Even if adding the luminous mysteries to the Rosary was a bad idea, and I think it was, they involve events from Our Lord's life from the Gospels.  I see no way that meditating on events from Christ's life could ever be evil.  

Quote from: Jack in the Box

Its purpose is malevolent, and apparently Pope John Paul II the author of the Luminous Mysteries is NOT IN HEAVEN. A photograph (on the back-cover of a Chiesa Viva book written of him) shows him in flame.

Nifty.  I wanna see.  Where do I see it at?

Right here:




"JPII in the flames of Hell" at a ceremony
near his birthplace in Poland: a photographer
claims to have taken a picture showing
JPII burning in the flames of Hell; speculations
on yet another "apparition" abound.






As for the Luminous Mysteries, it is irresponsible for us go promote the curious
and unsubstantiated opinion that these mysteries are "evil" or "malevolent." That
makes no sense, honestly.

We do have the fact that no indulgences are attached to these 5 new mysteries.
They are biblical events, to be sure, and they are mysterious in that we cannot
know the full significance of their meaning in this life. So they are meet topics
for contemplation. But when used for mysteries for meditation in the Rosary, they
have no indulgence as mysteries, because no Pope has given them any
indulgence. JPII never gave any indulgences for any prayers. He gave one really
big indulgence around the year 2000 for going to confession and meeting certain
criteria, but that was not for any specific prayer, such as the Rosary.

Visionaries have lots of different visions of many different things, but that is not
what we base our faith on. Visions should always be tested against the dogmas
of the Catholic Faith. The Rosary of 15 decades is not a dogma. But it is the most
highly indulgenced sacramental in the Church outside of Mass.

Even if adding the luminous mysteries to the Rosary was a bad idea, and I think it was, they involve events from Our Lord's life from the Gospels.  I see no way that meditating on events from Christ's life could ever be evil.  

Precisely.

Right here:


"JPII in the flames of Hell" at a ceremony
near his birthplace in Poland: a photographer
claims to have taken a picture showing
JPII burning in the flames of Hell; speculations
on yet another "apparition" abound.

Noone may say that JPII is iin the flames of Hell. Not even traditio. This is an evil thing. The most we can say is that he may be in Purgatory and we must therefore pray for him.

As for the image of JPII - can't see the facial features! It could be anybody or on the other hand photo could be fraudulent.

Even if adding the luminous mysteries to the Rosary was a bad idea, and I think it was, they involve events from Our Lord's life from the Gospels.  I see no way that meditating on events from Christ's life could ever be evil.  

Truth admixed with lies is a mark of Satan, not God.

Meditate on the events, but not as part of the Most Holy Rosary—not as part of Wojtyla's outrageous pride in claiming to "to bring out fully the Christological depth of the Rosary" (Apostolic Letter Rosarium Virginis Mariae §19). He claimed to perfect the imperfect Rosary that the Blessed Mother gave us. So typical of his forebears the rabbis, what a demon he was!

Of all the evil he wrought, that single proud claim outraged me more than any other act of his.

It isn't anyone.  It is just flame.  I split second before and a split second after this photograph was taken it looked completely different.  

You are correct. Some photographer snapped a photo, and it's just a photo. It is
not even a private revelation. It's like a reported image of the Virgin Mary in a
reflection of the sun in a dirty window, or a "tempest in a teapot."

In the collected works of Sor Juana De la Cruz there are meditations of the fifteen decades of the rosary and they do not correspond to the fifteen decades as we have them today.  

Why don't you post a copy of her "meditations," or are you just repeating a
meaningless sentence you have read somewhere without knowing what you're
talking about? Do you have her "collected works?" Do you know someone else
who has the book? All the references I see attest that Sor Juana de la Cruz did
not write on the subject of the Rosary in general, but rather on many other topics.
Therefore, she was not a Rosary scholar, or one given to much commentary on
the practice of the Rosary prayers. She was a writer of plays, poetry and prose.
Her purpose was not to be an historian or to docuмent facts of history. She wrote
to entertain her readers. As such, proposing some manner of Rosary meditations
that were NOT in common practice would be more likely her intention.

Some see her as a feminist who was ahead of her time. Her life and literary works
are held up as an example of how women were unjustly suppressed in previous
centuries, and therefore if she had written about Rosary meditations that were of
her own imagination, that would be hailed by feminists as a positive attribute,
since anything that talented women in those days did that was NOT traditional is
made to seem like it was a mark of "genius" or "creativity."

Quote from: Sigismund

Even if adding the luminous mysteries to the Rosary was a bad idea, and I think it was, they involve events from Our Lord's life from the Gospels.  I see no way that meditating on events from Christ's life could ever be evil.  

Truth admixed with lies is a mark of Satan, not God.

Meditate on the events, but not as part of the Most Holy Rosary—not as part of Wojtyla's outrageous pride in claiming to "to bring out fully the Christological depth of the Rosary" (Apostolic Letter Rosarium Virginis Mariae §19). He claimed to perfect the imperfect Rosary that the Blessed Mother gave us. So typical of his forebears the rabbis, what a demon he was!

Of all the evil he wrought, that single proud claim outraged me more than any other act of his.

The list of the novelties of JPII is extremely long.
One cannot argue that the man was not intelligent.
But sometimes intelligence can be a great temptation to vice.
For example, how did Our Lord give us the Lord's Prayer, the Pater Noster?

Pater Noster, qui es in coeli, sanctificetur nomen tuum...
Panem nostrum quotidianum, da nobis hodie, ...
...sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris.
Et ne nos inducas in tentationem, sed libera nos a malo.

Then along comes JPII, saying that we should not pray "And lead us not
into temptation," because "God does not lead us into temptation."

Now, someone in the future 100 years from now, researching our age, might
come across that quip, and say that since the Pope is the supreme authority in
the Church, there is no way that the Our Father could have had "And lead us not
into temptation" in it, because here is the Pope saying that should not be how we
pray; and therefore, even though a lot of extant prayer books have those words
in them, certainly Catholics would not have been DOING something that the Pope
had so clearly denounced in his "infallible" teaching.

So then, if anyone has followed his advice and has changed the Our Father to
have omitted "And lead us not into temptation," they are no longer praying the
Our Father as given to us by Our Lord. If they would like the indulgence given
by the prayer, they won't get it, because they have not said the prayer. If they
are praying this way in the Rosary, they won't get the Rosary indulgence
either, because they are not praying the Our Father in the Rosary, and therefore
it's not the Rosary anymore. JPII did not provide any new indulgences for his
warped version of the Rosary, or for his remodeled Pater Noster. In fact,
he didn't provide any indulgences for anything. Maybe he thought that indulgences
were no longer of any importance.

Now, that could hardly be the case for anyone in Purgatory. There can be no
reasonable doubt that EVERYONE in Purgatory is a great advocate of the
importance of indulgences! Just like everyone who is in the process of suffering
shipwreck is a great advocate of the importance of lifesaving efforts, or everyone
inside a crashing airplane is a great advocate of Star Wars technology of getting
"beamed up." But it is quite likely the case for everyone in hell. Why would
someone in hell think that indulgences are of any importance?

A visionary, well known to the writer of this posting, once during an adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, saw the altar turning "funeral drapped"; the monstrance turning from "gold to pewter"; and all the candles turning "black". This dreaful vision occured during an instant to just the visionary who was in the middle of a dozen or so of worshippers. The vision only occured to one person, because all others in the chapel did not appeared disturbed.

This visionary had no idea of what had happened. He was at mid-point of a prayer of a set of the twenty decades of the Rosary at the instant that the vision occured. He wrote a testimonial to the editor of the San Francisco Chronicle, but did not tell any-one else.

This visionary went to Tridentine Mass the following Sunday, upon a coincidental invitation to a chapel belonging to the SSPX. During the Sermons, the priest spoke at lenght about the fifteen decades of the Most Holy Rosary of the Blessed Virgin Mary. After Mass, during a series of Q&A offered by the visiting priest, the "visionary" asked why the homelist had not talked about the Luminous Mystery. The answer was that the Luminous Mysteries are a novelty rejected by the Society.

After the Q&A, a parishoner of the chapel came to explain that the Luminous Mysteries were an invention of Pope John Paul II, while the original Fifteen Mysteries were given to Saint Dominic by the Blessed Virgin Mary. This said parishoner repeating "Mary" several times. This fact was unknown to the visionary at that time.

Several weeks later, the visionary realized that the hellish vision that occured during the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament was due to having recited the Luminous Mysteries, because the vision occured exactly at the moment the prayer ended. It was a "three fold prophecy" since three persons were part of it:
1. the "visionary" who was unaware of what had caused the vision at that time.
2. the priest (of the SSPX) who talked about the original fifteen Mysteries of the  Rosary.
3. the parishoner who explained in assertive terms that the Luminous Mysteries did not come from "Mary".

It is evident that the Luminous Mystery are a debasement of the Rosary, as perhaps a "fourth leg added on a three legs stool". Its purpose is malevolent, and apparently Pope John Paul II the author of the Luminous Mysteries is NOT IN HEAVEN. A photograph (on the back-cover of a Chiesa Viva book written of him) shows him in flame. The late Pope is deformed as he was during his last days on earth.

who are all thes "known vissionaries"??? names and dates, links please..... :reading: :reporter:

True, guess its one of those things we dont get to know