Why do some traditional Catholics reject the Luminous Mysteries of the Rosary?

[floresco]

I had plenty of experience with the old Latin Mass before the changes, it was all we had for years. I witnessed the turmoil and confusion in the parish as we had to change. I saw the attendance drop off and most of all I remember the older folks who became dispirited. I visited the SSPX occasionally when it first started to spread around. I spoke to the attendees and shared a lot of thoughts with them.

I recommend that you be clearer in identifying your personal experiences as such, rather than stating your observations as if they were universal facts.

In my experience, people who talk about traditionalist nostalgia usually do so as a put down. It has usually been a way to marginalize and dismiss the concerns of traditionalists.

 

[Big_Feet]

Hey everyone. Why do some traditional Catholics reject the Luminous Mysteries of the Rosary? This is something I never understood.

I personally see at least two reasons…

1. It does these prayers do not fit their individual preferences, and therefore they reject it as a personal devotion for themselves.
2. As I also believe is the often the case with their disapproval of the OF of the Mass: they have a misconstrued understanding of "T"radition vs. "t"radition, believing they are one in the same, when in fact "T"raditon cannot be changed, while "t"raditon (which the specific form of the liturgy, as well as the Rosary are a part of) can be changed as the Church decides.

There are probably many more, but these are the two that are most evident to me.

 

[Seamus_L]

I’ve said the Luminous Mysteries with groups in church on occasion, but I’ve never said it on my own. I guess I just feel the Rosary is already complete. I’ve never criticized anyone else for saying it, but it just isn’t one of my devotions.

 

[newyorkcatholic]

I did’t think my comments were negative at all, and I don’t see why you should think so.

Having lived through it, I know that the yearning for a return to the Latin Mass was primarily nostalgia. This is why I stated that it started out that way, I did not state that it is still that way.

People started buying recordings of the old Latin Mass for just that reason. I bought them and my father bought them.

I had plenty of experience with the old Latin Mass before the changes, it was all we had for years. I witnessed the turmoil and confusion in the parish as we had to change. I saw the attendance drop off and most of all I remember the older folks who became dispirited. I visited the SSPX occasionally when it first started to spread around. I spoke to the attendees and shared a lot of thoughts with them.

I can tell you now without reservation that the primary motivation of most of those people was nostalgia and with some (actually many) of them a strong dose of bitterness.

This is why everyone wanted to bring back the church of the '30’s - '40’s & '50’s. Not because it was the best expression of traditional Catholicism, it was because that was what they remembered and wanted to recover. They were not real traditionalists inj any ideological sense, they were depressed and dispirited people full of nostalgia for ‘the good old days’.

Newcomers and young people want a more dignified form of liturgy than the Ordinary Form, and I don’t blame them one bit. But the only option they have is the one the SSPX fought so hard for them to get, and that was fueled by nostalgia.

I don’t see how your memories of your personal experiences translates into your being able to read the minds of all the people who desired the Latin Mass, and to see that their motive was nostalgia.

And also see through all that theological puff in works like those of Ottaviani, Lefevbre, and so on … all nostalgia really, no serious concerns.

???

 

[Padraig1972]

What did you expect? This isn’t Fish Eaters, the traditionalist position can’t be taken for granted. I think you should stay, you add a lot to the conversation.

Reactions for sure, but being accused for praying the rosary for selfish needs and demanding blessed Virgin Mary to pray for me was not expected. But, one learns every day.

 

[floresco]

I’m beginning to think that traditional Catholics don’t pray the Luminous Mysteries so we can be accused of poor understanding of Catholicism and disobedience to the Pope. Reading this thread leaves me with the impression that this is the likely result.

But seriously, it doesn’t even make sense to refer to it as rejecting the Luminous Mysteries. It is an optional devotion and there is no obligation of any kind to say them. The question should be “Why do some people choose to pray these Mysteries?” Those who find it meaningful do it and, likewise, those who do not find it meaningful do not do it. Why should this be an occasion to cast aspersions on the faith of Catholics who do not choose to engage in an optional devotion?

 

[TrueLight]

. Why should this be an occasion to cast aspersions on the faith of Catholics who do not choose to engage in an optional devotion?

 

[Leon_Bloy]

Anyone can make up their own mysteries if they want to, by the way… just sayin’.

I have noticed a lot of people here worried about “rules” regarding the rosary that don’t exist!

I love the rosary, and try to say it every day, and I don’t often use the Luminous Mysteries, just because I’m used to the older system. I have huge veneration for Blessed John Paul II, and have no problem with the Luminous Mysteries if other people want to pray them with me.

But… to say the rosary, or not, is optional. To say part of it is fine, to begin and not finish it is fine, and to make up ones’ own mysteries from the Bible or life of Mary as one wants to, privately, is fine, as is saying the prayers without meditating at all!

There are older and venerable forms of the rosary or other chaplets that are different from the traditional rosary, also - like the Franciscan Crown, which doesn’t require meditation, and has six decades (as I recall… or maybe it’s seven?).

 

[Padraig1972]

Anyone can make up their own mysteries if they want to, by the way… just sayin’.

I have noticed a lot of people here worried about “rules” regarding the rosary that don’t exist!

I love the rosary, and try to say it every day, and I don’t often use the Luminous Mysteries, just because I’m used to the older system. I have huge veneration for Blessed John Paul II, and have no problem with the Luminous Mysteries if other people want to pray them with me.

But… to say the rosary, or not, is optional. To say part of it is fine, to begin and not finish it is fine, and to make up ones’ own mysteries from the Bible or life of Mary as one wants to, privately, is fine, as is saying the prayers without meditating at all!

There are older and venerable forms of the rosary or other chaplets that are different from the traditional rosary, also - like the Franciscan Crown, which doesn’t require meditation, and has six decades (as I recall… or maybe it’s seven?).

Sure, people can make up their own mysteries if they want to. But then it is not the rosary that Pope Pius V instituted in 1579 with 15 mysteries.

If people want to pray five, 10, 15, 20, 50 or 100 mysteries…it is their choice. But i do not support it (and if asked: i do speak up against it) and follow what i have promised to do weekly through The Rosary Confraternity.

The Luminous Mysteries are fine, and too bad they were not instituted in 1579. But i accept the history and leave it there.

 

[Lujack]

Sure, people can make up their own mysteries if they want to. But then it is not the rosary that Pope Pius V instituted in 1579 with 15 mysteries.

If people want to pray five, 10, 15, 20, 50 or 100 mysteries…it is their choice. But i do not support it (and if asked: i do speak up against it) and follow what i have promised to do weekly through The Rosary Confraternity.

The Luminous Mysteries are fine, and too bad they were not instituted in 1579. But i accept the history and leave it there.

Not to be rude, but what is there to speak up against?

 

[Padraig1972]

Not to be rude, but what is there to speak up against?

The reason is perfectly stated here

 

[newyorkcatholic]

I have noticed a lot of people here worried about “rules” regarding the rosary that don’t exist!

Actually there are rules. If you are a member of the Confraternity for example, or saying the rosary to satisfy your scapular promise, there are rules.

If you break them, fine, but what you are saying might not really be a rosary.

If I just say one Ave for each decade and get through 15 decades in 5 minutes … I haven’t fulfilled the promises!

 

[Mike30]

Hey everyone. Why do some traditional Catholics reject the Luminous Mysteries of the Rosary? This is something I never understood.

The Rosary is a purely optional devotion. Except for some people in religious orders, both relgcious and secular and those who have made a promise or took a vow to say the rosary, no one even has to sayit at all. There are no rules in this matter. As far as the Luminous Mysteries go, if people want to say them fine. Go for it. But if you don’t want to you should not be questioned as to why you don’t or have some aspersations cast against you because you choose not to.

 

[Hesychios]

Lujack;9170482:

Not to be rude, but what is there to speak up against?

The reason is perfectly stated here
“They detract from the imagery of the rosary being Our Lady’s Psalter”

Very interesting comment. But in the great scheme of things it’s not really about her …

"The greatest gift we have from Mary is not finally about Mary at all. The “good news” we believe is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. It’s the story of our redemption through the sacrifice of God’s only Son, made possible by the trust of a young woman of Galilee. Mary cannot overshadow or be separated from her son. She always points beyond herself to the greatness of God and the mission of Jesus Christ. She is the first and greatest Christian disciple. And therein lies her beauty to every new generation of believers."
Most Rev. Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M., Cap. - Archbishop of Denver.

 

[Lujack]

The reason is perfectly stated here

Again, I’m not being contrary, since the Rosary is purely a private devotion and can be done according to personal preference or according to what works better for one’s own spiritual development (and nothing is wrong with that), but criticizing the Luminous Mysteries because “It was good enough for St. Alphonsus and St. Louis, it should be good enough for me!” seems unfair to me.

After all, St. Louis never knew devotion to the Sacred Heart and St. Alphonsus died 100 years before it became a feast; neither knew the Immaculate Heart or Our Lady of Fatima or Divine Mercy Sunday or the Feast of Christ the King.

So I don’t think that Pope John Paul II dishonors those saints in anyway by having chosen to offer an addition.

 

[Corki]

Anyone can make up their own mysteries if they want to, by the way… just sayin’.

I have noticed a lot of people here worried about “rules” regarding the rosary that don’t exist!

Actually there are rules. If you are a member of the Confraternity for example, or saying the rosary to satisfy your scapular promise, there are rules.

If you break them, fine, but what you are saying might not really be a rosary.

If I just say one Ave for each decade and get through 15 decades in 5 minutes … I haven’t fulfilled the promises!

In addition to the “rules” newyorkcatholic mentioned, there are “rules” attached to saying the Rosary with the intention of gaining an indulgence.

 

[Padraig1972]

Again, I’m not being contrary, since the Rosary is purely a private devotion and can be done according to personal preference or according to what works better for one’s own spiritual development (and nothing is wrong with that), but criticizing the Luminous Mysteries because “It was good enough for St. Alphonsus and St. Louis, it should be good enough for me!” seems unfair to me.

After all, St. Louis never knew devotion to the Sacred Heart and St. Alphonsus died 100 years before it became a feast; neither knew the Immaculate Heart or Our Lady of Fatima or Divine Mercy Sunday or the Feast of Christ the King.

So I don’t think that Pope John Paul II dishonors those saints in anyway by having chosen to offer an addition.

How many times do i need to explain that i do not criticizing them? I just don`t use them as they were not not instituted back in 1579. That matters to me.

 

[Lujack]

How many times do i need to explain that i do not criticizing them? I just don`t use them as they were not not instituted back in 1579. That matters to me.

And I’m not criticizing you.

 

[Oneofthewomen]

In addition to the “rules” newyorkcatholic mentioned, there are “rules” attached to saying the Rosary with the intention of gaining an indulgence.

But I, for one, am not part of any society or confraternity, and don’t pray the rosary to gain any indulgences. I pray the rosary to meditate on the mysteries of the life of Christ. How I pray the rosary is not any more right or better than the ways anyone else chooses to pray it, it is a purely optional devotion.

Pray as you can, not as you cant!!
What matters is that you pray!

 

[Alfonsus]

Why do you pray it if you do not belive in it`s powers? No offence, but i find this posting incredibly sad. Yes, it saddens me.

Simply put, I believe in its power, as the Church officially teach: that it is a compendium of the Gospel, that it immerse you in the mystery of incarnation, its Christocentric characters, because it is a devotion that draws its strength from the Church.

What I don’t believe are promises and powers of the Rosary (or other devotions) as alleged by private revelations.

To my understanding, this stance is very traditional, for it anchor the prayers and sacramental to the authority of the Church, not private revelations. Because the Church herself teaches that those revelations are bounding no one.

Of course by the same token, I’m not saying that people that believe private revelations sanctioned by the Church are wrong. It is their business protected by the Church.
I only explained that my preference is because the Church recommendation and reasoning she outlined instead of the private revelation itself.