The issue with the “Luminous Mysteries” is the attempt to shoehorn them into the Dominican Rosary/Our Lady’s Psalter as that destroys its intrinsic character (150 Hail Marys). The other problem is the haughty justification for bringing about its existence Church-wide in the first place.
I will start with the latter and I am adapting what
I already wrote elsewhere on the subject (I apologize for typos and bad grammar).
John Paul II wrote:
This is not to say, however, that the method cannot be improved. Such is the intent of the addition of the new series of mysteria lucis to the overall cycle of mysteries and of the few suggestions which I am proposing in this Letter regarding its manner of recitation.
...
I believe, however, that to bring out fully the Christological depth of the Rosary it would be suitable to make an addition to the traditional pattern which, while left to the freedom of individuals and communities, could broaden it to include the mysteries of Christ's public ministry between his Baptism and his Passion...
Consequently, for the Rosary to become more fully a “compendium of the Gospel,” it is fitting to add... 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.
https://www.vatican.va/content/john-pau ... ariae.html
John Paul II is effectively stating that there can be an improvement to the intrinsic structure of a prayer that is 800 years old, given to us by Our Lady (if you choose to believe that it was given to St. Dominic or at least its current structure was given to him), and reconfirmed by Our Lady numerous times. First to Blessed Alan de la Roche with the 15 promises (reflecting the 15 mysteries) and Our Lady of Fatima who explicitly confirmed the 15 mysteries in Her messages. John Paul II further pushes this claim by stating his new mysteries would make the Rosary more fully a “compendium” of the Gospel.
Herein lies the overzealous and misguided assumption about the traditional Holy Rosary by John Paul II: That its application and usage should necessarily result in an evolution where additional meditations on the life of Christ must be added. This conviction is so strong that it literally alters the foundational structure of a prayer that has persisted 800 years, dares to claim improvement upon what Our Lady herself has confirmed, and potentially harms the 15 promises if one prays the Luminous mysteries solely on Thursdays. Why did not any Pope or true saint ever consider such improvements until the 21st century? Why did Our Lady not do this Herself?
The answer to these questions is simple; the Rosary reflects the Psalter and that it simply does not need to have more “Christological depth.” Or in other words, it need not to be an exhaustive demonstration of the life of Christ, and certainly if not exhaustive, it does not need to be expanded to destroy its traditional structure. This is further reinforced by the fact that heaven itself confirmed the structure of the prayer. Who dares think they can come along and “improve” a prayer from Our Lady that has persisted in the same structure for centuries?
The traditional Rosary is sufficient. Not every single prayer, devotion, and liturgy needs to be filled up with options so that the faithful, who are apparently so bored with everything, can be reinvigorated.
If there is a disinterest in the Rosary, then why take aim at the Rosary itself? This implies that the Rosary is at fault, unable to gain interest of those in the present time. It certainly was sufficient for various times periods over 800 years. Change for the sake of disinterest will yield endless change and novelty, instead of focusing on praying and doing penance for the conversion of souls. Novelty begets novelty, and the accumulation of novelty weakens the faith.
Furthermore, using the logic of expansion for the sake of “Christological depth,” the Rosary might as well have 350 Hail Marys, or 35 individual mysteries, one 5-decade Rosary for each day of the week. It can be expanded to cover even more events in the Gospel because more is better. Never mind the novelty. Never mind destroying the traditional prayer structure that goes back to Old Testament times from inspired scripture. Never mind that only the traditional 15 mysteries have the promises attached to them. None of that matters because we sit atop history and can judge what things need to be improved, even if it was confirmed to us by the Mother of God Herself.
Rosary’s Structure
The Psalter is comprised of 150 prayers as seen in the book of Psalms. Traditionally the 150 Psalms were prayed by priests and other religious, and to a certain extent they still do this today. The laity developed their own various forms of a Psalter, such as praying 150 Our Fathers. The traditional Rosary, or Our Lady’s Psalter, is thus logically comprised of 150 Hail Marys which in turn are divided into three parts: the Joyful mysteries, the Sorrowful mysteries, and the Glorious mysteries.
Later in the 15th century, Blessed Alan de la Roche had a vision of Our lady who gave 15 promises to those to recite Her Rosary. This is the same Rosary that confirmed to St. Dominic that is comprised of 150 Halil Harys. The 15 promises reflect the 15 mysteries. Once again, heaven itself confirms the Psalter form of the Rosary and attached special graces to those who devoutly recite it.
Finally at Fatima Our Lady gave a further promise of special grace in addition to confirming the Rosary as 15 decades:
“I promise to assist at the hour of death with all the graces necessary for salvation, all those who on the First Saturdays of five consecutive months, confess, receive Holy Communion, and keep me company for fifteen minutes, meditating on the fifteen mysteries of the Rosary.”
This short exposition is to drive home a particular point that the traditional Rosary must have a Psalter structure to be referred to as “The Rosary” (the Dominican Rosary). Other types of Rosaries exist, but when we speak of *the* Rosary we are referring to the prayer that Our Lady Herself gave us that persisted for 800 years in its Psalter form. Otherwise, it cannot be called Our Lady’s Psalter or “The Rosary” in our present context.
Hence, the Luminous Mysteries by themselves are not a part of Our Lady’s Psalter and they do not carry with them special promises.
The 20-decade cycle also disrupts the weekly flow of the traditional Rosary where the mysteries are said chronologically starting on Monday and then repeat (Joyful, Sorrowful, and then Glorious). The exception would be Sunday. This is because Sunday is the New Day or Eighth Day, and it usually receives the Glorious mysteries because it is the day Our Lord was Resurrected. Although the Sunday mysteries can change depending on the liturgical season.
Rcastle wrote: While at the same time I also recognize the Church is not backwards looking but builds on what it has received on the past to continue to nurture the faithful in the present.
The Church as in the hierarchy or organic development from the Church as a whole? What has been handed down and developed should not violate continuity. 800 years of the Dominican Rosary/Mary’s Psalter being 150 Hail Marys, representing Biblical prayer the Psalms, is interrupted by the “Luminous Mysteries.”
However:
On can pray the “Luminous Mysteries” on their own, apart from the Rosary, as to not interrupt its intrinsic structure.
Also, since other types of Rosaries exist, if one wants to take the 15 mysteries and tack on 5 more, then it should be called something else. It should not be conflated with “the Rosary” (because the context is the Dominican Rosary) as it loses its intrinsic Psalm-structure, which was handed down through centuries and confirmed by heaven itself.
Riverboat wrote: The fact that Pope John Paul II proposed them lent considerable heft, and he allowed plenty of leeway as for acceptance.
RCastle wrote: The fact they address current issues in the Church seems to speak well for them while two canonized Saints using them in prayer also seems to speak well for them.
This is not really a good reason. Modern canonized “saints” can do or say things that are simply outrageous against the faith. E.g. JPII’s Assisi meetings (helped people break the 1st commandment) or how he allowed pagan rituals to be performed on himself. No one here is going to help people to start breaking commandments or invite American Indians over to do rituals with feathers. Or in other words, just because someone who received a modern canonization did it doesn't mean its free from error, imprudence, or impiety.