FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: The “New” Rosary: It’s Time to Say Goodbye
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3
For something that was not supposed to be mandatory it is interisting to note that it is included in every rosary booklet I've ever seen, with no reference to it being up to your own discretion.
I discovered I was some sort of evil rad trad when I once commented to a couple of friends, en passant, that I did not pray the luminous mysteries. One of them looked at me as if I had just confessed to some filthy crime.

I suppose its because I learned how to really pray the rosary with FE (I mean, my grandmother and great grandmother taught me the prayers, which from infancy I committed to memory, but not the mysteries). This is quite telling, isn't it ? Much before discovering traddom I looked for priests, enrolled myself into silly preparations for confirmation and wasted many a weekend before turning into a rebellious drop out, etc. But they never taught me the simple prayer of the Rosary.

I think this suggests a possible future for the mysteries : FB rightly remarked that time will tell. The Rosary seems to be the quintessential popular devotion, and so popular piety will determine if these new mysteries will prevail or not.
But its a popular devotion that is rapidly disappearing. Outside of the SSPX (where they have public Rosary before Mass) or individually in TLMs, only old folks pray the Rosary in the Church.
If the new Rosary survives at all it will be among the charismatics—a JPII child. They do have some strong Marian devotions and are the only ones with young people praying the Rosary (or young people at all, besides traddom).

I suppose this will be the future, at least here in Latin America (and the other places where religion is still growing). That is, the future will be a battle not between trads and « reverent NOers », but between trads and charismatics, which I take to be something completely unCatholic.
In truth only time will tell how much of post conciliar anything prevails. One cannot legislate devotion from the top down. Part of the problem with modern Catholicism is that it is treated by the hierarchy as basically a business trying to sell a product created in a board room committee meeting. What's crazy is the charismatic neo conservative crowd looks at the pope as some divine CEO whose every word, gimmick and gesture is the voice of God for our times. That's like bing a company " yes man".

If you think our Faith is a product to be bought and sold in some vast religious marketplace you're a snake oil salesman with no real faith and no interior life.

Just look at St Joseph for instance, devotion to him is something the more modern popes have tried to drum up but it just hasn't stuck so well. It's not all that rooted in Tradition really, or at least some parts of it are not. RadTrad had an excellent in depth look at this.Feasts like St. Joseph the Worker are just contrived and haven't stuck.

One devotion I'm surprised has become ubiquitous is Divine Mercy, it's almost quintessential post conciliar Catholicism. It's also a JPII era charismatic thing.  Even so, time will still tell how lasting it is. We are too stuck in our own time to see how things will play out.

Maybe there will be a revival of public recitation of the Office, at least in cathedrals...who knows?

What RF said is true though,it's mostly the elderly that pray the rosary in church.

There's a part of me that likes popular piety. At its best it's beautiful even if it's a bit messy and tends towards superstition. The hierarchy can really only help rein in the worst abuses in popular piety but has no real power to just create something out of thin air and mandate it.

Many of the luminous mysteries can be contemplated within the traditional set.
Baptism in the Jordan -> The visitation can lead into thinking of John the Baptist which can lead to thinking about the Baptism in the Jordan
Wedding in Cana -> Finding of Jesus in the Temple. Christ makes himself subject to Mary and Joseph. Can lead one into contemplating the beginning of his public life at Cana.
Proclamation of the Kingdom -> I guess you can pick any number of things here.
Transfiguration -> The Ascension. Christ in all his Glory having ascended into Heaven to rule at the right hand of the Father.
Institution of the Eucharist -> Plenty to choose from, especially the Crucifixion. "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all things to myself. " We can contemplate the priest raising the Eucharist up as Christ was raised up on the Cross.

Granted, these things aren't necessary the primary focus of those mysteries, but when you pray the Rosary over and over and over again, then sometimes you can branch out and contemplate things that are related to the stated mystery.
(02-11-2016, 11:19 AM)formerbuddhist Wrote: [ -> ]One devotion I'm surprised has become ubiquitous is Divine Mercy, it's almost quintessential post conciliar Catholicism. It's also a JPII era charismatic thing.  Even so, time will still tell how lasting it is. We are too stuck in our own time to see how things will play out.

To be fair, St. Faustina lived in the early 20th Century so the Chaplet of Divine Mercy was a pre-VII creation (from Our Lord if you wish to believe her revelations). It was quite popular in Poland and then with JPII being Polish he popularized it throughout the Church. I think it may be one of the newer post-VII things that will endure unless someone invalidates St. Faustina's writings (which I don't see being likely).

There can be good, newer devotions which pop up. If Divine Mercy is not abused, it's a wonderful devotion. The difference is that one must couple Divine Mercy with penance and contrition. The Divine Mercy devotion should never be separated from Confession. That's the downfall of how it has been presented post VII. Personally, if we were to eventually see the restoration of the old calendar to some extent, Divine Mercy Sunday would be something that I could easily see transfer from the new calendar.
(02-11-2016, 10:12 AM)AugustineNYC Wrote: [ -> ]For something that was not supposed to be mandatory it is interisting to note that it is included in every rosary booklet I've ever seen, with no reference to it being up to your own discretion.

and no note of the fact that they were added much, much later.
The Luminous mysteries were actually developed by St. George Preca in the 1950s and popularized among the the Society of Christian Doctrine.  On the one hand, they do directly oppose the classic Modernist errors concerning Christ's divinity and the miracles and other facts in the Gospel of St. John,  as well as reinforcing other truths where there has been confusion in our time, such as the importance of Baptism, the universal call to conversion, the intercessory power of the Blessed Virgin, the Real Presence, etc.

In the history of the Rosary, different people promoted different Mysteries, some much more strictly than JPII did. It's how the Rosary's mysteries changed over time.  If he legislated them, it would be one thing, but he just promoted them like so many other people before him.

To me, valid criticism relates to the parallel with the Psalter, but only when the whole thing is prayed at once.  If praying it all at once, it only makes sense to pray 150 Aves, no matter what mysteries you use.  However, once you go to a 50 Aves per day weekly schedule, you've already broken that parallel (it's still a good thing if it's all you can do!).  You now have 350 aves per week--two full Psalters plus an extra 50.  Whether you repeat a set of mysteries a third time or pray the Luminous mysteries for the extra set, I don't see the difference with respect to the Psalter parallel.

I think some people oppose the Luminous mysteries based on the claim that Our Lady revealed the Rosary "as is" to St. Dominic, but this is not true.  She encouraged him to spread the Angelic Psalter as something already existing.  This is how St. Louis de Montfort describes this event in Secret of the Rosary:

St. Louis de Montfort Wrote:"Dear Dominic, do you know which weapon the Blessed Trinity wants to use to reform the world?"

"Oh, my Lady," answered Saint Dominic, "you know far better than I do because next to your Son Jesus Christ you have always been the chief instrument of our salvation."

Then Our Lady replied: "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."
http://catholictradition.org/Classics/se...osary2.htm

We originally learn of this event  a couple hundred years after the fact when it was revealed  by Our Lady to Bl. Alan de Rupe.  Interestingly enough, Bl. Alan vigorously opposed the 50 per day schedule which had become popular as a corruption of the Psalter, and even forbade the name "Rosary" on the same grounds.

As for the mysteries, as I mentioned, they have varied over time with the oldest documented being three in number: Annunciation, Nativity, and Assumption.  I can go into more of the intervening development and who promoted what, but fast forward to to Bl. Alan.  Bl. Alan did say that Our Lady said to him to meditate on  "the life and passion" of her Son (no specifics on the mysteries are mentioned). If we stuck to that, we'd be using the Joyful, Luminous, and Sorrowful Mysteries.  Likewise, at the time,  a different Dominic, Dominic of Prussia, had popularized a version with 50 meditations on the life and passion of Our Lord leading to some speculation he was actually the Dominic Our Lady was talking about.  However, Bl. Alan greatly opposed his method.  The mysteries he proposed were very general: Incarnation for the first third, Passion for the second, and Resurrection for the third.  He divided the third section into five parts--the Resurrection, the Ascension, Pentecost, the Glorification of Christ, and the Final Judgment.

I was taught the Rosary in CCD before JPII proposed the luminous ones.  As AugustineNYC mentions, when I decided to get back into the Rosary they were in every pamphlet.  Since my memory of learning the Rosary was foggy, I didn't think anything of it.  They do seem to have caught on in m experience anyway.
(02-11-2016, 09:41 AM)formerbuddhist Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-11-2016, 08:34 AM)CaptCrunch73 Wrote: [ -> ]
The bigger question is why? Adding mysteries to the Rosary, communion in the hand, change the Mass, etc etc etc Why? Why? Why?

If you take Catholicism then tweak every single thing about Catholicism is it still Catholicism?

I would say it's complicated. I definitely identify with the old Believers who saw that inner and outer are related so much so that if you change the externals you risk changing the Faith itself. In fact you actually do change it. How you pray determines how you believe. It's absolutely true. I've seen it in my own life.  For instance, if I start praying the rosary or the breviary I am drawn in spite of myself to start thinking like a traditional Latin Rite Carholic, but if I start praying from my Horologion and using my prayerrope I'm drawn to all things Eastern. The externals matter a great deal. They are the means by which we somehow understand and grow in our faith.



On the other hand there is development. Just what is legitimate and what isn't is up for debate though.

I would suggest that the addition of the luminous mysteries as anything more than optional is not legitimate though.

One thing that comes to mind is the question of authority, exactly who has the right to arbitrarily change our traditions? Were any of the 20th century changes ( breviary, Holy Week, fasting requirements, all of the post conciliar changes...) legitimate exercises of authority or abuses? Does any man--- pope or not--- have the authority to simply tinker with the Faith? Do we learn our Faith through the liturgy and our devotions or not?

These are things that I've often thought about. I'm definitely more eastern. I've got no love whatsoever for papal maximalism and tinkering no matter who it is.

This was a major question in the leadup to Vatican II--there's a good book that is a survey of all the thought at the time on this, called "Change and the Catholic Church."  What is the essence of Catholicism? What can be changed and what can't? Catholicism has existed in many times and places without the Rosary, for example.  The Liturgy has been different in different times and places.  Many things have changed over time and across localities. The question was asked, if all these things have changed in the past, why can't we change them now to respond to a world itself that was changing so rapidly?

Sure, some individuals proposed changes to things that could not be changed, but there otherwise is no logical answer to this question of why can't we.  We can't say it was always this way, because it wasn't.  We might say it has been done this way a long time, but so was the thing that preceded that change.  Maybe our change will be done for a long time too.  Etc.

What was neglected, however, was the idea that traditions have a value simply as traditions (regardless of their actual content) by reinforcing unity and continuity between members of the Church and to help tie us to those unchangeable things that are also constant.  They help reinforce the confidence we have that our house is built on the unshakable rock. 

Take Friday abstinence as an example.  The Latin Church's fasting and penitential rules are one of the areas where there has been the most continual changes made over the centuries.  Therefore clearly the Church can make changes here.  Likewise, a good argument can be made that making Friday a more generally penitential day admitting of many forms of penance rather than prescribing one certain thing (that can be performed quite easily and without a spirit of penance) would be advantageous.  But the effects of changing it were quite different, in that it led both to the doubt of unchangeable moral laws as well as a general loss of Catholic identity and unity--it had become a tradition that bound us Catholics in the West together and therefore bound us to Christ--its value was more than the specific act of having some cheese pizza or fish and chips rather than a hot dog.

One of the reasons the Catholic Church has been historically so successful at evangelizing in every time and place is because of that flexibility that does not bind the Church arbitrarily to certain practices of the past.  But we have been unsuccessful at it in these days because in our haste to try and adapt to rapidly arising new problems we neglected the value of tradition itself as a strong support and remedy. The "standard of proof" for when it was justified to make a change to a tradition was much higher in the past because of this respect for the inherent value of tradition as tradition.  Traditions weren't immutable, but the good to be gained by change had to outweigh the significant cost of altering tradition.
(02-11-2016, 12:21 PM)GangGreen Wrote: [ -> ]
(02-11-2016, 11:19 AM)formerbuddhist Wrote: [ -> ]One devotion I'm surprised has become ubiquitous is Divine Mercy, it's almost quintessential post conciliar Catholicism. It's also a JPII era charismatic thing.  Even so, time will still tell how lasting it is. We are too stuck in our own time to see how things will play out.

To be fair, St. Faustina lived in the early 20th Century so the Chaplet of Divine Mercy was a pre-VII creation (from Our Lord if you wish to believe her revelations). It was quite popular in Poland and then with JPII being Polish he popularized it throughout the Church. I think it may be one of the newer post-VII things that will endure unless someone invalidates St. Faustina's writings (which I don't see being likely).

There can be good, newer devotions which pop up. If Divine Mercy is not abused, it's a wonderful devotion. The difference is that one must couple Divine Mercy with penance and contrition. The Divine Mercy devotion should never be separated from Confession. That's the downfall of how it has been presented post VII. Personally, if we were to eventually see the restoration of the old calendar to some extent, Divine Mercy Sunday would be something that I could easily see transfer from the new calendar.


Oh I've got no quarrel with Divine Mercy. It's not my cup of tea but it's definitely something I've got no issue with. I admit I'm not at all into any kind of private revelations, writings of saints about private revelations or the devotions surrounding them. Divine Mercy seems to be kind of a reiteration of and/ or an expansion of the Sacred Heart devotion. I like popular piety and find it nice even though somee devotions or expressions of them do not suit my taste. Like for me I love certain aspects of the Sacred Heart in its dogmatic implications, and I love the litany, but I do not have a devotion to Communions of reparation or First Friday's. I admit much of traditional Latin Catholic piety is foreign to me,or makes this eastern heart of mine a bit uneasy.

I still don't know how much longevity Divine Mercy will have in the long run. It's still too soon to tell. In one parish around here the First Friday devotions are bound up with Divine Mercy, at the parish close to me Divine Mercy has no presence at all. Again, it's more popular piety that will either be accepted or rejected over time...

It strikes me that the best example of a legitimate development was Eucharistic Adoration. If the Eucharist is Jesus Christ, than why not pray before Him after Mass, or in a reserved chapel or monstrance? It's a beautiful next step in our understanding of the Real Presence and what it means.

What's interesting is that many devotions and revelations take a long time to be accepted and treated without skepticism.

There is something to the laity acting in some capacity as guardians of the Faith. Of course it must be well formed laity, but there's always going to be a tension between popular piety and officialdom. 
My NO church has Rosaries before Mass, at least on Sundays. I've never seen anybody rolling around on the floor screeching and foaming at the mouth like a lot of charismatic Protestants I've seen so I think my church is mostly safe from that particular plague.

As for the Divine Mercy, I think its a nice simple devotion. Its not my favorite but I don't see anything wrong with it and its kind of charming in its simplicity.
Pages: 1 2 3