Why does the SSPX laity and so forth not say

the Luminous Mysteries? please don’t get into arguments. i only want a straight forward and charitable answer. That is all. :thumbsup:

I suggest reading this.

athanasiuscm.blogspot.com/2007/02/why-luminous-mysteries-are-bad.html

Sums it up quite well.

Many other traditonalists don’t say them either.
Part of the reasoning is that the number of total mysteries matches the Psalter, or something like that. I am sorry that I don’t have a hard answer for you.

fisheaters.com/rosary.html

The link which CatholicNick provided explains it very well.

It is not just an “SSPX thing.” When the Rosary is prayed as it was intended (15 decades), as revealed by Our Lady, it is obvious that the Luminous Mysteries mess it up, to put it bluntly. Most important, to me, is that the Joyful, Sorrowful and Glorious Mysteries were instituted by divine revelation; the Luminous were not. The Luminous Mysteries should have been created as a chaplet, not part of the Rosary.

And now the number of sets of mysteries matches the number of Gospels. Symbolic representations are all nice and good, however I don’t believe they can supersede the substance that the new mysteries add. They complete the meditations on the life of Christ. With the Luminous Mysteries we have 6 of the 7 sacraments to meditate on Baptism (L1), Confession (L3), Eucharist (L5), Confirmation (G3), Marriage (L2), and Holy Orders (L5). I suppose anointing of the sick might fall under The Proclamation of the Kingdom with Confession, but I think it might be a little bit of a stretch.
I think the added depth to the substance of the Rosary more than makes up for any loss in the symbolic number of Hail Marys.

Yours in Christ,
Thursday

I’ll say this, the author of this piece is shrewd. I liked the way he says “This argument is wrong therefor anyone who make it is wrong” and everyone is supposed to go “Oh, OK.” And then he goes on to use the argument he’s degraded. Obviously he took debate 101.:shrug:

The fact is that there is a “T” Tradition and a “t” tradition. Tradition cannot change. It is immutable. The Rosary doesn’t fall under that category and the Church has never said it does. Being that it’s a pretty important devotion in the life of Catholics, if it was Tradition, it would certainly have been given this status. JPII is the reason that this tradition is mutable. He’s made additions that further aid us in meditating on Christ’s life which is always beneficial. The idea that Christ and Mary are upset about this because it gives us more than 150 Hail Marys is ridiculous. Mary’s whole life is spent bringing us closer to her Son. The presumption that a “traditional” number was changed (even if it did correlate to the 150 Psalms) and therefor the Rosary’s power is somehow diminished is just silly. The idea that putting more meditations of Christ’s life in the Rosary is somehow detracting from the Faith is ludicrous. Some are taking quite the antiquarian approach to Tradition. We are warned against that. As Thursday pointed out, the number now matches the number of Gospels. :shrug:

And BTW, some of us who love the Luminous Mysteries also love Gregorian Chant and Latin and also don’t receive Communion in the hand.:thumbsup:

‘Instituted by Divine Revelation’ indeed? Private devotions are not instituted by Divine Revelation.

Where pray tell has any such Divine Revelation endorsed a ‘final and complete’ form of the Rosary? Even after Mary’s appearances to St Dominic and the Blessed seers of Fatima the Rosary was added to - in fact Our Lady did so herself with the Fatima Prayer! Hardly indicative of the Rosary ever having been in any kind of final and immutable form.

understood. but doesn’t the sspx make a great big thing out of not saying the luminous mysteries because they are post vatican 2? i don’t know why. iam only wondering why they don’t say the luminour mysteries. is it because they don’t come from the Blessed Virgin?

No, simply, it breaks the TRADITIONAL symbolism of the Rosary, which is 150 Hail Marys, resembling the 150 psalms.

Theres nothing intrinsically wrong with meditating on the mysteries. It just changes what the rosary had always been seen to be, Our Lady’s Psalter.

This still raises the question on whether or not the symbolism is more important then the added substance.

Yours in Christ,
Thursday

And what was the purpose of Our Lady’s Psalter?

Traditions mean something, even if they are little "t"s. The Rosary had always been seen to be Our Lady’s Psalter, for hundreds of years. Your seeing it as the Numbers of the Gospels et al, are what you yourself came up with, an innovation.

I.e. the reason the Rosary Came into existence was because people didn’t memorise the 150 Psalms anymore, so they said the Rosary instead, and 150 Hail Mary’s representing the 150 Psalms. This isn’t just an “added symbolism” somebody made up.

In the Early Church the faithful memorized all 150 Psalms, or else prayed as many as they could learn, just as Jews had for centuries prior. As time progressed through the Middle Ages, the faithful who could not learn the Psalms, which increased as the population of Europe moved from urban population to a more rural and landed population, wanted a way to participate in the praying the Psalms. Thus at some point the tradition was devised to pray 150 Our Fathers, for those who could not participate in the Psalms. Then it came to say 150 Hail Marys, and so on. Later this became fashioned into some Our Fathers and some Hail Marys, although Tradition doesn’t say by who. It was already in existence when St. Dominic refashioned it into the form we are more familiar with. Nevertheless, it is true to a certain extent that he received it from heaven, in as much as Our Lady told him to spread the devotion far and wide amongst the faithful, and it became known as “Our Lady’s Psalter”. This is so because during the Rosary the Hail Mary is said 150 times. The whole rosary is modeled off of the Breviary, the Church’s Psalter, since at the end of ten Hail Marys, the Glory be is said, just as it is after every Psalm in the Latin rite of the Church.

From athanasiuscm.blogspot.com/2007/02/why-luminous-mysteries-are-bad.html

Innovation is not a four letter word (it’s a ten letter word), and age does not necessarily make something better. I do not argue with you that traditions mean something, what I take issue with is turning the Rosary into a museum piece, at the expense of good innovations.
Other than breaking the 150 thing, does anyone have an objection to the Luminous Mysteries?

Yours in Christ,
Thursday

(Who is now heading into work. . . )

The purpose of Our Lady’s Psalter, was to allow ordinary laymen to participate in the Divine Offices in a time when the once usual practice of people learning all 150 Psalms by heart fell out of use.

Priests (with the Old Breviary anyway) prayed all 150 Psalms in 1 week. Laymen pray 150 Hail Marys with all the traditional mysteries of the Rosary.

The Rosary imitates the Divine office in many ways; the most obvious being the 150 Hail Marys and the 150 Psalms, the second being the ending of each decade with a Doxology (Gloria Patri) which all Psalms are ended with in the Office.

And my friend, many traditions have been changed by the Church over the years, correct? Was it wrong to change them because they were a tradition at some point? This would be antiquarianism to say yes.

Again, what is wrong with saying 200 Hail Marys and meditating on more of Christ’s life? How would this be offensive to Our Lord and Lady? If you can point this one out, I’ll drop them right away. Simply to say it’s not the same number and therefor not representative of what the Rosary took the place of is not working for me.

You yourself just pointed out that originally people said the Psalms. Was it wrong to change them to only Hail Marys? I’m sorry but I find this kind of ironic. It’s OK to do away with one tradition but not add to another? Saying 150 Hail Marys is not saying the 150 Psalms nor is the same as saying the Divine Office no matter how imitative it is.

If anyone’s interested, here’s a short history of the Rosary.
newadvent.org/cathen/13184b.htm

Please, Bear, do not put words into my mouth.

I don’t have to pray the new mysteries, they are not binding. The Rosary hasn’t changed from its Traditional form of Our Lady’s Psalter if one doesn’t say them. One doesn’t have to include the new Mysteries at all.

The Point is, the church has never changed traditions so suddenly, by the sudden additions of new mysteries to the Rosary to give an example. One can draw a Parallel with the construction of the Novus Ordo Missae out of nothing in the late 1960s (not suing the word fabrication… some on this forum don’t like this word). Traditions change through Organic development, not overnight, not suddenly.

Never one did I, or any traditionalists say one cant say or mediate on these New Mysteries…

Uh, I guess I wasn’t specific. What’s the ultimate purpose of all of these.

Please, Bear, do not put words into my mouth.

And where did I do that?

I don’t have to pray the new mysteries, they are not binding. The Rosary hasn’t changed from its Traditional form of Our Lady’s Psalter if one doesn’t say them. One doesn’t have to include the new Mysteries at all.

One doesn’t have to say the Rosary at all. Does that make it a good thing, though?

The Point is, the church has never changed traditions so suddenly, by the sudden additions of new mysteries to the Rosary to give an example. One can draw a Parallel with the construction of the Novus Ordo Missae out of nothing in the late 1960s (not suing the word fabrication… some on this forum don’t like this word). Traditions change through Organic development, not overnight, not suddenly.

The Church never had Mass communication as we are “blessed” with today, did it? The fact is that several devotions have changed as they caught on. Things are going to catch on a lot quicker when the Vatican can put things out on a website. The quickness of the change has little to do with it. Some don’t like the change. If the Holy Father had added one Hail Mary at a time it would be too fast and considered inorganic to some. It’s quite organic to meditate on more of Christ’s life when we have been doing it for several centuries now. It’s not like we’re now meditating on the life of St. Boniface (first saint that came to mind). We’re just doing more of the same. If one thinks the reason we say the Rosary now is to participate in the Divine Office then I think one would be mistaken.

Never one did I, or any traditionalists say one cant say or mediate on these New Mysteries…

Where did I say you did? That said, if you read the blog given, it clearly states that it is a tradition that is wrong to change and that would be, well, wrong. And BTW, not all Traditionalists say this. I know several who actually find including the Luminous Mysteries, which are more mysteries of Christ’s life, to be quite Traditional. This isn’t a Traditional vs. Novus Ordo debate.

I apologize for my error in words. I suppose I should have said “divine institution.” Pope Pius XII, in his encyclical on the Rosary (Ingruentium Malorum), said “We well know the Rosary’s powerful efficacy to obtain the maternal aid of the Virgin. By no means is there only one way to pray to obtain this aid. However, We consider the Holy Rosary the most convenient and most fruitful means, as is clearly suggested by the very origin of this practice, heavenly rather than human, and by its nature.”

Adding a new mystery to the Rosary is not akin to adding the Fatima Prayer. There are 150 psalms, not 200. The Aves represent these 150 psalms. That is fact. Another name for the Rosary is Our Lady’s Psalter. Our Lady herself called it this. She said to St. Dominic: “I want you to know that, in this kind of warfare, the battering ram has always been the Angelic Psalter which is the foundation stone of the New Testament. Therefore if you want to reach these hardened souls and win them over to God, preach My Psalter.” It has also been consistently referred to as a Psalter by many popes.

Our Lady at Fatima said to the children seers to recite “a third of the Rosary” every day. How does that work now with 20 decades?

It would have been fine, IMO, to introduce the Luminous mysteries as a separate chaplet. But adding them to the Mysteries of the Rosary in effect abolishes the original, historical and traditional intent of the devotion.

Pax vobiscum!

Well, that blog article was quite insulting. The blogger makes generalizations and assumptions about people who pray the Luminous Mysteries. I suppose since I pray the Luminous Mysteries, I also dislike the Latin Mass, approve of altar girls, and receive Communion in the hand…oh, wait, none of those things are true.

In Christ,
Rand

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.