Era Might Posted May 28, 2006 Posted May 28, 2006 (edited) [quote name='MichaelFilo' post='991674' date='May 27 2006, 10:01 PM'] And if you should choose to not believe that Mary had the final say so in the mysteries of an ancient prayer tradition (that is the rosary before Mary revealed Her will for them to be to respective part sof the New Testament), then one must admit that the tradition organically grew to what it is today, it was not the result of papal decisions. [/quote] From the old Catholic Encyclopedia: [quote]When we find such an exercise recommended to a little group of anchorites in a corner of England, twenty years before any Dominican foundation was made in this country, it seems difficult to resist the conclusion that the custom of reciting fifty or a hundred and fifty Aves had grown familiar, independently of, and earlier than, the preaching of St. Dominic. On the other hand, [b]the practice of meditating on certain definite mysteries, which has been rightly described as the very essence of the Rosary devotion, seems to have only arisen long after the date of St. Dominic's death[/b]. It is difficult to prove a negative, but Father T. Esser, O.P., has shown (in the periodical "Der Katholik", of Mainz, Oct., Nov., Dec., 1897) that the introduction of this meditation during the recitation of the Aves was rightly attributed to a certain Carthusian, Dominic the Prussian. [b]It is in any case certain that at the close of the fifteenth century the utmost possible variety of methods of meditating prevailed, and that the fifteen mysteries now generally accepted were not uniformly adhered to even by the Dominicans themselves[/b]. [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13184b.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13184b.htm[/url][/quote] The Luminous mysteries are not the first time a Pope has personally added something to a popular prayer. The Hail Mary itself was changed. Again, from the old Catholic Encyclopedia: [quote][b]As regards the addition of the word "Jesus," or, as it usually ran in the fifteenth century, "Jesus Chrustus, Amen", it is commonly said that this was due to the initiative of Pope Urban IV (1261) and to the confirmation and indulgence of John XXII[/b]. The evidence does not seem sufficiently clear to warrant positive statement on the point. Still, there, can be no doubt that this was the widespread belief of the later Middle Ages. A popular German religious manual of the fifteenth century ("Der Selen Troïst", 1474) even divides the Hail Mary into four portions, and declares that the first part was composed by the Angel Gabriel, the second by St. Elizabeth, [b]the third, consisting only of the Sacred Name, Jesus Christus, by the popes, and the last, i.e. the word Amen, by the Church[/b]. [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07110b.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07110b.htm[/url][/quote] I don't think there's any problem if you prefer to pray the previous 15. Eastern Catholics, after all, do not add the word "Filioque" in the creed as we do in the West. But the addition of the Luminous mysteries is not anything unique in the history of the Church. The mere fact that they came from a Pope should suffice for our respect for the new practice. Edited February 5, 2007 by Era Might
cmotherofpirl Posted May 28, 2006 Posted May 28, 2006 [quote name='MichaelFilo' post='991674' date='May 27 2006, 10:01 PM'] I meant I am repulsed because the additions was inorganic. No one sat around a table and decided to add the mysteries of the rosary. It was given to St. Dominic. And if you should choose to not believe that Mary had the final say so in the mysteries of an ancient prayer tradition (that is the rosary before Mary revealed Her will for them to be to respective part sof the New Testament), then one must admit that the tradition organically grew to what it is today, it was not the result of papal decisions. So, I say repulsed because it was neither of Heavenly origin nor of organic growth, it is an abrupt addition, and like all additions made on the spot, it's something to be careful of. I would wonder if we could make 5 more mysteries for the 5 big miracles done by Christ... or maybe 5 on five occasions of Christ showing exemplary virtue... etc. I'm not sure if you realize the trend, but while these may lead to wonderful moments of prayer, they certainly are not the original 15 which are centered around the highlights of Christ's life. They reflect on the Church calander, the Incarnation and Birth (Christmas), the Paschal Sacrafice (Holy week), and the Ressurection (Easter to Pentecost). The Luminous mysteries hold no real position on the calander. The 15 decades reflect on the 150 psalms.. it's all so fitting, adding or removing throws it off. So I ought to be repulsed by that which throws off the beauty that is found in the perfect nature of the rosary on reflecting the life of Christ. God bless, Mikey [/quote] Remember what I said about pious tradition? Popular piety linked St Dominic with the rosary, but we have only been saying the "Hail Mary" in its present form for less than 500 years and the offical version of it only came out with the Council of Trent. Many different prayers can be said on a group of beads, it is a meditative device, not something set in stone. Do you add the words from Fatima in, or say the Salve Regina, do you add on the words of divine mercy? Those are additions. Try not to be "repulsed" by the living breathing development of church practices and popular devotions.
MC IMaGiNaZUN Posted May 28, 2006 Posted May 28, 2006 Pope John Paul instituted the new mysterious to reinvigorate the devotion in the church. Heck for people like me who were only really into their faith since then, it is amazing. But yeah, i have no problem with people who choose not to. Another bit of information, some other bishops and founders of religious congregations found additional sets of mysteries. some of these include: The Baptism of Christ The Temptation of Christ in the Dessert The Miracle at Cana The Proclamation of the Gospel The Miracles of Healing The Transfiguration of Christ The Procession of Christ into Jerusalem The Last Supper One bishop also formulated the Immaculate Mysteries to go with various Marian solemneties. The Immaculate Conception of Mary The Nativity of Mary The Presentation of Mary The Betrothal of Mary to Joseph The Perpetual Virginity of Mary But yeah, just thought i would throw those out there for you. SHALOM
goldenchild17 Posted May 29, 2006 Posted May 29, 2006 I must just be superstitious : but I never warmed up to the fact that Mary asked us to pray at least 1/3 of the rosary every day, and 1/3 of 20(mysteries) is 6.66. Anyways... Plus I've always thought of the rosary as a kind of parallel to the Trinity(not as in praying to Mary as to a God). But instead that there are three persons in one God, and each person is fully God. All of this is full of mysteries. So to is(or WAS apparently...) the rosary three sets of mysteries in one rosary and yet even praying one set of mysteries is still to pray the rosary. Yeah. I definitely have other concerns about it too.
cmotherofpirl Posted May 29, 2006 Posted May 29, 2006 [quote name='goldenchild17' post='992219' date='May 29 2006, 12:47 AM'] I must just be superstitious : but I never warmed up to the fact that Mary asked us to pray at least 1/3 of the rosary every day, and 1/3 of 20(mysteries) is 6.66. Anyways... Plus I've always thought of the rosary as a kind of parallel to the Trinity(not as in praying to Mary as to a God). But instead that there are three persons in one God, and each person is fully God. All of this is full of mysteries. So to is(or WAS apparently...) the rosary three sets of mysteries in one rosary and yet even praying one set of mysteries is still to pray the rosary. Yeah. I definitely have other concerns about it too. [/quote] You can find parallels in just about anything if you try hard enough, but is that really a reason not to meditate of the life of Jesus using the Luminous Mysteries?
Guest JeffCR07 Posted May 29, 2006 Posted May 29, 2006 For those who argue that the Luminous mysteries are "repulsive" or mark a clear and definite break with Tradition, I have a serious question. Pope John Paul II offered them as being [i]optional[/i]. We can pray them if we want, but he did not force them on us. Moreover, this should be clear from the very existence of this post. Being able to ask the question means that it is a matter of personal choice. So here is my question. If the Luminous mysteries constitute an inorganic development, then what could possibly be an [i]organic[/i] development? It seems to me that this is the [i]most[/i] organic case possible: Pope or bishop suggests something, makes it optional, sees if people start doing it. If the people do it, it sticks, if they don't, it doesn't. It seems to me that slapping the label of "inorganic development" on anything that an extreme traditionalist doesn't like has become a common tactic, but one that is both hollow and totally without content. I'm open to talking about legitimate, organic development, but it seems like the extreme traditionalists just label anything they don't like as being "inorganic" and leave it at that. If a change comes from the people without the backing of the magisterium, it's inorganic, if a change comes from the magisterium and tries to get backing from the people, its inorganic, if the people and magisterium agree and change something, its both a revolution in the Church and inorganic. The fact of the matter is, for extreme traditionalists, "organic development" means nothing more than "change that happened in the past" and, as such, there simply can't be any change that is acceptable to them. If a set of mysteries to meditate on, offered by the Pope as something the laity can do if they want, does not constitute the first step of an organically developed change, then I simply don't know what could possibly constitute an organic development Your Brother In Christ, Jeff
homeschoolmom Posted May 29, 2006 Posted May 29, 2006 I have more trouble meditating on the glorious mysteries than I do the luminous ones...
indescribable Posted May 29, 2006 Posted May 29, 2006 all of my little rosary booklets don't include the newer luminous mysteries. any suggestions for a little prayer book that includes them?
goldenchild17 Posted May 29, 2006 Posted May 29, 2006 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='992222' date='May 28 2006, 10:51 PM'] You can find parallels in just about anything if you try hard enough, but is that really a reason not to meditate of the life of Jesus using the Luminous Mysteries? [/quote] Not particularly. I don't necessarily see anything wrong with the mysteries themselves(although the naming "Luminous" is a bit creepy to me). But as you probably know by now I don't accept anything Post Vatican II as coming from the true Church. While I don't see them as a definite evil, I just don't follow what comes from beyond Vatican II thus far. And I do like what I see as a helpful reminder of the Trinity. Whether it's forced upon it or not is not a concern to me. It reminds me of the Trinity, of God, and an addition to that just ruins it for me. Not that I think it would be bad to meditate on these parts of Christ's life, just I don't do it as a part of the rosary. [quote name='JeffCR07' post='992263' date='May 29 2006, 05:52 AM'] For those who argue that the Luminous mysteries are "repulsive" or mark a clear and definite break with Tradition, I have a serious question. Pope John Paul II offered them as being [i]optional[/i]. We can pray them if we want, but he did not force them on us. Moreover, this should be clear from the very existence of this post. Being able to ask the question means that it is a matter of personal choice. So here is my question. If the Luminous mysteries constitute an inorganic development, then what could possibly be an [i]organic[/i] development? It seems to me that this is the [i]most[/i] organic case possible: Pope or bishop suggests something, makes it optional, sees if people start doing it. If the people do it, it sticks, if they don't, it doesn't. It seems to me that slapping the label of "inorganic development" on anything that an extreme traditionalist doesn't like has become a common tactic, but one that is both hollow and totally without content. I'm open to talking about legitimate, organic development, but it seems like the extreme traditionalists just label anything they don't like as being "inorganic" and leave it at that. If a change comes from the people without the backing of the magisterium, it's inorganic, if a change comes from the magisterium and tries to get backing from the people, its inorganic, if the people and magisterium agree and change something, its both a revolution in the Church and inorganic. The fact of the matter is, for extreme traditionalists, "organic development" means nothing more than "change that happened in the past" and, as such, there simply can't be any change that is acceptable to them. If a set of mysteries to meditate on, offered by the Pope as something the laity can do if they want, does not constitute the first step of an organically developed change, then I simply don't know what could possibly constitute an organic development Your Brother In Christ, Jeff [/quote] I totally see what you're saying. Sometimes for some things I just see it as unnecessary. The question for me is not can they do this, but why would they do it? What's the point? Yes it is a matter of preference, I used to pray them for the first couple of weeks that they existed, then I decided not to. This was before I became traditionalist. I realize they are optional and just didn't feel they were a good thing at the time. As for organic development, I totally understand that things can and should develop and become better. I think, when things get back to normal in the Church(which I believe they will), that it would be good to do a few inconsequential things with the Tridentine Mass such as with the organization of the readings and whatnot. I'm not against development. I just don't currently see the Vatican as representing the Church so I don't see any reason to follow their lead in things.
Theoketos Posted May 30, 2006 Posted May 30, 2006 Um, to be replused by the light of Christ's Baptism, of the Wedding of Cana, Christ's Baptism, the proclaimation of the Kingdom, the
homeschoolmom Posted May 30, 2006 Posted May 30, 2006 [quote name='Theoketos' post='992747' date='May 30 2006, 07:02 AM'] Um, to be replused by the light of Christ's Baptism, of the Wedding of Cana, Christ's Baptism, the proclaimation of the Kingdom, the [/quote] Something grabbed and ate Theo in mid-sentence!!!
Jaime Posted May 30, 2006 Posted May 30, 2006 [quote name='homeschoolmom' post='992749' date='May 30 2006, 07:07 AM'] Something grabbed and ate Theo in mid-sentence!!! [/quote] *BUURRRRP* Sorry about that! I was really hungry and I was out of Cheerioats
cmotherofpirl Posted May 30, 2006 Posted May 30, 2006 go to the corner while we ready the stomach pump
Jaime Posted May 30, 2006 Posted May 30, 2006 [quote name='Sojourner' post='992773' date='May 30 2006, 08:19 AM'] I liked Theo [/quote] I can see why He was very tasty
Recommended Posts