.
Before the revolution of Vat.II there was a bit more cool-headedness in the higher clergy, to the effect that they were not afraid to say what Catholic Tradition would dictate regarding key topics of doctrine.
When it came to the "divine mercy devotions," the point is, there was a danger to the Faithful inasmuch as these "devotions" could obfuscate the pernicious character of the deadly sin of presumption. Since the shepherds of the Church, the watchmen on the wall, were supposed to warn everyone when danger was nigh, it would be proper for them to denounce the "divine mercy devotions" as a DANGER to the Faith of Catholics, since by its incessant repetition of "...for the sake of His sorrowful passion, have mercy on us and on the whole world," it could lead the devotee to presume that simply by repeating this prayer that a sort of "vending machine" product (of God's mercy) could be obtained.
There is nothing wrong with begging God for His mercy.
But there is a difference for example, in the Eastern tradition and the West, whereby the multitude in the St. Chrysostom rites that say "Lord have mercy" about 40 times 40 times, is mitigated in the West, with a beautiful parlay of 3 x 3, reminiscent of the Blessed Trinity. Please note, the Wreckovationists post Vat.II abhorred this marvelous, wondrous Tradition (the Latin Kyrie) so much they attacked it by deleting the third rep, leaving us with two (instead of three).
So you see, it's not a question of asking God too many times for mercy, or of "useless repetition," rather, it's a question of passing down the Tradition we have received. That is, ask not whether the number of times you pray to God for mercy is appropriate; ask whether your prayer is faithful to the Sacred Tradition of your forefathers.
What the Vat.II revolution gave us is PROVABLE by historical fact, that the revolutionaries don't care WHAT you do, so long as it's not what was done before the revolution................
ANYTHING BUT faithfulness to Tradition.
.