Welcome to Pinoy Defensor Fidei – Catholic Christian Brotherhood

Pinoy Defensor Fidei – Catholic Christian Brotherhood

Posts Tagged ‘Catholic

Asians Are Politically Conservatives but they just dont know it.

leave a comment »

If people check the party principles  and history of the Republican and Democratic Party I know most will identify themselves as Conservatives and therefore will register  as Republican specially Asians.

Most Asians have Conservative values therefore they will find their values in common with the Republicans.

I am very familiar why most Filipinos and other Asians are registered Democrats. Back in the Philippines the word “Democratic” or “Democracy” is a familiar word by Filipinos because it means Freedom and Capitalism.

Another reason why they registered Democrats because when Filipinos who come over here in the US, they did not know that majority of the media is Liberal. So when we watch TV news and read newspapers all you will learn is that the Conservatives are bunch of racists, fascists and etc. The liberal media even report false news against Conservatives and they wont correct it because they know that Liberals believe anything the Mainstream media will report.

This daily news from the Left will eventually brain washed new immigrants into thinking that the Republicans or Conservatives are bad and the Liberals or Democrats is the good one. So when they become US citizens then obviously they register Democrats.

I also discovered that most Filipinos are Politically Conservatives but they don’t know it is because after I shared to them the Conservative principles and most of them admitted they share the same conservative values, and then I told them Now you know you are really a Conservative and not a Liberal.

The difference between the Liberals (Democrats) and Conservatives (Republicans)

Republican Conservative Principles:
* Anti-Abortion or Pro-Life
* Pro-Legal Immigration, Against ILLEGAL Immigration.
* Traditional family
* Believes that marriage is between a man and a woman only.
* Maintaining the core family values that helped establish our great country
* Believes in Free market economy
* Believe the role of government should be to provide people the freedom necessary to pursue their own goals.
* Individual rights or liberty
* For Lower taxes, Tax cuts
* Government money does not belong to government. It belongs to the taxpayers who worked hard for it,
and who had funds deleted from their paychecks even before they got to see them.
* As it pertains to the constitution, a conservative believes in what is called “original intent.”
* Believes in personal responsibility.
* Opposes welfare or entitlement (welfare, SSI. Section 8 etc) except for those who really needs it
* Strong national defense through a strong military (Peace through Strength)
* Limited government or Smaller government for less restriction and control.
* Free enterprise (Capitalism) and limited government are the heart and soul of the Republican Party.

Democratic Party’s Liberal Principles:
Pro-Abortion
Pro Illegal Immigration.
For Taxpayer Money to Pay for Contraceptives
For Taxpayer Money to Pay for Abortions
Support Gay Marriage
Anti Military (cuts Military budget)
Don’t care about traditional family
For big Government or more Government control
For Govt Socialized Healthcare
For welfare even to those people who are able to work, but chose not to.
For all kinds of Tax Increase (they believe that it is necessary to raise taxes to feed the poor, even these people can work if they want to but chose not to and instead rely on taxpayers’ money to feed them)

 

I was able to enlightened them more people when I told them that the original racist party was the Democrat party,it was the Democrat party who opposed freeing the Slaves, that all KKK members were Democrats, Lincoln was a Republican who freed the slaves, those times the party of the Blacks is the Republican Party etc. Almost all Pinoy Democrats by default do not know the history. I was once one of the Democrat by default because of the Mainstream media and naive of the history, when I learned about history and the conservative principles I discovered I was a Conservative

If you search for the History of the Democratic Party you will discovered that they the one who is  the racist Party.

 

DEMOCRATS Opposed:

Abolition of slavery in  1865

Citizenship for Blacks  1866

Voting Rights for Black 1869 

The Republican Party is the one who fought to abolish slavery, citizenship for the Black people,  and Voting Rights for the Black People.

Also the First Black US Senators and Congressmen were all Republicans only 3 years after the Republican Party abolished Slavery.

Rep. John Willis Menard (R) Louisiana 1868.

Rep. Joseph Rainy (R). South Carolina 1869 – 1878.

Senator Hiram R. Revels (R). Mississippi 1860 – 1870. First Black Senator in US History.

Rep. Jefferson F, Long (R). Georgia  1869 – 1870

Rep. Robert C. DeLarge (R). South Carolina 1871 – 1872

Rep. Robert B. Elliot (R). South Carolina 1871 – 1872, 1873, 1874

Rep. Benjamin Turner (R) Alabama 1871 – 1872

Rep. Josiah T. Walls (R) Florida 1871 – 1876

Rep. Richard Cain (R) 1873 – 1874, 1877 – 1878

Rep. John Lynch (R) 1873 – 1874, 1875 – 1876, 1881 – 1882

Rep. James Rapler  (R). Alabama 1873 – 1874

Rep. Alonzo J. Ranzier (R). South Carolina 1873 – 1874

Senator Blanche K. Bruce (R)    Mississippi 1875 – 1880

Rep. Jeremiah Haralson (R). Alabama 1875 – 1876

Rep.  John Hayman (R). North Carolina  1875 – 1876

Rep. Charles Nash (R). Lousiana 1875 – 1876

Rep. Robert Smalls (R). South Carolina 1875 – 1978, 1881 – 1886

Rep. James O’hara   (R) North Carolina 1883 – 1885, 1885 – 1886

Rep.  Henry Cheatham    (R)  1889 – 1890, 1891 –  1892

Rep. John Langston (R). Virginia 1889 – 1890

Rep. Thomas Miller (R). South Carolina 1889 – 1890

Rep. George Murray (R) South Carolina 1893 – 1894, 1895 – 1896

Rep.  George White  (R) 1897 – 1898,  1899 – 1900

 

Twenty Two Black Republicans were elected in the congress by 1900.

The Democrats did not elect Blacks to Congress until 1935.

 

Blacks were a majority of the population in many congressional districts across the South. In 1870, Joseph Rainey of South Carolina was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives, becoming the first directly elected black member of Congress to be seated.[2] Blacks were elected to national office also from Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Texas and Virginia.

All of these Reconstruction era black senators and representatives were members of the Republican Party. The Republicans represented the party of Abraham Lincoln and of emancipation. The Democrats represented the party of planters, slavery and secession.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Americans_in_the_United_States_Congress

 

The Fake “big switch”

If you actually look up the party affiliations of all of the southern “Dixiecrats,” you can see that most never even switched sides. Al Gore, Sr.? Never switched. Robert Byrd? Never switched. Bull Connor, a.k.a. the arch-nemesis of MLK, jr.? Never switched. In fact, out of all the politicians that were “Dixiecrats,” (there were 18 in total), only two ever switched. There was never a mass exodus of southern Democrats from the Democrat Party, and there’s definite proof to back up that statement. Saying they all became Republicans is the epitome of revisionist history, and it’s a shame how many people are buying it.?

By February 1854, anti-slavery Whigs had begun meeting in the upper Midwestern states to discuss the formation of a new party. One such meeting, in Wisconsin on March 20, 1854, is generally remembered as the founding meeting of the Republican Party.

In 1856 the Republican party was founded and John Fremont became the first candidate of the Republican Party for the office of President of the United States.

Democrats called them Black Republican party because the Republican was based on the abolition movement designed to help blacks Americans and free the slaves and keep them free in the Northern Territories.

Next election in 1860 cycle Lincoln won the election and the 7 states of the Confederacy in the deep south were out of the Union before Lincoln took office because they knew that the election of a Republican President meant the end of slavery in America.

The National Union Party was the temporary name used by the Republican Party for the national ticket in the 1864 presidential election which was held during the Civil War. … The party nominated incumbent President Abraham Lincoln and for Vice President Democrat Andrew Johnson, who were elected in an electoral landslide.

 

The Liberal Media Bias (CNN, ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, PBS, AP, REUTERS, etc)

The liberal media will not report anything good done by Conservatives, most of the reports they make are nagatives towards Conservative and the Republican Party.

 

The Effect of the Liberal Media to new Asian immigrants in America.

The biggest advantage of the Democrat party is their Liberal Media who are constantly reporting bias, and half truth against Republicans. Many immigrants are being brainwashed into thinking that Conservatives and Republicans are not good and bunch of racists people which is actually the other way around if you know the history  slavery and emancipation.

WHO IS THE FOUNDER OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH? IS IT JESUS OR CONSTANTINE? By Fr. Abe Arganiosa

with 4 comments

Sign of the cults… They have an Human Founder, extra Biblical writings, and Founded on… The Roman Catholic was started and fonded by Constantine on 313AD at that time they engaged with the state and killed the real Christian at that time, before Constatine there’s a church existed already… Jesus Said upon this rock I will build my Church.. Not Charles Taze Russell of Jehovah, not Felixstowe Manalo of INC, not Joseph Smith of Mormonism, not Soriano of Dating Daan, not Ellen G White of Sevent day Adventist, not the Muslims of Muhammad, not Even Emperor Constantine… The true Church practices the Authority of the Bible Alone not the leader or any head of the Church… What we called Biblical Authority, Jesus said “even the gates of hell shall not prevail against my church” meaning before Constantine the true church existed already… Learn from the past history is a vital part of knowing and discovering the truth.

Avatar
FrAbeArganiosa lingkod Keziah… • 5 hours ago

[Sign of the cults…]

THESE ARE SIGNS OF YOUR CULTS NOT OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

[They have an Human Founder, extra Biblical writings, and Founded on…]

THE FOUNDER OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS NO OTHER THAN THE LORD JESUS CHRIST. FOR THAT REASON OUR FOUNDER IS DIVINE AND NOT MERELY HUMAN. IF YOU WANT A CREDIBLE PROOF HERE ARE THE TESTIMONIES OF ENCYCLOPEDIAS:

“The Catholic Church is the divine society founded by Christ and bestowed by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Specifically this is the society of believers united under the Bishop of Rome and hence is often called the Roman Catholic Church” (Groliers Encyclopedia Vol 5 page 106);

“It is a reality that the only Church that can trace its history back to the time of the apostles is the Catholic Church” (Ency Micropaedia Britannica Vol 8 page 664);

“Jesus Christ founded only one Church which spread throughout the world and this is the Catholic Church” (Encyc Britannica Vol 17 page 641);

“The Catholic Church has two natures, human and divine, the same as her founder Jesus Christ” (International Encyc Vol 15 page 520).

DON’T TELL ME THAT YOUR LIES OUT OF YOUR VINEGARED SALIVA ARE MORE CREDIBLE THAN THE STATEMENTS OF HUNDREDS OF SCHOLARS WHO RESEARCHED FOR THESE ENCYCLOPEDIAS?

[The Roman Catholic was started and fonded by Constantine on 313AD]

HA HA HA… THIS IS PATHETIC AT BEST. THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH CAME BEFORE CONSTATINE BECAUSE THE MOTHER OF CONSTANTINE WAS CATHOLIC, ST. HELENA, EVEN BEFORE CONSTANTINE WAS BORN. SO YOUR CLAIM IS A HISTORICAL LIE. JUST A SIMPLE RESEARCH IS ENOUGH TO DEBUNK YOUR CLAIM. THERE WERE MORE THAN 30 POPES WHO LIVED BEFORE CONSTANTINE WAS BAPTIZED AS CHRISTIAN:

St. Peter (32-67)
St. Linus (67-76)
St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
St. Clement I (88-97)
St. Evaristus (97-105)
St. Alexander I (105-115)
St. Sixtus I (115-125) Also called Xystus I
St. Telesphorus (125-136)
St. Hyginus (136-140)
St. Pius I (140-155)
St. Anicetus (155-166)
St. Soter (166-175)
St. Eleutherius (175-189)
St. Victor I (189-199)
St. Zephyrinus (199-217)
St. Callistus I (217-22) Callistus and the following three popes were opposed by St. Hippolytus, antipope (217-236)
St. Urban I (222-30)
St. Pontain (230-35)
St. Anterus (235-36)
St. Fabian (236-50)
St. Cornelius (251-53) Opposed by Novatian, antipope (251)
St. Lucius I (253-54)
St. Stephen I (254-257)
St. Sixtus II (257-258)
St. Dionysius (260-268)
St. Felix I (269-274)
St. Eutychian (275-283)
St. Caius (283-296) Also called Gaius
St. Marcellinus (296-304)
St. Marcellus I (308-309)
St. Eusebius (309 or 310)
St. Miltiades (311-14)
* The Catholic Encyclopedia

SEE, HOW CAN CONSTANTINE BE THE FOUNDER OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH WHEN THERE WERE CATHOLIC POPES PRIOR TO CONSTANTINE?

[at that time they engaged with the state and killed the real Christian at that time, before Constatine there’s a church existed already…]

HA HA HA… EXCUSE ME. THE EARLY CHRISTIAN MARTYRS ARE CATHOLIC SAINTS. THOSE WHO KILLED THEM WERE THE PAGANS. THOSE WHERE ST. IGNATIUS OF ANTIOCH, ST. POLYCARP OF SMYRNA AND MANY OTHERS. HERE IS THE TESTIMONY OF ONE OF THOSE MARTYRS FED TO THE LIONS ABOUT 200 YEARS BEFORE THE COMING OF CONSTANTINE:

“See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Christ Jesus does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles. Do ye also reverence the deacons, as those that carry out the appointment of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.” Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2 (c. A.D. 110).

SEE, WORD FOR WORD THEY BELONG TO THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND NOT TO YOUR CULT. SORRY FOR YOU. YOUR CLAIM FALLS FLAT.

[Jesus Said upon this rock I will build my Church.. Not Charles Taze Russell of Jehovah, not Felixstowe Manalo of INC, not Joseph Smith of Mormonism, not Soriano of Dating Daan, not Ellen G White of Sevent day Adventist, not the Muslims of Muhammad, not Even Emperor Constantine…]

EXACTLY. ITS NOT THE BORN AGAIN FELLOWSHIPS INVENTED IN THE UNITED STATES NOWADAYS AS WELL.

ITS THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BECAUSE IT IS THE FIRST AND THE OLDEST CHURCH FOUNDED BY CHRIST ON ST. PETER THE APOSTLE.

[The true Church practices the Authority of the Bible Alone not the leader or any head of the Church…]

THAT IS DEMONIC. THE TRUE CHURCH DOES NOT HAVE YET THE BIBLE AND DOES NOT TEACH “BIBLE ALONE” DOCTRINE. THE BIBLE ITSELF DOES NOT TEACH “BIBLE ALONE” DOCTRINE. THAT PROTESTANT DOGMA WAS DEMONICALLY INVENTED BY MARTIN LUTHER DURING THE 16TH CENTURY. IT IS A MAN-MADE TRADITION. IF YOU CAN PROVE OTHERWISE THEN SHOW WHERE IT IS IN THE BIBLE.

[What we called Biblical Authority, Jesus said “even the gates of hell shall not prevail against my church” meaning before Constantine the true church existed already…]

OF COURSE, THE TRUE CHURCH EXISTED BEFORE CONSTANTINE BECAUSE THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS THE TRUE CHURCH THAT EXISTED BEFORE CONSTANTINE. WE ALREADY HAD MORE THAN 30 POPES BEFORE CONSTANTINE AND HIS MOTHER WAS CATHOLIC EVEN BEFORE HE WAS BORN. HA HA HA…

[Learn from the past history is a vital part of knowing and discovering the truth.]

LEARN FROM HISTORY YOURSELF BECAUSE IT IS OBVIOUS THAT YOU ARE IGNORANT OF HISTORY. ONLY FOOLS WHO ARE INCAPABLE OF SIMPLE RESEARCH WILL BELIEVE YOUR LIES AND DISTORTION OF HISTORY. YOU ARE LYING IN ORDER TO PROTECT YOUR NEWLY INVENTED BORN AGAIN CULTS.

Source: http://www.splendorofthechurch.com.ph/2013/04/12/who-is-the-founder-of-the-catholic-church-is-it-jesus-or-constantine-by-fr-abe-arganiosa/

Written by pinoyteaparty

April 11, 2013 at 10:49 pm

Posted in Apologetics

Tagged with ,

EXPOSING THE BORN AGAIN MOVEMENT

with 11 comments

History of Born Again

The Born Again Movement traces its origin early in the 19th century. In reaction to Protestant Liberalism a group of Protestant theologians from various denominations (Baptist, Methodist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Evangelicals etc.) wrote a 12 volume book entitled The Fundamentals. The book contains a compilation of essays of Protestant doctrines, and the Born Again Movement adapted their doctrines from this 12 volume book that is why some of their doctrines are similar to those of mainline Protestants. In the strictest sense Born Again Christians is an offshoot of mainline Protestantism, no wonder they claimed to be a non-denominational Church. Born Again Movement arrived at our shores in the late 1930’s and gained its popularity in the 70’s and 80’s which is considered the golden era of Born Again Movement in the Philippines. During these years membership in various Born Again Churches increased because they where able to infiltrate mainline Protestant Churches and had lured nominal Catholics into their fold. However their steady growth ceases starting the year 1990 and their membership declined in the succeeding years. In the year 2000 Born Again Churches from the United States sent their missionaries in the Philippines to re-established the Born Again Movement and this time their primary mission is no longer to infiltrate Protestant and Catholic Churches but targeted the youth in schools particularly college students. In Davao City there are various Born Again Churches, the following are the most common Born Again Churches that is actively recruiting students to join their rank, House hold of Faith, Victory Chapel, G12, PSALM and Maranatha Family Church. Born Again evangelist does not want to discuss the history of the Christian church, in their Bible studies with their prospects, they intentionally limit the discussion to the Bible alone. They conceal the history of the Christian religion because it will show that their movement did not originate from the apostles. It is necessary for them to negate history because St. Paul warned us not to accept teachings that did not originate from the apostles Gal.1:8 and Born Again Movement evidently cannot trace the history of their church into the time of the apostles.

Method of Evangelization:

Born Again evangelists employ the basic principles of human psychology in order to lure people into their fold. Their method is both manipulation and deception, let me explain why. There are two principles that worked behind their method, emotion and common ground (music). Born Again evangelist realized that music is a common ground among youths, so they utilized music to attract young adults into their churches. If you attend the service of one of these Born Again Churches you can see that their music ministry is like a rock and roll band, they intentionally composed alternative type gospel songs in order to add attraction to their service. In this way those people whom they invited will experience a pleasurable feeling and will come back for more. Aside from music they add into their arsenal the appeal to the emotions of the people. The sermons of their pastors are directed to stir up the emotions of the listeners and sometimes they would even come to the point of crying in the pulpit, that is the reason why their pastors must be a good public speaker. Born Again evangelist knew that once they where able to touch the person’s emotion it will be very easy to manipulate him. Through music they grant pleasure and through emotional manipulation they control the people, this is a classical example of psychological conditioning (this is also used to train dogs). Clearly Born Again evangelization has deception as its chief foundation and they even used selected passages from the Bible to deceive people. They usually start evangelizing by asking ambiguous questions such as “Are you saved?” or “Are you born again?”, if the person answers “no or I don’t know” they will tell you that you must accept Christ as a Lord and Personal Savior in order to be born again otherwise you will be damned to hell. And if the person will answer “yes” they will invite you to their church and worship with them. And if the person is a Catholic that would mean that you have to leave the Catholic Church and do away your Catholic beliefs about Mary, the Saints, confession etc. Let us be vigilant not to fall to the snares of the Born Again movement.

Written by pinoyteaparty

April 5, 2013 at 1:34 am

Posted in Apologetics

Tagged with , ,

666 and Vicarius Filii Dei claims

with 3 comments

Vicarius Filii Dei   is NOT, nor has it ever been a title of the Pope.  This little anti-Catholic gem was created by the Seventh-Day Adventists in an effort to discredit the “godless Papists.”

This title is a fraudulent one created out of nothing by Ellen Gould White, inventor of the SDAs. You will never find it in a Catholic document (or tiara, as the legend usually goes).

It’s a title (from one of the more famed forgeries of history, the Donation of Constantine) that other people use to prove a 666-antichrist-papacy connection and to show that, no matter who is Pope, the papacy and the Catholic Church are not of God. Also, Catholic apologists mention (to Seventh-Day Adventists in particular) that Ellen Gould White’s name totals 666 when given the same treatment.

Interestingly, if you take the Roman numberals used in Ellen G. White’s name it adds up to 666.

How’s that for irony?

Let’s consider this accusation. Latin, Greek, and Hebrew have numerical values assigned to various letters in their alphabets. In Latin the values are: I=1, V=5, X=10, L=50, C=100, D=500, M=1,000. By extension W=10 (because W=VV, or two Vs together), and U=V (because there was no letter U for the Romans; where you see the letter U in modern writing, use the letter V instead).
As you can work out for yourself, Vicarius Filii Dei does add up to 666 in Latin: Vicarius=112; Filii=53, Dei=501. (Ignore letters which are not assigned a numerical value.) The problem is that Vicarius Filii Dei is NOT  a title of the pope. One of his titles, in fact his chief title, is Vicarius Christi (Vicar of Christ), but, unfortunately for Seventh-Day Adventists and other anti-Catholics who attempt to use this ploy, Vicarius Christi adds up to only a measly 214, not the infernal 666.
Since the average person, Catholic or Protestant, hasn’t the foggiest idea what the pope’s titles are in Latin or English, anti-Catholics (some of whom know better) can get away with this subterfuge.
But what if one of the pope’s titles did add up to 666? Would that coincidence prove the pope is the beast? Hardly. It would prove nothing because lots of names and titles add up to 666. By using a nifty little technique you can force a Seventh-Day Adventist to admit that the addition to 666 proves nothing, even when it’s a papal title that’s in question. Here’s how.
Have your son-in-law do the math, and he’ll be shocked to learn that the name of the woman who started Seventh-Day Adventism, Ellen Gould White, adds up to 666: Ellen=100, Gould=555, White=11. Ask him whether this “proves” that the foundress of his religion was the beast? If he says “No,” then the tallying of the name means nothing. If he says “Yes,” then what’s he doing belonging to a church founded by the beast? Either way his argument collapses. (Isn’t apologetics fun?)

http://forums.catholic.com

Written by pinoyteaparty

February 21, 2013 at 6:06 am

Posted in Apologetics

Tagged with , ,

The Rosary

with one comment

The word rosary comes from Latin and means a garland of roses, the rose being one of the flowers used to symbolize the Virgin Mary. If you were to ask what object is most emblematic of Catholics, people would probably say, “The rosary, of course.” We’re familiar with the images: the silently moving lips of the old woman fingering her beads; the oversized rosary hanging from the waist of the wimpled nun; more recently, the merely decorative rosary hanging from the rearview mirror.

After Vatican II the rosary fell into relative disuse. The same is true for Marian devotions as a whole. But in recent years the rosary has made a comeback, and not just among Catholics. Many Protestants now say the rosary, recognizing it as a truly biblical form of prayer—after all, the prayers that comprise it come mainly from the Bible.

The rosary is a devotion in honor of the Virgin Mary. It consists of a set number of specific prayers. First are the introductory prayers: one Apostles’ Creed (Credo), one Our Father (the Pater Noster or the Lord’s Prayer), three Hail Mary’s (Ave’s), one Glory Be (Gloria Patri).

The Apostles’ Creed

The Apostles’ Creed is so called not because it was composed by the apostles themselves, but because it expresses their teachings. The original form of the creed came into use around A.D. 125, and the present form dates from the 400s. It reads this way:

“I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into hell. The third day he arose again from the dead. He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father. From thence he shall come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy Catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.”

Traditional Protestants are able to recite the Apostles’ Creed without qualms, meaning every line of it, though to some lines they must give meanings different from those given by Catholics, who composed the creed. For instance, we refer to “the holy Catholic Church,” meaning a particular, identifiable Church on earth. Protestants typically re-interpret this to refer to an “invisible church” consisting of all “true believers” in Jesus.

Protestants, when they say the prayer, refer to the (lower-cased) “holy catholic church,” using “catholic” merely in the sense of “universal,” not implying any connection with the (upper-case) Catholic Church, which is based in Rome. (This is despite the fact that the term “Catholic” was already used to refer to a particular, visible Church by the second century and had already lost its broader meaning of “universal”).

Despite these differences Protestants embrace the Apostles’ Creed without reluctance, seeing it as embodying basic Christian truths as they understand them.

The Lord’s Prayer

The next prayer in the rosary—Our Father or the Pater Noster (from its opening words in Latin), also known as the Lord’s Prayer—is even more acceptable to Protestants because Jesus himself taught it to his disciples.

It is given in the Bible in two slightly different versions (Matt. 6:9-13; Luke 11:2-4). The one given in Matthew is the one we say. (We won’t reproduce it here. All Christians should have it memorized.)

The Hail Mary

The next prayer in the rosary, and the prayer which is really at the center of the devotion, is the Hail Mary. Since the Hail Mary is a prayer to Mary, many Protestants assume it’s unbiblical. Quite the contrary, actually. Let’s look at it.

The prayer begins, “Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee.” This is nothing other than the greeting the angel Gabriel gave Mary in Luke 1:28 (Confraternity Version). The next part reads this way:

“Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.” This was exactly what Mary’s cousin Elizabeth said to her in Luke 1:42. The only thing that has been added to these two verses are the names “Jesus” and “Mary,” to make clear who is being referred to. So the first part of the Hail Mary is entirely biblical.

The second part of the Hail Mary is not taken straight from Scripture, but it is entirely biblical in the thoughts it expresses. It reads:

“Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.”

Let’s look at the first words. Some Protestants do object to saying “Holy Mary” because they claim Mary was a sinner like the rest of us. But Mary was a Christian (the first Christian, actually, the first to accept Jesus; cf. Luke 1:45), and the Bible describes Christians in general as holy. In fact, they are called saints, which means “holy ones” (Eph. 1:1, Phil. 1:1, Col. 1:2). Furthermore, as the mother of Jesus Christ, the Incarnate Second Person of the Blessed Trinity, Mary was certainly a very holy woman.

Some Protestants object to the title “Mother of God,” but suffice it to say that the title doesn’t mean Mary is older than God; it means the person who was born of her was a divine person, not a human person. (Jesus is one person, the divine, but has two natures, the divine and the human; it is incorrect to say he is a human person.) The denial that Mary had God in her womb is a heresy known as Nestorianism (which claims that Jesus was two persons, one divine and one human), which has been condemned since the early 400s and which the Reformers and Protestant Bible scholars have always rejected.

Another Mediator?

The most problematic line for non-Catholics is usually the last: “pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death.” Many non-Catholics think such a request denies the teaching of 1 Timothy 2:5: “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” But in the preceding four verses (1 Tim. 2:1-4), Paul instructs Christians to pray for each other, meaning it cannot interfere with Christ’s mediatorship: “I urge that prayers, supplications, petitions, and thanksgivings be made for everyone. . . . This is good, and pleasing to God our Savior.”

We know this exhortation to pray for others applies to the saints in heaven who, as Revelation 5:8 reveals, intercede for us by offering our prayers to God: “The twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each holding a harp, and with golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints.

The Glory Be

The fourth prayer found in the rosary is the Glory Be, sometimes called the Gloria or Gloria Patri. The last two names are taken from the opening words of the Latin version of the prayer, which in English reads:

“Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Spirit. As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.” The Gloria is a brief hymn of praise in which all Christians can join. It has been used since the fourth century (though its present form is from the seventh) and traditionally has been recited at the end of each Psalm in the Divine Office.

The Closing Prayer

We’ve covered the opening prayers of the rosary. In fact, we’ve covered all the prayers of the rosary except the very last one, which is usually the Hail Queen (Salve Regina), sometimes called the Hail Holy Queen. It’s the most commonly recited prayer in praise of Mary, after the Hail Mary itself, and was composed at the end of the eleventh century. It generally reads like this (there are several variants):

“Hail holy Queen, Mother of mercy, our life, our sweetness, and our hope! To thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve. To thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this vale of tears. Turn, then, most gracious advocate, thine eyes of mercy toward us, and after this our exile show unto us the blessed fruit of thy womb, Jesus. O clement, O loving, O sweet Virgin Mary.”

So those are the prayers of the rosary. Between the introductory prayers and the concluding prayer is the meat of the rosary: the decades. Each decade—there are fifteen in a full rosary (which takes about forty-five minutes to say)—is composed of ten Hail Marys. Each decade is bracketed between an Our Father and a Glory Be, so each decade actually has twelve prayers.

Each decade is devoted to a mystery regarding the life of Jesus or his mother. Here the word mystery refers to a truth of the faith, not to something incomprehensible, as in the line, “It’s a mystery to me!” The fifteen mysteries are divided into three groups of five: the Joyful, the Sorrowful, the Glorious. When people speak of “saying the rosary” they usually mean saying any set of five (which takes about fifteen minutes) rather than the recitation of all fifteen mysteries. Let’s look at the mysteries.

Meditation the Key

First we must understand that they are meditations. When Catholics recite the twelve prayers that form a decade of the rosary, they meditate on the mystery associated with that decade. If they merely recite the prayers, whether vocally or silently, they’re missing the essence of the rosary. It isn’t just a recitation of prayers, but a meditation on the grace of God. Critics, not knowing about the meditation part, imagine the rosary must be boring, uselessly repetitious, meaningless, and their criticism carries weight if you reduce the rosary to a formula. Christ forbade meaningless repetition (Matt. 6:7), but the Bible itself prescribes some prayers that involve repetition. Look at Psalms 136, which is a litany (a prayer with a recurring refrain) meant to be sung in the Jewish Temple. In the psalm the refrain is “His mercy endures forever.” Sometimes in Psalms 136 the refrain starts before a sentence is finished, meaning it is more repetitious than the rosary, though this prayer was written directly under the inspiration of God.

It is the meditation on the mysteries that gives the rosary its staying power. The Joyful Mysteries are these: the Annunciation (Luke 1:26-38), the Visitation (Luke 1:40-56), the Nativity (Luke 2:6-20), the Presentation of Jesus in the Temple (Luke 2:21-39), and the Finding of the child Jesus in the Temple (Luke 2:41-51).

Then come the Sorrowful Mysteries: the Agony in the Garden (Matt. 26:36-46), the Scourging (Matt. 27:26), the Crowning with Thorns (Matt. 27:29), the Carrying of the Cross (John 19:17), and the Crucifixion (Luke 23:33-46).

The final Mysteries are the Glorious: the Resurrection (Luke 24:1-12), the Ascension (Luke 24:50-51), the Descent of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:1-4), the Assumption of Mary into heaven (Rev. 12), and her Coronation (cf. Rev. 12:1).

With the exception of the last two, each mystery is explicitly scriptural. True, the Assumption and Coronation of Mary are not explicitly stated in the Bible, but they are not contrary to it, so there is no reason to reject them out of hand. Given the scriptural basis of most of the mysteries, it’s little wonder that many Protestants, once they understand the meditations that are the essence of the rosary, happily take it up as a devotion. We’ve looked at the prayers found in the rosary and the mysteries around which it is formed. Now let’s see how it was formed historically.

The Secret of Paternoster Row

It’s commonly said that St. Dominic, the founder of the Order of Preachers (the Dominicans), instituted the rosary. Not so. Certain parts of the rosary predated Dominic; others arose only after his death.

Centuries before Dominic, monks had begun to recite all 150 psalms on a regular basis. As time went on, it was felt that the lay brothers, known as the conversi, should have some form of prayer of their own. They were distinct from the choir monks, and a chief distinction was that they were illiterate. Since they couldn’t read the psalms, they couldn’t recite them with the monks. They needed an easily remembered prayer.

The prayer first chosen was the Our Father, and, depending on circumstances, it was said either fifty or a hundred times. These conversi used rosaries to keep count, and the rosaries were known then as Paternosters (“Our Fathers”).

In England there arose a craftsmen’s guild of some importance, the members of which made these rosaries. In London you can find a street, named Paternoster Row, which preserves the memory of the area where these craftsmen worked.

The rosaries that originally were used to count Our Fathers came to be used, during the twelfth century, to count Hail Marys—or, more properly, the first half of what we now call the Hail Mary. (The second half was added some time later.)

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/the-rosary

Written by pinoyteaparty

January 1, 2013 at 7:17 pm

Posted in Apologetics

Tagged with ,

Apostolic Succession – The Catholic church has the Apostolic Succession that can be traced more than 2,000 years ago started by Peter as the first Pope click here to see the list of the Popes

leave a comment »

Apostolic Succession another proof that The Catholic church is the one that Jesus Christ Founded.

# The Catholic church has the Apostolic Succession that can be traced more than 2,000 years ago started by Peter as the first Pope click here to see the list of the Popes.

# By the Apostolic succession is meant that priests and bishops have received the Apostolic authority through an unbroken line of Popes from St. Peter to the current Pope.

# Therefore present-day bishops, as the successors of previous bishops, going back to the apostles more than 2,000 years ago, have this power by virtue of this unbroken chain.

# The doctrine that the authority and the mission given by Jesus to the Apostles have descended in a direct and unbroken line of bishops to the bishops of today

The List of Popes

See also POPE, PAPAL ELECTIONS, ELECTION OF THE POPE.

St. Peter (32-67)
St. Linus (67-76)
St. Anacletus (Cletus) (76-88)
St. Clement I (88-97)
St. Evaristus (97-105)
St. Alexander I (105-115)
St. Sixtus I (115-125) Also called Xystus I
St. Telesphorus (125-136)
St. Hyginus (136-140)
St. Pius I (140-155)
St. Anicetus (155-166)
St. Soter (166-175)
St. Eleutherius (175-189)
St. Victor I (189-199)
St. Zephyrinus (199-217)
St. Callistus I (217-22) Callistus and the following three popes were opposed by St. Hippolytus, antipope (217-236)
St. Urban I (222-30)
St. Pontain (230-35)
St. Anterus (235-36)
St. Fabian (236-50)
St. Cornelius (251-53) Opposed by Novatian, antipope (251)
St. Lucius I (253-54)
St. Stephen I (254-257)
St. Sixtus II (257-258)
St. Dionysius (260-268)
St. Felix I (269-274)
St. Eutychian (275-283)
St. Caius (283-296) Also called Gaius
St. Marcellinus (296-304)
St. Marcellus I (308-309)
St. Eusebius (309 or 310)
St. Miltiades (311-14)
St. Sylvester I (314-35)
St. Marcus (336)
St. Julius I (337-52)
Liberius (352-66) Opposed by Felix II, antipope (355-365)
St. Damasus I (366-83) Opposed by Ursicinus, antipope (366-367)
St. Siricius (384-99)
St. Anastasius I (399-401)
St. Innocent I (401-17)
St. Zosimus (417-18)
St. Boniface I (418-22) Opposed by Eulalius, antipope (418-419)
St. Celestine I (422-32)
St. Sixtus III (432-40)
St. Leo I (the Great) (440-61)
St. Hilarius (461-68)
St. Simplicius (468-83)
St. Felix III (II) (483-92)
St. Gelasius I (492-96)
Anastasius II (496-98)
St. Symmachus (498-514) Opposed by Laurentius, antipope (498-501)
St. Hormisdas (514-23)
St. John I (523-26)
St. Felix IV (III) (526-30)
Boniface II (530-32) Opposed by Dioscorus, antipope (530)
John II (533-35)
St. Agapetus I (535-36) Also called Agapitus I
St. Silverius (536-37)
Vigilius (537-55)
Pelagius I (556-61)
John III (561-74)
Benedict I (575-79)
Pelagius II (579-90)
St. Gregory I (the Great) (590-604)
Sabinian (604-606)
Boniface III (607)
St. Boniface IV (608-15)
St. Deusdedit (Adeodatus I) (615-18)
Boniface V (619-25)
Honorius I (625-38)
Severinus (640)
John IV (640-42)
Theodore I (642-49)
St. Martin I (649-55)
St. Eugene I (655-57)
St. Vitalian (657-72)
Adeodatus (II) (672-76)
Donus (676-78)
St. Agatho (678-81)
St. Leo II (682-83)
St. Benedict II (684-85)
John V (685-86)
Conon (686-87)
St. Sergius I (687-701) Opposed by Theodore and Paschal, antipopes (687)
John VI (701-05)
John VII (705-07)
Sisinnius (708)
Constantine (708-15)
St. Gregory II (715-31)
St. Gregory III (731-41)
St. Zachary (741-52)
Stephen II (752) Because he died before being consecrated, many authoritative lists omit him
Stephen III (752-57)
St. Paul I (757-67)
Stephen IV (767-72) Opposed by Constantine II (767) and Philip (768), antipopes (767)
Adrian I (772-95)
St. Leo III (795-816)
Stephen V (816-17)
St. Paschal I (817-24)
Eugene II (824-27)
Valentine (827)
Gregory IV (827-44)
Sergius II (844-47) Opposed by John, antipope (855)
St. Leo IV (847-55)
Benedict III (855-58) Opposed by Anastasius, antipope (855)
St. Nicholas I (the Great) (858-67)
Adrian II (867-72)
John VIII (872-82)
Marinus I (882-84)
St. Adrian III (884-85)
Stephen VI (885-91)
Formosus (891-96)
Boniface VI (896)
Stephen VII (896-97)
Romanus (897)
Theodore II (897)
John IX (898-900)
Benedict IV (900-03)
Leo V (903) Opposed by Christopher, antipope (903-904)
Sergius III (904-11)
Anastasius III (911-13)
Lando (913-14)
John X (914-28)
Leo VI (928)
Stephen VIII (929-31)
John XI (931-35)
Leo VII (936-39)
Stephen IX (939-42)
Marinus II (942-46)
Agapetus II (946-55)
John XII (955-63)
Leo VIII (963-64)
Benedict V (964)
John XIII (965-72)
Benedict VI (973-74)
Benedict VII (974-83) Benedict and John XIV were opposed by Boniface VII, antipope (974; 984-985)
John XIV (983-84)
John XV (985-96)
Gregory V (996-99) Opposed by John XVI, antipope (997-998)
Sylvester II (999-1003)
John XVII (1003)
John XVIII (1003-09)
Sergius IV (1009-12)
Benedict VIII (1012-24) Opposed by Gregory, antipope (1012)
John XIX (1024-32)
Benedict IX (1032-45) He appears on this list three separate times, because he was twice deposed and restored
Sylvester III (1045) Considered by some to be an antipope
Benedict IX (1045)
Gregory VI (1045-46)
Clement II (1046-47)
Benedict IX (1047-48)
Damasus II (1048)
St. Leo IX (1049-54)
Victor II (1055-57)
Stephen X (1057-58)
Nicholas II (1058-61) Opposed by Benedict X, antipope (1058)
Alexander II (1061-73) Opposed by Honorius II, antipope (1061-1072)
St. Gregory VII (1073-85) Gregory and the following three popes were opposed by Guibert (“Clement III”), antipope (1080-1100)
Blessed Victor III (1086-87)
Blessed Urban II (1088-99)
Paschal II (1099-1118) Opposed by Theodoric (1100), Aleric (1102) and Maginulf (“Sylvester IV”, 1105-1111), antipopes (1100)
Gelasius II (1118-19) Opposed by Burdin (“Gregory VIII”), antipope (1118)
Callistus II (1119-24)
Honorius II (1124-30) Opposed by Celestine II, antipope (1124)
Innocent II (1130-43) Opposed by Anacletus II (1130-1138) and Gregory Conti (“Victor IV”) (1138), antipopes (1138)
Celestine II (1143-44)
Lucius II (1144-45)
Blessed Eugene III (1145-53)
Anastasius IV (1153-54)
Adrian IV (1154-59)
Alexander III (1159-81) Opposed by Octavius (“Victor IV”) (1159-1164), Pascal III (1165-1168), Callistus III (1168-1177) and Innocent III (1178-1180), antipopes
Lucius III (1181-85)
Urban III (1185-87)
Gregory VIII (1187)
Clement III (1187-91)
Celestine III (1191-98)
Innocent III (1198-1216)
Honorius III (1216-27)
Gregory IX (1227-41)
Celestine IV (1241)
Innocent IV (1243-54)
Alexander IV (1254-61)
Urban IV (1261-64)
Clement IV (1265-68)
Blessed Gregory X (1271-76)
Blessed Innocent V (1276)
Adrian V (1276)
John XXI (1276-77)
Nicholas III (1277-80)
Martin IV (1281-85)
Honorius IV (1285-87)
Nicholas IV (1288-92)
St. Celestine V (1294)
Boniface VIII (1294-1303)
Blessed Benedict XI (1303-04)
Clement V (1305-14)
John XXII (1316-34) Opposed by Nicholas V, antipope (1328-1330)
Benedict XII (1334-42)
Clement VI (1342-52)
Innocent VI (1352-62)
Blessed Urban V (1362-70)
Gregory XI (1370-78)
Urban VI (1378-89) Opposed by Robert of Geneva (“Clement VII”), antipope (1378-1394)
Boniface IX (1389-1404) Opposed by Robert of Geneva (“Clement VII”) (1378-1394), Pedro de Luna (“Benedict XIII”) (1394-1417) and Baldassare Cossa (“John XXIII”) (1400-1415), antipopes
Innocent VII (1404-06) Opposed by Pedro de Luna (“Benedict XIII”) (1394-1417) and Baldassare Cossa (“John XXIII”) (1400-1415), antipopes
Gregory XII (1406-15) Opposed by Pedro de Luna (“Benedict XIII”) (1394-1417), Baldassare Cossa (“John XXIII”) (1400-1415), and Pietro Philarghi (“Alexander V”) (1409-1410), antipopes
Martin V (1417-31)
Eugene IV (1431-47) Opposed by Amadeus of Savoy (“Felix V”), antipope (1439-1449)
Nicholas V (1447-55)
Callistus III (1455-58)
Pius II (1458-64)
Paul II (1464-71)
Sixtus IV (1471-84)
Innocent VIII (1484-92)
Alexander VI (1492-1503)
Pius III (1503)
Julius II (1503-13)
Leo X (1513-21)
Adrian VI (1522-23)
Clement VII (1523-34)
Paul III (1534-49)
Julius III (1550-55)
Marcellus II (1555)
Paul IV (1555-59)
Pius IV (1559-65)
St. Pius V (1566-72)
Gregory XIII (1572-85)
Sixtus V (1585-90)
Urban VII (1590)
Gregory XIV (1590-91)
Innocent IX (1591)
Clement VIII (1592-1605)
Leo XI (1605)
Paul V (1605-21)
Gregory XV (1621-23)
Urban VIII (1623-44)
Innocent X (1644-55)
Alexander VII (1655-67)
Clement IX (1667-69)
Clement X (1670-76)
Blessed Innocent XI (1676-89)
Alexander VIII (1689-91)
Innocent XII (1691-1700)
Clement XI (1700-21)
Innocent XIII (1721-24)
Benedict XIII (1724-30)
Clement XII (1730-40)
Benedict XIV (1740-58)
Clement XIII (1758-69)
Clement XIV (1769-74)
Pius VI (1775-99)
Pius VII (1800-23)
Leo XII (1823-29)
Pius VIII (1829-30)
Gregory XVI (1831-46)
Blessed Pius IX (1846-78)
Leo XIII (1878-1903)
St. Pius X (1903-14)
Benedict XV (1914-22) Biographies of Benedict XV and his successors will be added at a later date
Pius XI (1922-39)
Pius XII (1939-58)
Blessed John XXIII (1958-63)
Paul VI (1963-78)
John Paul I (1978)
John Paul II (1978-2005)

Benedict XVI (2005-2013)

Francis (2013—)

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm