Talk:The Secret of the Rosary

Text needs clarifacation

This text was inserted by an editor into the article, but it contradicts itself.

There are five Methods of Praying the Rosary that St. Louis-Marie Montfort provided in the last chapter of Secret of the Rosary. Only the first two appear in the book published by itself, although all five are given in the book God Alone, as well as on a web page of montfort.org.

It says there are five methods in the last chapter of Secret of the Rosary, but then it says only the first two methods appear in the book. So do 5 or 2 methods appear in the book? Dgf32 (talk) 22:18, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

No worries, I fixed it. Her main point was correct, it just needed better presentation. Usually she has interesting information, just needs someone to make it compatible with Wikepedia - which I see you are doing Dgf32. Thank you for that. History2007 (talk) 03:08, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about my clumsy writing. I meant that when the book is published not within all other works of St. Louis-Marie (God Alone is a compilation of all of his books), there is only two methods provided (because the editors thought it would make the book too thick I guess).

Also, I use the name of St. Bernadette but I am a 'he' not she. Maria Bernada (talk) 12:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I thought you were called Maria. Do you remember a user called ChristeAudinos? He also liked this book and Father faber's translation. Was that you? And I started a page God Alone if you want to see that or add to it. Cheers. History2007 (talk) 13:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

YesMaria Bernada (talk) 20:41, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

"In this book St. Louis discusses two different methods of praying the rosary, while three additional methods (i.e. five altogether) are listed in the book God Alone, based on his collected writings" I think St. Louis probably put all five as part of the Secret of the Rosary but the editors left it out.--Maria Bernada (talk) 20:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you are probably right and I changed it a little. But Wikepedia does not work based on what either of us think (because it would be a guess by us) so we can not say that, unless we have a specific and solid reference. And I do not have one. So we should probably leave it as such, unless you have a good reference that says that. History2007 (talk) 21:11, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Literal translation of paragraph 154. (used auto-translator)

"In order to facilitate the exercise of the Holy Rosary, here are several ways to recite the holy Rosary, with the meditation of the joyful, sorrowful and glorious mysteries of Jesus and Mary. You stop at that which is most to your liking: you can train yourself another particular method, as several saintly persons have done."

Common translation:

154. To make the recitation of the Rosary easier for you, here are several methods which will help you to say it in a good and holy way, with the meditation on the joyful, sorrowful and glorious mysteries of Jesus and Mary. Choose whichever method pleases you and helps you the most: or you can make up one for yourself, as several holy people have done.

He says "several" which couldn't mean just two methods.

Original French: http://www.montfort.org/French/Oeuvres/SAR.htm

[154] Afin de vous faciliter l'exercice du saint Rosaire, voici plusieurs[several, many] méthodes pour le réciter saintement, avec la méditation des mystères joyeux, douloureux et glorieux de Jésus et de Marie. Vous vous arrêterez à celle qui sera le plus à votre goût: vous pourrez vous en former vous-même une autre méthode particulière, comme plusieurs saints personnages ont fait. --Maria Bernada (talk) 13:34, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I think you are probably right, and I am not sure why it is a big deal as to which book it is in. If you want to change it, I will not object, as long as the text is clear, but other people may. As long as we mention the 5 methods, that is what matters.

You do have a pretty good page started on the Methods of Praying the Rosary, and all the energy discussing this minor issue should probaby go into getting that important into better shape and linked from various places, because that is the page that will provide real benefit because it has "good information in it. History2007 (talk) 14:44, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

References

Misunderstanding regarding Imprimatur

I've removed the claim that the imprimatur given to this publication means that "the book has been approved by the Catholic Church." No such approval is conveyed. An Imprimatur added to the title page of a book simply means that the book has not made any claims counter to the teachings of the Catholic Church. It is not an "approval" of the book, and claiming such approval suggests that the contents of the book are now somehow part of Catholic doctrine and/or now part of some official canon. It is not.Malke 2010 (talk) 15:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)