Rosary: New Luminous Mysteries Put Our Lady Aside – Dominican Priest…editor
Why is it that so many – probably most – Catholics have accepted the new Luminous Mysteries uncritically?
And is Father Albert right to say that these new “mysteries of light” put Our Lady aside?
I know Catholics who have been put off supporting various events, such as the 40 days for life annual prolife event, because they are trying to raise their children to learn only the traditional Faith and they were taken aback, a couple of years ago, to find the assembled group were including the Luminous Mysteries in the Rosary. These Catholics did not know them – and refuse to learn them (as do I) – so that informed their decision the following year and they didn’t attend, which is, of course, a pity. The same goes for various rosary events held in parishes – if these new mysteries are used, some of us just won’t go along.
If “Shocked from Surrey” wishes to protest – go head. But that is the reality for those of us who are taking Pope John Paul II at his word and not including these mysteries in our rosary. Ever.
Which begs the question, why – when the Pope made them optional and those of us dubbed “traditionalists” won’t say them, let alone pray them – are they always included, why the lectures and meetings with “experts” who have “studied” them? A real mystery that, given that I can’t recall a single lecture or study day on the traditional Rosary before or since the new mysteries came along – right up to the present time. Why the sudden enthusiasm from Modernists for these new mysteries of light? It really is a mystery, says Puzzled from Glasgow to Shocked from Surrey…
I don’t even know what those new mysteries of light are – I will never say them.
It’s getting really boring, all this new stuff, everything being changed. Nothing is the same as it was. We don’t need a new rosary. Our Lady gave us the old rosary and that should be good enough for any Catholic.
I don’t know what broccoli tastes like, therefore I’m never ever going to eat it! Thats the kind of Catholic that gives the Church a bad name.
Yes, that’s ridiculous – Catholics who wont eat Broccoli even though they’ve never tasted it? Broccoli is GOOD for us – it can help us maintain a healthy weight because it is low in calories and provides a lot of filling fibre. Each cup of cooked broccoli contains 5.1 grams of fibre, or 20 percent of the daily value of 25 grams, along with 0.6 grams of fat and 3.7 grams of protein but only 55 calories.
So, what’s with those silly Catholics? We’re supposed to avoid anything that is a danger to our health – physical or spiritual, but Broccoli is obviously healthy so what’s their problem?
Honestly, one has to wonder, sometimes, Dano, doesn’t one?
N O T I C E . . .
I owe an apology to Margaret USA because yesterday – Feast of St Anthony – she celebrated her 50th birthday, and, if you all recall, at the time when we marked Summa’s (our Australian) blogger’s 50th, I had promised her a dedicated thread when her 50th came around. She emailed this morning to (very kindly and gently) point out the error of my ways, so I sincerely apologise for my bad memory and wish to extend warmest birthday greetings, albeit belatedly, to Margaret USA…
Happy birthday, Margaret, USA – and many happy returns!
Thank you! My 50th was last year. I sent Madame Editor a picture of St. Anthony. I was born on his feast day (June 13th is the feast of St. Aquilina too) so I can’t forget them!
I am suspicious of any modern leaflet, pamphlet, book, website etc related to the Rosary because of these mysteries. I wouldn’t ever say them.
Fr Albert is my superior and is a great priest. He has produced many videos and they would be great for future blog articles.
That is a very good point – a lot of seemingly harmless (or even useful) literature often turns out to be erroneous or even harmful in various ways. It always pays to have a good look at it, especially before passing it to children.
I was very impressed by Fr Alberts video, he comes across very well. You mention other videos he has done – are they all connected with Fatima.org, or what other sources are there (id like to see them).
Presumably they all available on you-tube?
Yes, they are all available on YouTube.
Thanks! I will be sure to check out some more of them.
A priest on Relevant Radio commented, however, that the Luminous Mysteries speak to, and pray about, the chief unbeliefs of the world around us now: when marriage is under assault, we have the Mystery of the Wedding at Cana; when the Real Presence is under assault, we have the Mystery of the Giving of the Eucharist; when the secular world is happy to regard Christ as a nice man, we have the Mystery of the Transfiguration, and so on (the other two are the Proclamation of the Gospel and the Lord’s baptism in the Jordan). Yes, I don’t like the instant acceptance of everything that comes along, but on Thursdays we can always pray the Rosary twice. There can’t be too much prayer!
Has that priest you mention ever comments on any of the other mysteries?
I ask because it never ceases to amaze me when I see advertisements for various programmes/lectures about the Luminous Mysteries, and usually being delivered by priests who have not, as far as I know, ever given a talk or any exhortation about the traditional rosary or any set of mysteries therein.
So, I’m interested to know if the priest you mention falls into the category of priests who have taken a sudden interest in these Luminous Mysteries, where there was no interest in the rosary before, or whether he is a rosary devotee…
What a very good question, I don’t know because I only caught a bit of his telephone interview twice repeated over a couple of months. I don’t even know his name.
Just wanted to point out, regarding these Luminous Mysteries, that Lucifer is the “angel of light.”
Sorry, but I find that remark to be, at best, idiotic, and at worst, blasphemous. Do you not know that St. John teaches that Christ is the light come into the world? Get a life! Still better, start reading the Scriptures.
Use of the term “ili umi” has other meanings. Carlos Slim Helou for example, Helou is ilu. It doesn’t mean “to enlighten”. It refers to Strong’s word #3817, an Arabian. The Freemasons are Arabian, as you can see in their symbols.
If you are suggesting that the Vatican chose the adjective “Luminous” for these mysteries because of some sinister Arabian/Freemasonic meaning – they’re really not that knowledgeable, take it from me.
St Paul teaches in 2 Corinthians that Satan disguises himself as “an angel of light” so RCA Victor is hardly idiotic to point that out and clearly he has a very good grasp of the Scriptures. If Pope John Pau lI hadn’t wanted such a connection to be made he should have considered carefully what name he would give to his brand new mysteries or, better still, left the rosary alone.
Even Paul VI, while apparently thinking nothing of foisting a new Mass on us, told off Archbishop Bugnini for suggesting the new mysteries, saying that if we changed the rosary the faithful would think we had changed the faith.
Thank you for your intervention. Perhaps I did not elaborate enough on my point about Lucifer:
1. We know that the Church has been extensively and thoroughly infiltrated by the agents of Satan – predominantly Freemasons and Communists – for over 100 years now.
2. One of the subversive tricks used by these infiltrators, who have been dubbed “Modernists” (a term I find most inadequate in portraying their perfidy), is to redefine Catholic language, putting words in plain view which mean certain things to the faithful, and even to unsuspecting clergy, but which mean things entirely different to the infiltrators. Words like “aggiornamento,” ecumenism,” “reform,” “evangelization,” etc. They have even redefined “Eucharist” to mean a communal meal instead of a liturgical sacrifice, and I’m sure our bloggers could come up with quite a lengthy list of redefined Catholic terms.
3. If you peruse JPII’s document (Rosarium Virginis Mariae) “recommending” the “luminous” mysteries to the Church, you will find it full of strange justifications for the use of this new term to describe some of the major events in Our Lord’s ministry…not to mention the stark and irrational contradiction between his lengthy affirmation of the tradition and beauty of the Rosary, and this:
“Consequently, for the Rosary to become more fully a “compendium of the Gospel”, it is fitting to add, following reflection on the Incarnation and the hidden life of Christ (the joyful mysteries) and before focusing on the sufferings of his Passion (the sorrowful mysteries) and the triumph of his Resurrection (the glorious mysteries), a meditation on certain particularly significant moments in his public ministry (the mysteries of light). This addition of these new mysteries, without prejudice to any essential aspect of the prayer’s traditional format, is meant to give it fresh life and to enkindle renewed interest in the Rosary’s place within Christian spirituality as a true doorway to the depths of the Heart of Christ, ocean of joy and of light, of suffering and of glory.” [Why did the Rosary need “fresh life”? And how did disfiguring Our Lady’s mystical dowry, as it were, provide it with fresh life? And when did the purpose of the Rosary become to serve as a “compendium of the Gospel”?]
There are numerous other strange statements in this document, such as
“The first of the “signs” worked by Jesus – the changing of water into wine at the marriage in Cana – clearly presents Mary in the guise of a teacher, as she urges the servants to do what Jesus commands.” [i.e. misinterpreting Mary’s role as “teacher” rather than intercessor]
“The Rosary mystically transports us to Mary’s side as she is busy watching over the human growth of Christ in the home of Nazareth. This enables her to train us and to mold us with the same care, until Christ is “fully formed” in us (cf. Gal 4:19). This role of Mary, totally grounded in that of Christ and radically subordinated to it, “in no way obscures or diminishes the unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power”.(20) This is the luminous principle expressed by the Second Vatican Council which I have so powerfully experienced in my own life and have made the basis of my episcopal motto: Totus Tuus.” [How, one wonders, is this principle “luminous”?]
4. Given the track record of Modernist verbal sleights of hand, and putting their subversion in plain sight of the unsuspecting, I am suspicious about the appearance of the term “luminous.” Did JPII himself come up with this term? Did someone else in the Curia write this document, leaving room for first person insertions from the Pope?
At any rate, I find the rationale for JPII’s proposal entirely weak, even preposterous, and his choice of word for his “new” “mysteries” extremely unfortunate.
What a great video that is – thanks to Fr Albert.
I think a lot of people think “why make a big deal of it?” when it comes to the new mysteries, but that video gets right to the heart of it in a very informative way.
It is also well balanced, in that he says there is ultimately nothing wrong with meditating on these mysteries privately, but – crucially – its not the Rosary.
What I also resent about the new mysteries is that I like the pattern the 3 authentic sets of mysteries create across a week, and a needless fourth set upsets that.
I do not pray the new mysteries and see no need to. As Fr Albert says, only what Our Lady gave us is what is essential.
Tbh, given where much of the Church is now, I am surprised we have not had the “ecumencial mysteries” inflicted upon us yet (jings, I hope Francis is not reading this!).
Does this offense to the Blessed Virgin surprise you? They do not hesitate before any means to try to reduce her position in the eyes of the faithful!
A significant detail, I noticed that a few decades ago in Lourdes as well as in the Vatican Gardens, the halo worn by the Blessed Virgin was removed and I found it exposed in a small museum behind the basilica in Lourdes…
That’s a disgrace. Instead of piling on as much evidence of Catholic devotion to Our Lady as possible, they are – literally – removing it. Shocking but not particularly surprising.
I don’t pray the “Luminous” Mystery, I am not obliged to. Fr Albert is clear in the video on what he said about the Rosary.
I remember reading an article about there being 150 Hail Mary’s contained within the fifteen decades of the Rosary – that number corresponds with the 150 Psalms found in the bible.
Thank you for that link to that excellent article. That, together with the video of Father Albert, makes it very easy to understand why these new mysteries of light are a very bad idea. I’ve never said them, and don’t even know what they are, I’ve just put a “not interested” note in my head for all things “new” in the Church, LOL!
Technically, the Rosary has 153 Ave Marias in it if one prays all 15 Mysteries plus the 3 Ave Marias at the beginning.
And if you read the Gospel of St. John, after the Resurrection St. Peter caught 153 fish.
And Protestants claim the Rosary isn’t in the Bible…
I’ve always understood that the Rosary itself is what Our Lady revealed to St Dominic, and the rest was added, the Our Father and 3 Hail Marys at the start. Then the Hail Holy Queen was added on. This came back to me recently when I read a question and answer somewhere and the question was about not always having time to pray the entire rosary. The priest answering said that she could just say the actual Rosary – not the add ons, if that helped.
It seems we discussed the “luminous” mysteries back in 2014. I posted 2 articles about them back then, one by Chris. Ferrara and the other from Christian Order.
“Here is an article by always compelling Christopher Ferrara on the Luminous Mysteries:
and a bit of introductory commentary from Christian Order on this same article”:
(both links still work…and even my memory still works….)
What I found interesting in that Christian Order editorial and generally when reading about the Luminous Mysteries is the number of people who say they don’t know them, have never heard them and don’t want to know them. That’s quite a strange phenomenon, probably evidence of “novelty-fatigue”- people fed up with the constant “new” stuff being foisted on us.
Yes, this reminds me of what happens in the Novus Ordo Communion line. NO priests constantly urge their flocks to receive both the body and blood, yet less than half do so. It seems the sensus fidelium is still alive in many, despite almost 2 generations of novelty, psychobabble, and other forms of gibberish.
There are so many of these doubtful and confusing post-conciliar devotions now, I steer clear of all of them. Not only the ‘Luminous Mysteries’ but also the ‘Via Lucis’ (a ‘luminous’ version of the Stations of the Cross, with post-resurrection ‘stations’), the ‘Divine Mercy devotion’, the ‘Divine Will’ devotion etc etc. All of them seem to have gained Church approval or are in the process of gaining approval, but even so . . .
– Hold fast to that which is good! –
I completely agree – that’s my own position, steer clear. If it’s new, just keep it. I’m not interested!
Reblogged this on Dans le Sacré-Cœur.
Epouse de SACRÉ-COEUR
Thank you for reblogging this thread!
I paid a quick visit to your site just now but will pay a more careful visit later.
Comments are closed.