteries—the Joyful, the Sorrowful, the Glorious; a triune prayer addressed to the Mother of God.

The reference to the Psaltery is telling for another reason: It is indirectly an unfavorable comment on the “new” Rosary of John Paul II, which added five “luminous” mysteries, and thus 50 more Aves, to the traditional Rosary. That makes a total of 200 Aves, which would destroy the Rosary’s ancient correspondence to the 150 Psalms of the Psalter; the Rosary would no longer be “the Psaltery of Our Lady.” Then, of course, the “new” Rosary would no be longer triune, but rather would have four parts involving 50 Aves each: Joyful, Sorrowful, Glorious, and “Luminous.” **

I would really like to know what everyone in this tread thinks of this matter.
For the whole story here: remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2010-0615-ferrara-rosary.htm
The reason that this can be done without violating any rules is that the rosary is a private devotion, not a public liturgical act.

While at one time it may have been called the Psaltery of Our Lady, it was never a legal definition, but a pius one. For the sake of piety, the Holy Father can add to it whatever he deems to be edifying and helpful in driving the piety of the faithful.

Finally, none of the mystries of the rosary are binding on the person who prays the rosary. The rosary can be prayed without mentioning the mysteries. The 15-decade rosary is a Dominican tradition, which became very popular. It is not a tradition of the universal Church. There are Oriental Churches that have never prayed the rosary. In my own Franciscan tradition, we use both the Dominican tradition and our own Franciscan tradition. In our tradition the rosary only has seven mysteries, not 15. The rosary that we wear on our habit has seven decades, not five. It’s really a personal choice or in the case of a religious institute or an association of the faithful, such as the Legion of Mary, you are free to use as many or as few decades. It has never been etched in stone or in law. People who come to our chapel are usually surprised because we have seven mysteries when we pray the rosary.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF 🙂
 
Umm, the Rosary was called “Mary’s Psalter” almost from the beginning, so I think that 150 Aves –> 150 Psalms is more than just a specious argument.
That, and yes, I do think there is some merit to saying “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” with something that has worked well for several hundred years.
There’s also the whole Fatima thing… where Mary specifically talks about the 15 Mysteries of the Rosary. Now we are getting into the origin of the rosary. If the rosary come to us from the Psalter exclusively then the new mysteries fundamentally change the rosary. Tradition does hold that St. Dominic (d. 1221) devised the rosary as we know it. Moved by a vision of our Blessed Mother, he preached the use of the rosary in his missionary work among the Albigensians, who had denied the mystery of Christ. Some scholars take exception to St. Dominic’s role in forming the rosary. The earliest accounts of his life do not mention it, the Dominican constitutions do not link him with it and contemporaneous portraits do not include it as a symbol to identify the saint. So if one excepts the later story about St. Dominic and the vision what the Pope did was change something directly from heaven. If one excepts the former story again the Pope fundamentally changed the connection to the Psalter with the connection to the 150 Psalms and the Trinity. Which in the mind of the Church connected the prayer of the Church (the liturgy of the hours)which the Clergy pray daily to Mary’s Psalter or “the rosary” which connects us together in thought and prayer which ultimately connects us to almighty God. So does a Pope have the authority to make a change like this? yup sure does. Does that authority automatically make the change a good pastoral move? No it doesn’t. Pope John Paul II was a profoundly Holy man. I love him. I respect him. I submit to his authority when I must. This is one area I am free to make the call. I am not bound to pray the new rosary. Just as others are not bound to pray the rosary as it has always been prayed. I will stick to what has made saints. The rosary and the Latin Mass. I am not playing games with my soul or those of my family just because it is “new” Please pray for me and I will pray for you. God love you.
I have no quarrel with you, PioKolby. You are a good Catholic, I know. I was only pointing out that that the addition of the Luminous Mysteries enlarges our contemplation of Christ’s life, and enriches us spiritually. You can continue praying the rosary as you always have, and God will be pleased and bless you for it. We all have our own outlook on these things, and so long as we each do what we feel is pleasing to the Lord, then all is well. Thank you for presenting your views so clearly. God bless.
 
If one excepts the former story again the Pope fundamentally changed the connection to the Psalter with the connection to the 150 Psalms and the Trinity.{/QUOTE]
How is this different than what St. Dominic did to the Rosary?

So maybe in the mind of the Church there are good reasons that this change was made also.

I so agree with you here.

For you to claim out of your mouth that the Pope is a Profoundly holy man
and then say what he did was not good. Is telling me that you believe that you are more profoundly holy than he is. Who should I believe? Our Apostolic Leaders or you?
I understand that you are not bound to follow his leadership. We all have free will to follow God’s Will. That is something God does not infringe on. So why would our Apostolic Leaders?
God Love you too.
Holy doesn’t mean impeccable since the new rosary is new and since it is a matter of choice I needed to judge for myself and my family if they were good. I in my freedom as a Catholic have discerned that since we are a Religion of tradition and since this is a new novelty in the Tradition of the Church because of that fact we are going to pass on the new rosary. Since the Pope didn’t make them binding I am only doing what is sane by making a decision. That doesn’t mean I am asking you to choose between me and our Apostolic Leaders. Our Apostolic Leaders never said you need to pray the new rosary. I never said you need to pray the rosary the traditional way. Since we are a Religion of tradition I think sticking to what has produced fruit like Holy men such as Pope John Paul II tradition is the way to go. If you choose something other than that God love you! In the end all the novelties of the Post Vatican II period will be judged by Almighty God. We will see if the fruits of virtue,strong families,vocations and conversions flow from the Post Vatican II novelties. So far the fruit is lacking. So I’ll pass on the new stuff. And you know what? I can do that and be in Communion. Your comment saying that I think I am as Holy as Pope John Paul II was a unfair attack and clearly not based in Charity. I am no where near a saint. I would like to be saint and I ask you to pray for me that I would become a saint. As I said before I discern this to be a pastoral mistake made by a saint. Just like kissing the Koran which was a well intended mistake. If I am wrong may the lord make that known to me. Till I see fruit of grace and holiness in the Church anything introduced after 1955 is not being practiced in this house. New is new. In a religion of Tradition all new things should flow from that Tradition. I prayed the luminous mysteries from when they were introduced until last year and did so because I found them to be lacking the fruit produced by the traditional rosary. I also found them to lack continuity with the practice of the saints and the prayer life of the saints. This is also why I go to the Latin Mass. In other words I tried and found that Tradition works best. God Love you!

I Think this video is a good snap shot of where I am coming from.
youtube.com/watch?v=COZdKL5TMSM
 
Br. JR, OSF said
“The reason that this can be done without violating any rules is that the rosary is a private devotion, not a public liturgical act”.

Brother,
Your point is well taken. What is a clear is that the New Mass was changed in the same manner as the rosary along with other things. Many see all these changes as a ridged imposition of experiments flowing from some members of the Clergy not a organic expression of the Apostolic Faith flowing from God. The Mass is new. Ecumenism is new. The language and tone in theology are new. Women in the sanctuary is new. Women dressing like prostitutes at Mass is new. Communion while standing & in the hand is new. So talking about the new rosary must be done in the context of all the newness. Where is all this newness leading? Many say Apostasy and Anti Christ. So if we are a Religion of Tradition how can this many things be new and yet we say this is the same Religion? The traditions in your community can be traced to flowing from the prayer life and practice of Francis correct? Which must have a organic origin in the life of your community. Here is what is wrong the new mass and the new rosary can each be traced to one man. Does the Pope have the authority? Yes of course he does. However this authority all Pope’s have and yet they don’t use it. Look at what Pope Paul VI said

***“The faithful would conclude that ‘the Pope has changed the Rosary, and the psychological effect would be disastrous. Any change in it cannot but lessen the confidence of the simple and the poor.”…Pope Paul VI ***

The facts are the same man who gave us the New Mass also wanted to change the rosary Annibale Bugnini tried and Pope Paul VI said no. Alice Von Hildebrand insists That Annibale Bugnini was a Freemason. Alice Von Hildebrand is not some nut. Two years before he promulgated Marialis Cultus, Paul VI rejected Annibale Bugnini’s infamous proposal to “reform” the Rosary so that the Our Father would be recited only once at the beginning, the Hail Mary edited to include only “the biblical portion of the prayer,” and the “Holy Mary, Mother of God” said “only at the end of each tenth Hail Mary.” So really in the context of all this many say no thank you. So clearly Catholics are free to choose on this matter. In a way it is unfair to discuss this as if it is the only new thing. Thankfully Catholics can disagree on this.

.
 
Holy doesn’t mean impeccable since the new rosary is new and since it is a matter of choice I needed to judge for myself and my family if they were good. I in my freedom as a Catholic have discerned that since we are a Religion of tradition and since this is a new novelty in the Tradition of the Church because of that fact we are going to pass on the new rosary. Since the Pope didn’t make them binding I am only doing what is sane by making a decision. That doesn’t mean I am asking you to choose between me and our Apostolic Leaders. Our Apostolic Leaders never said you need to pray the new rosary. I never said you need to pray the rosary the traditional way. Since we are a Religion of tradition I think sticking to what has produced fruit like Holy men such as Pope John Paul II tradition is the way to go. If you choose something other than that God love you! In the end all the novelties of the Post Vatican II period will be judged by Almighty God. We will see if the fruits of virtue,strong families,vocations and conversions flow from the Post Vatican II novelties. So far the fruit is lacking. So I’ll pass on the new stuff. And you know what? I can do that and be in Communion. Your comment saying that I think I am as Holy as Pope John Paul II was a unfair attack and clearly not based in Charity. I am no where near a saint. I would like to be saint and I ask you to pray for me that I would become a saint. As I said before I discern this to be a pastoral mistake made by a saint. Just like kissing the Koran which was a well intended mistake. If I am wrong may the lord make that known to me. Till I see fruit of grace and holiness in the Church anything introduced after 1955 is not being practiced in this house. New is new. In a religion of Tradition all new things should flow from that Tradition. I prayed the luminous mysteries from when they were introduced until last year and did so because I found them to be lacking the fruit produced by the traditional rosary. I also found them to lack continuity with the practice of the saints and the prayer life of the saints. This is also why I go to the Latin Mass. In other words I tried and found that Tradition works best. God Love you!

I Think this video is a good snap shot of where I am coming from.
youtube.com/watch?v=COZdKL5TMSM
*Dear PioKolby,

I apologize if I have been uncharitable. This is not my intent.
My intent is to question your reasons, as you are questioning Pope John Paul II and our Apostolic Leader’s reasons.
I understand that you are not required to pray the new mysteries.
This is not the point I am trying to make.
The point I am trying to make is that I do not believe we should be going around telling people that introducing them was part of a “Satanic Modernistic anti-catholic philosophy.” To me going around saying things like this does nothing but undermined our trust and confidence in our Apostolic Church Leaders in their leadership and guidance and causes dissension within our Church.
I know I am probably the most confused, worthless sinner there is. I can only trust in their leadership and guidance to help me become a saint. Then you come along and tell me things that would lead one to believe our Apostolic Leaders could be causing all the errors within our church. If I can not trust in their leadership and guidance then who and what am I left with to Trust in?
In your link, Pope Benedict XVI is quoted as saying that the Church suffers greatest damage from what pollutes the Christian Faith and life of its members from internal not external.
When I heard that, not only did I think of all the sex abuse scandals and other things, but I also thought of this. What better way to destroy the Church Of Jesus Christ than to make sure no one has any trust or confidence in her leadership and guidance.
To me the biggest threat is internal not external.
The one biggest “heresy” that I see happening is that we believe we know better than our Apostolic Leaders in their Leadership and Guidance and every time we raise doubts in peoples minds about their leadership and guidance we play right into that hand.

I do hope and pray you can see the confusion you are causing for me, and yes please keep me in your prayers as you are in mine,
*
 
*Dear PioKolby,
I do hope and pray you can see the confusion you are causing for me, and yes please keep me in your prayers as you are in mine,
*
God Bless you! Apology accepted. I didn’t say that the new rosary was part of a “Satanic Modernistic anti-catholic philosophy.” I said it **could **be seen by some lost in the Occult as the Church coming around to the world of enlightenment. Just like some think altar girls mean that the Church will have women priests.I also apologize for any confusion I may have caused you. I would suggest making a Holy hour a day to deal with any confusion. Bring any matters in print or prayer to our Blessed Lord. You have to realize that the Apostolic Leaders are not impeccable. The Holy Father is infallible in matters of Faith and morals under certain conditions. What I mean by that is every time a member of the clergy opens his mouth even a Pope this does not mean what is said is correct. The only time we can have 100% trust is when something has been defined with Papal infallibility. Otherwise the clergy are able to make mistakes. Also the reality of Judas’s in the Church has be a cross for us from day one. This is true till today such a Judas invented the new Mass. A great read would be tanbooks.com/doct/vatican_liturgy.htm
We should obey and respect the Apostolic Leaders but know they are not all orthodox some are heterodox. Some don’t believe at all and actively want to destroy the Church from within. Another good read would be tanbooks.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/217/ Remember our Lord called us to be “sharp as serpents and simple as doves” In other words don’t be so naive. The Church leaders are not perfect and some are evil just like some are Holy virtuous men. Sorry if you don’t like that but it is true. I hope this helps.

The Church Suffering
youtube.com/watch?v=lgVMHIakxcE

Suffering Religious
youtube.com/watch?v=dL4wkxTeH5c

Back to the rosary We come to the point that constitutes the principal difficulty: the addition of five “mysteries of light.” It is true that, in itself, the choice of the mysteries of the rosary is not untouchable; in itself, the form of the rosary could equally be different. But in fact, the mysteries that are meditated and the form which we know have been established over centuries of usage, confirmed by the office of Our Lady of the Rosary, and sanctioned by the immemorial practice of the Church. As Pope Leo XIII reminds us, this prayer was called the Psalter of the Blessed Virgin by several Roman Pontiffs 5 from the 150 Aves that correspond to the 150 Psalms, as, indeed, is acknowledged in the Letter Rosarium Virginis Mariae §19. To decree that henceforth the rosary will comprise 200 Aves will efface this symbolism. In this there is an attack against tradition written with a little t, but by the very fact troubles Christian life and piety. The pope was entirely free to create a new chaplet. Whether in the form of a corona (the Latin word for chaplet) or in the form of a rosary, there are dozens of devotions to the Blessed Virgin, like the chaplet of St. Brigit, or of St. Joseph, or of the Holy Trinity, or of the Precious Blood, etc. To give an example, the chaplet of the Seven Dolors of Our Lady, proper to the Servite Order which is consecrated to the contemplation of our Lady’s sufferings, is composed of seven series of seven Aves, to which are added four others in order to total the fifty-three of the ordinary rosary. It would have been easy enough to add to this list a chaplet of John Paul II comprising the Mysteries of Light. In this regard, consider the story of the psalms themselves. In the fourth century St. Jerome had been asked to revise the old Latin translation, which was linguistically defective. The saint refused in the name of tradition, and proceeded merely to make a few minor corrections because he did not want to alter a version which had already entered men’s memories. Yet it was scarcely a hundred years old. He later proceeded to make his own, excellent translation which remains to us as testimony to his genius.
 
Dear Friends,

Certainly, the 150 Hail Mary’s of the Rosary call to mind the 150 Psalms of David.

However, that is not the only relationship between the Rosary and the Psalter.

In fact, the Psalter itself was a musical instrument of ten strings. This is why the Rosary is divided into decades. One decade by itself is a “psalter” and relates directly to it.

Now, the fact is that the Ven. Pope John Paul II did not indicate whether he expected people to pray another five decades to make up 20 decades or not (if he did give such an indication, I would like to know where). The only thing we can say for certainty is that he suggested the possibility of praying the Mysteries of Light instead of another set of Mysteries, especially on Thursdays. Pope John Paul II was borrowing the tradition of the Maltese Bl. Father Preca in doing this.

But let’s look at the traditional criticism that to increase the Rosary to 20 decades is to efface the symbolism of the 150 psalms.

In fact, where do we ever read in the life of a Catholic saint who was devoted to the Rosary that he or she limited themselves to 15 decades only? St Padre Pio, for example, prayed 20 - 30 full 15-decade rosaries a day. St John Matha did 45 decades daily. St Louis de Montfort in his True Devotion to Mary suggested that the Slaves of Jesus through Mary always do another “six or seven decades in honour of the years you believe our Lady to have lived on earth” (i.e. either the Brigittine or Franciscan Crown chaplets).

During the time of the persecution of the Catholic Church in Britain and Ireland, the Recusant Catholics widely promoted the Confraternity of the Rosary. They also refused to limit themselves to 15 decades daily. In one Confraternity’s set of rules we read that one could say nine decades to honour the nine choirs of Angels, five decades for the Five Wounds of our Lord, seven decades for the seven Bloodsheddings, twelve decades for the 12 Apostles, another seven for the seven joys and sorrows of St Joseph etc.

I think it is clear that the format of 1 Our Father followed by ten Hail Mary’s, in effect, a true Psalter (also called a “decima”) reflecting its ten strings is the unchangeable pattern established in the Rosary or Psalter of our Lady. There were many sets of mysteries/saints one could honour using this set form of prayer. We also know that throughout Catholic history, men especially only carried the decade/decima rosary with them, hung from their belts. It was this that was called “the Rosary.” Then there is the 18-decade Rosary of the Brigittine Order from the visions of St Brigitte of Sweden. Perhaps she wasn’t a traditional Catholic either . . .

As for the Popes and Saints that referred to the symbolism of the number 150 (in fact, it was not “150” but, as St Louis de Montfort wrote, “153” taken from the number of fish caught by the Apostles after the Resurrection of Christ as noted in the final verses of the Gospel of John), which of them would have protested against the addition of another five decades to the Rosary? Which Pope or Saint would have been against Catholics praying another 50 decades to reflect on our Lord’s Baptism in the Jordan, the Wedding at Cana in Galilee, the Beatitudes and teaching ministry of our Lord, the Transfiguration and the Last Supper? Do we seriously believe that the historic Catholic Church throughout the ages would have looked with anything but enthusiastic approval on Catholics who would pray 20 decades of the Rosary daily, with meditations on the mysteries?!

Pope John Paul II did not come from the comfortable environment of North America and western Europe. He came from Eastern Europe, like my family.

He knew that what kept people faithful to the Catholic Church was PRAYER and then MORE PRAYER. And that devotion to the Most Holy Mother of God - which was seriously on the wane in the West before he became Pope and restored it to its rightful place - was crucial to our prayer life and our focus on the Divine Incarnation of our Lord, God and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

This is why I find the arguments of “traditional” Catholics to be so very silly in this regard. If they were traditional, they would be out there promoting twenty and more decades of the Rosary daily. Forgive me, but let’s get a grip on!

Pope John Paul II himself often prayed 25 and more decades of the Rosary in public. When a blasphemous movie was aired in Rome, he not only protested against it, but asked people to join him in St Peter’s Square to say the Rosary - 35 decades, one after another, if memory serves me correctly.

I will get off my soap-box now. I’ve found that a good way to celebrate the Rosary is by including the “theme tags” after the word “Jesus” as recommended by St Louis de Montfort i.e. “Jesus being Scourged” etc. Since the Rosary was also intended as a substitute for the Daily Office, one may say two or three decades seven or eight times throughout the day or else five decades seven times a day if one has time.

Also, on Wednesdays and Fridays especially, one can do a variation of the 20 decades via the Way of the Cross - 14 decades for the 14 stations of the Way of the Cross and seven decades, inserted after the 11th Station, in honour of the Seven Words spoken by Christ on the Cross. (OK, that makes 21 decades, sorry . . .).

As an Eastern Catholic, however, 20 decades poses no problem symbolically as well since our 150 psalms are divided into 20 “kathismata” or sections that are prayed throughout the week.

But enough on all this symbolism. What was the figure the theologians arrived at for the number of angels on the head of a pin? 🙂

Alex
 
God Bless you! Apology accepted.
Thank you. You are very kind.
I didn’t say that the new rosary was part of a “Satanic Modernistic anti-catholic philosophy.” I said it **could **be seen by some lost in the Occult as the Church coming around to the world of enlightenment.
I understand, what I am trying to say, regarding what I emphasized, is that if some in the Occult take them to mean that the Church is coming around to enlightenment and if that is wrong, that is their error, not our Apostolic Leaders in their Leadership and guidance.
Just like some think altar girls mean that the Church will have women priests.
Again, that would be their error, not our Apostolic Leader’s
I also apologize for any confusion I may have caused you.
Please do not apologize, I am the one who causes my confusion when I try to explain things that seem to be way over my head. I should know better than try to explain something that I can barely grasp.
I would suggest making a Holy hour a day to deal with any confusion. Bring any matters in print or prayer to our Blessed Lord.
I do and I know He is the only reason I do not go completely mad from all the madness/confussion I see.
You have to realize that the Apostolic Leaders are not impeccable. The Holy Father is infallible in matters of Faith and morals under certain conditions. What I mean by that is every time a member of the clergy opens his mouth even a Pope this does not mean what is said is correct.
I understand what you are saying but who should I put my trust and confidence in? You who tells me I should not trust my fathers or my fathers who have years of Apostolic Traditions, Teachings, and Theologies behind Them? I would rather trust them and there leadership and guidance verses my own judgment or Intellect. I know that it is more likely my intellect and judgment that is not seeing things clearly verses those who have the requirements that an Apostolic Position in the Church holds.
More importantly I have the promise that Jesus Christ gave to His Apostles, "I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren’ and His promise that the "gates of Hell would not prevail against His Church. I am not an Apostolic Leader of the Church so I know I do not have that blessing.

The only time we can have 100% trust is when something has been defined with Papal infallibility. Otherwise the clergy are able to make mistakes. Also the reality of Judas’s in the Church has be a cross for us from day one. This is true till today such a Judas invented the new Mass. A great read would be tanbooks.com/doct/vatican_liturgy.htm
Again I will put my trust and confidence in our Apostolic Leaders in their leadership and guidence.
We should obey and respect the Apostolic Leaders but know they are not all orthodox some are heterodox. Some don’t believe at all and actively want to destroy the Church from within. Another good read would be tanbooks.com/index.php/page/shop:flypage/product_id/217/ Remember our Lord called us to be “sharp as serpents and simple as doves” In other words don’t be so naive.
*I believe it is sad that you believe me putting my confidence and trust into a promise made by Jesus Christ to His Apostles as being a bad thing. I find much peace at being naive and I do pray that God never let me stray from that. But I have found out that in order to stay naive I do need to be “sharp as a serpent and simple as a dove.” As I will be the first to attest to I know I am a work in progress. *
The Church leaders are not perfect and some are evil just like some are Holy virtuous men. Sorry if you don’t like that but it is true. I hope this helps.
If you say so, all I know is that I know I am not perfect and that I have Jesus Christs’ promises.
When I get time later I will try to listen to them and add my thoughts if I can

Cont’
 
Back to the rosary We come to the point that constitutes the principal difficulty: the addition of five “mysteries of light.” It is true that, in itself, the choice of the mysteries of the rosary is not untouchable; in itself, the form of the rosary could equally be different. But in fact, the mysteries that are meditated and the form which we know have been established over centuries of usage, confirmed by the office of Our Lady of the Rosary, and sanctioned by the immemorial practice of the Church. As Pope Leo XIII reminds us, this prayer was called the Psalter of the Blessed Virgin by several Roman Pontiffs 5 from the 150 Aves that correspond to the 150 Psalms, as, indeed, is acknowledged in the Letter Rosarium Virginis Mariae §19. To decree that henceforth the rosary will comprise 200 Aves will efface this symbolism. In this there is an attack against tradition written with a little t, but by the very fact troubles Christian life and piety. The pope was entirely free to create a new chaplet. Whether in the form of a corona (the Latin word for chaplet) or in the form of a rosary, there are dozens of devotions to the Blessed Virgin, like the chaplet of St. Brigit, or of St. Joseph, or of the Holy Trinity, or of the Precious Blood, etc. To give an example, the chaplet of the Seven Dolors of Our Lady, proper to the Servite Order which is consecrated to the contemplation of our Lady’s sufferings, is composed of seven series of seven Aves, to which are added four others in order to total the fifty-three of the ordinary rosary. It would have been easy enough to add to this list a chaplet of John Paul II comprising the Mysteries of Light. In this regard, consider the story of the psalms themselves. In the fourth century St. Jerome had been asked to revise the old Latin translation, which was linguistically defective. The saint refused in the name of tradition, and proceeded merely to make a few minor corrections because he did not want to alter a version which had already entered men’s memories. Yet it was scarcely a hundred years old. He later proceeded to make his own, excellent translation which remains to us as testimony to his genius.
*I do not know how to tell you this, but you can make your argument sound as intellectual as you want. It does not prove to me that the reason for the errors we see in our church today is because of changing the Rosary or the mass. I still believe it is our human nature that likes to will it’s will into everything.
I do believe I have said all I can say in this matter. I will have to leave the rest in God hands and the ones He left in charge of His Church and just keep praying that we do follow them into the Fullness of God’s Revealed Truth.

With my love and prayers, and please remember me in your’s,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top