The Luminous Mysteries

[HelenRose]

“must be prayed continuously”…Does this mean I can’t do it a decade at a time throughout the day, or that I must finish the Mystery that I am doing that day??
Thanks,
mouse

When you are praying the Rosary by yourself the prayer is between you, Mary and God. There is no set of rules - just guidelines.

Each Mystery is so full of meaning that one can find themselves meditating for a long period of time on just one Mystery alone.

Yes you can pray a decade at a time throughout the day.

Perhaps to receive certain graces one must pray the entire Rosary straight through but that doesn’t mean that you have to do this in order to meditate and pray the Rosary as your own needs and time dictates.

 

[mullenpm]

Palma85,

How dare you make such an unChristian-like remark. No one worships Our Holy Father John Paul II, but he was the head of our Church, and he deserves our respect.

You should be ashamed of yourself - you truly should.

What could it possibly be that makes you hate John Paul II so much. And if you hate him so much, why are you a Catholic, or are you? I forgot to check your post.

 

[WFS5801]

“must be prayed continuously”…Does this mean I can’t do it a decade at a time throughout the day, or that I must finish the Mystery that I am doing that day??
Thanks,
mouse

I think it used to mean that your five decades needed to be prayed in “one sitting,” but it appears that this is no longer a requirement for the indulgence.

Sorry for the confusion.

 

[desertPavel]

I love the luminous mysteries; they are beautiful. But I, also, respect that the “old” rosary was based on the Psalter and consisted of 150 Hail Mary’s. Yesterday, I decided on a compromise. I pray the Luminous Mysteries daily before Mass, especially because of the 5th Luminous Mystery- the institution of the Eucharist and in the evening I pray the Rosary according to the old formula. Joyful Mysteries-Monday & Thursday. Sorrowful Mysteries- Tuesday & Friday. Glorious Mysteries- Wednesday & Saturday. Sunday- according to the liturgical season. Just a personal compromise.

 

[Fone_Bone_2001]

OK, I get it now. Other Popes past, present and future could, did and probably will continue to make human errors in judgment, make mistakes or live less than perfect lives.

Except for Pope John Paul II of course, who was obviously perfect in every respect. No mistakes, no errors and absolute perfection throughout his entire life:thumbsup:

Why bother to go through the canonization process at all? Just elevate him immediately:extrahappy:.

Sometimes I think some of you ardent John Paul II supporters actually worship him instead of God…

Er… we don’t object to the Luminous Mysteries, therefore we worship JPII?

 

[Sherry_G]

I love the luminous mysteries; they are beautiful. But I, also, respect that the “old” rosary was based on the Psalter and consisted of 150 Hail Mary’s. Yesterday, I decided on a compromise. I pray the Luminous Mysteries daily before Mass, especially because of the 5th Luminous Mystery- the institution of the Eucharist and in the evening I pray the Rosary according to the old formula. Joyful Mysteries-Monday & Thursday. Sorrowful Mysteries- Tuesday & Friday. Glorious Mysteries- Wednesday & Saturday. Sunday- according to the liturgical season. Just a personal compromise.

I like the way you think! Beautiful witness!

 

[mick321]

Palma85,

How dare you make such an unChristian-like remark. No one worships Our Holy Father John Paul II, but he was the head of our Church, and he deserves our respect.

You should be ashamed of yourself - you truly should.

What could it possibly be that makes you hate John Paul II so much. And if you hate him so much, why are you a Catholic, or are you? I forgot to check your post.

John Paul II was the head of our Church.
He has been called from this life.
Benedictus Deus.
Move on.
.

 

[MIKE46]

Palma85,

How dare you make such an unChristian-like remark. No one worships Our Holy Father John Paul II, but he was the head of our Church, and he deserves our respect.

You should be ashamed of yourself - you truly should.

What could it possibly be that makes you hate John Paul II so much. And if you hate him so much, why are you a Catholic, or are you? I forgot to check your post.

What exactly was the un Christian remark that he made?

That it seemed to him that some of the John Paul II supporters seemed almost as if they worshipped him? That he alone of all the Popes never made a mistake? It does seem that way at times. I mean lets face it and be honest about it. Some people have already elevated John Paul II and act as if he lived a perfect stainless life. As far as I know the only person who ever did that was Jesus Christ… Saying things such as Palmas said is not disrespectful to John Paul II. At least if it is I don’t see it.

As a matter of fact, I don’t recall Palmas saying anything at all derogatory or disrespectful about John Paul II in the post… If he did could you please point it out? I am quite sure I am not the only one that would like to know what it was…

 

[Janine_Therese]

I was surprised that some poster mentioned saying “you and your” while praying the Rosary. I have always used “the and thou/thy” and everyone I know does as well. I know some who say “Ghost” rather than “Spirit” at the Gloria Patri ending the decade. When I was a child, after low Mass the Salve Regina, Three Hail Mary’s, and the prayer to St. Michael the Archangel were said by the priest and people until the Mass of Pope Paul VI was issued. Needless to say I have just revealed my, uh, “antiquatedness” but just to say, our very venerable Pope John Paul II was a wonderful pope as were the five I have grown up with. John Paul I was wonderful–even in his short reign. All popes have special gifts to bring and good ideas. I just feel comfortable with the traditional Rosary in the context of the Fatima mandates of Our Lady–and I do consider them mandates from her. But I also agree with those above who have said that heaven is delighted with any prayer indeed. I am glad people are talking about prayer and about the Rosary. I never thought we would recover these treasures after the years following Vat. II when irreverence ruled…

 

[SpiritusSanctus]

Palma85,

How dare you make such an unChristian-like remark. No one worships Our Holy Father John Paul II, but he was the head of our Church, and he deserves our respect.

You should be ashamed of yourself - you truly should.

What could it possibly be that makes you hate John Paul II so much. And if you hate him so much, why are you a Catholic, or are you? I forgot to check your post.

palmas85 never said he hated JPII. He just said it seemed as if though people today think he was perfect. It was not an “unChristian-like remark”. palmas85 is a Catholic.

 

[palmas85]

Palma85,

How dare you make such an unChristian-like remark. No one worships Our Holy Father John Paul II, but he was the head of our Church, and he deserves our respect.

You should be ashamed of yourself - you truly should.

What could it possibly be that makes you hate John Paul II so much. And if you hate him so much, why are you a Catholic, or are you? I forgot to check your post.

I am Catholic. Are you? I can even read and comprehend things. Can you?
Apparently not. Please show me where I said anything remotely disrespectful about the late Holy father. Just one thing. Why do you assume that I hate him? Did I say that I hated him. Did I say that he was not the head of the Church?. Well did I?.

No I did not. And if you had taken the time to read the statement instead of blindly following the cult of John Paul ll II you would know that.

What I said was that it seems that some of the ardent Pope John Paul II supporters worship him. I’m sorry if that offends you, but it is the truth. It seems to be a common belief among many of these people that Pope John Paul II was incapable of making any mistakes or errors in judgment, and that he was a walking, talking saint before his death.

He wasn’t.

He was a good holy man and he ran the Church for a long long time. He stood firm in certain instances and gave in horribly in others. He was a long way from perfect. In short he was a human being, not an angel, not a saint and not God.

What exactly was my alleged un Christian remark? Point it out if there is one there.You cannot because there is none. However Judging people falsely and libeling them as you have done to me is very un Christian.

And I don’t think anyone except the most rabid of progressives would argue otherwise.

 

[Tsuwano]

I am Catholic. Are you? I can even read and comprehend things. Can you?
Apparently not. Please show me where I said anything remotely disrespectful about the late Holy father. Just one thing. Why do you assume that I hate him? Did I say that I hated him. Did I say that he was not the head of the Church?. Well did I?.

No I did not. And if you had taken the time to read the statement instead of blindly following the cult of John Paul ll II you would know that.

What I said was that it seems that some of the ardent Pope John Paul II supporters worship him. I’m sorry if that offends you, but it is the truth. It seems to be a common belief among many of these people that Pope John Paul II was incapable of making any mistakes or errors in judgment, and that he was a walking, talking saint before his death.

He wasn’t.

He was a good holy man and he ran the Church for a long long time. He stood firm in certain instances and gave in horribly in others. He was a long way from perfect. In short he was a human being, not an angel, not a saint and not God.

What exactly was my alleged un Christian remark? Point it out if there is one there.You cannot because there is none. However Judging people falsely and libeling them as you have done to me is very un Christian.

And I don’t think anyone except the most rabid of progressives would argue otherwise.

I agree that Pope John Paul II was a human person who had flaws just as any human person does. I’m sure he struggled with sin and stubbed his toe now and then just as all of us do. I agree he was far from perfect. I agree he was a human being. I agree he was not an angel and certainly not God. Nevertheless, I think he was a saint. As you said, he was a good and holy man and perhaps that holiness should be recognized more than his flaws. Indeed, perhaps that should be true for all of us.

 

[palmas85]

Er… we don’t object to the Luminous Mysteries, therefore we worship JPII?

What is it with you guys, you don’t know how to read or what?.

Please show me where I even mentioned the Luminous Mysteries. Go ahead show me. Show me where I denigrated the Luminous mysteries and those that pray them. Go ahead, do it.

You as well as the previous poster that I responded to cannot do so because I didn’t. I said that there are those who seem to believe that the late Holy Father was perfect in every way and could not err no matter what he did. Those people DO seem as if they worship him and have for a long time.

 

[palmas85]

I agree that Pope John Paul II was a human person who had flaws just as any human person does. I’m sure he struggled with sin and stubbed his toe now and then just as all of us do. I agree he was far from perfect. I agree he was a human being. I agree he was not an angel and certainly not God. Nevertheless, I think he was a saint. As you said, he was a good and holy man and perhaps that holiness should be recognized more than his flaws. Indeed, perhaps that should be true for all of us.

It is equally important that we recognize the flaws so we do not become those that feel he could do no wrong, and never did wrong as many apparently do… He himself self did not believe that. He went to confession far too often to have thought he was special in some way and above everyone else… He recognized his frailty, his errors, his mistakes and above all his his humanity

And while I have no doubt he is in heaven now, I equally have no illusion that he was a saint on earth

 

[cothrige]

And while I have no doubt he is in heaven now, I equally have no illusion that he was a saint on earth

I find the wording here a little odd. I think I understand your objection to any suggestion that our late Holy Father lived a life so perfect that even his personal suggestions, not meant to be law, are received now as the undoubted promptings direct from God to us. I can see also how a person may feel that this suggests something akin to worship, though I may avoid using that term myself in noting it. But, I do find this above construction a little strange. It sounds like maybe by saint you mean someone having lived absolutely perfect lives, and if that is so then there is only one saint. But, I don’t think the Church uses the word saint in this manner. And, short of a death-bed confession, surely anyone who is in heaven now must have been a saint on earth. Just not perfect in every possible way.

 

[PJM]

=CatholicLife;6617542]Do you pray the Luminous Mysteries? Why or why not?

Awesome Picture! THANKS!

Yes I do; Every Thursday. I especially like the fifth Luminous Mystery which I always offer to Mary for Vocations.

I also change it just a Wee bit…

TO: “Jesus Institutes the Sacraments of Holy Orders and The Most Holy Euchrist; the gift of Himself into perpetuity”

I have no doubts that the GREAT Late Pope John Paul II would not object.

Love and prayers,
Pat

 

[Dancelittleewok]

Palmas85:

OK, I get it now. Other Popes past, present and future could, did and probably will continue to make human errors in judgment, make mistakes or live less than perfect lives.

Except for Pope John Paul II of course, who was obviously perfect in every respect. No mistakes, no errors and absolute perfection throughout his entire life:thumbsup:

Why bother to go through the canonization process at all? Just elevate him immediately:extrahappy:.

Sometimes I think some of you ardent John Paul II supporters actually worship him instead of God…

Agreed. Popes aren’t protected from impeccability and I don’t recall any people saying that JP II is perfect and needs not to go through the canonization process. Furthermore, I fail to understand why you believe that we are idolaters, putting the pope above God. I’d say that these are quite uncharitable remarks and a strawman.

What is it with you guys, you don’t know how to read or what?.

Please show me where I even mentioned the Luminous Mysteries. Go ahead show me. Show me where I denigrated the Luminous mysteries and those that pray them. Go ahead, do it.

You as well as the previous poster that I responded to cannot do so because I didn’t. I said that there are those who seem to believe that the late Holy Father was perfect in every way and could not err no matter what he did. Those people DO seem as if they worship him and have for a long time.

Just because it seems that way, it doesn’t mean it is so. Given the context of this thread, I’d say that you do believe that JP II adding the Luminous Mysteries is error:

My retort would be that just because a Pope does something does not automatically make it right.

Just we don’t think that the Luminous Mysteries aren’t in error, then does not follow that we believe that pope is in capable of error. Please address the arguments and refrain from personal attacks.

 

[Dancelittleewok]

I find the wording here a little odd. I think I understand your objection to any suggestion that our late Holy Father lived a life so perfect that even his personal suggestions, not meant to be law, are received now as the undoubted promptings direct from God to us. I can see also how a person may feel that this suggests something akin to worship, though I may avoid using that term myself in noting it. But, I do find this above construction a little strange. It sounds like maybe by saint you mean someone having lived absolutely perfect lives, and if that is so then there is only one saint. But, I don’t think the Church uses the word saint in this manner. And, short of a death-bed confession, surely anyone who is in heaven now must have been a saint on earth. Just not perfect in every possible way.

JP II might have entered Heaven via Purgatory, which I suspect Palmas85 is alluding to.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

Yes, we do. But as we go through the week, we only pray them once–on Thursday in commemoration of the Institution of the Eucharist.

 

[Mrs_Sally]

I do not pray the Luminous Mysteries. They are true and wonderful and essential to our faith–but at Fatima, when Mary commanded that the First Five Saturday devotion be done in reparation of blasphemies to her Holy Images, she said to Confess to a Priest, Recieve Holy Communion, and spend fifteen minutes in contemplation OF THE FIFTEEN MYSTERIES OF THE ROSARY. Now–this may sound like nit-picking–but–tradition is like a relay race. You take the batton and pass it on–you do not change it, or drop it, or swap it as our priest used to say. Mary gave us an exact formula for gaining the graces for the world’s salvation–and there should be no variation whatsoever upon it. The Luminous mysteries are proper matter for devotion and meditation AFTER the appointed mysteries of the day have been said, i.e. Monday:Joyful, ect. Then if you say another rosary use the Luminous. It is like the changes in the Mass and architecture of the Church. These have imperilled the church’s identity and worship. Many in the Vatican wish to put Fatima in the past. Fatima is more important than ever—and we must not allow the true and historic rosary or scapular to be imperilled. Thanks for listening.
J.Therese

This is the best argument against them yet; however, I am to do my meditating on the First Saturday. On the other days of the week, I can do whatever other personal devotions and pious practices I am accustomed to. Including saying the rosary with the Luminous mysteries on Thursday.