Manage Account

Yesterday, the world was shaken by the news of Charlie Kirk’s assassination while speaking at a college campus in Utah. Kirk was well known for engaging students and professors in conversations on a wide range of controversial issues. But he wanted to be known above all not as a political organizer or debater, but as a follower of Christ. When a podcaster asked how he wanted to be remembered after he died, he <a href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOcY0GMjQFW/">replied without hesitation</a>, “For courage for my faith . . .  the most important thing is my faith.”
Charlie was an Evangelical Protestant, but he was a sort of fellow-traveler of Catholicism: making common cause with Catholic thinkers and activists, often expressing admiration for the Church, engaging positively with Catholic ideas, and even sometimes seen attending Mass with his wife. When, last year, he visited the campus of San Diego State University, I sought him out, hoping to start a long-term dialogue with him about Catholicism.
When I shook his hand and introduced myself as Edgar from Catholic Answers, immediately he responded with, “I love Catholics!” and we chatted for a few minutes in which he expanded on his enthusiasm for Catholics and the Church. I handed him two of our books, Why We’re Catholic by Trent Horn and The Early Church was the Catholic Church by Joe Heschmeyer, along with my card. He received them with genuine interest and pleasure—a testament to his signature willingness to engage ideas and ways of thinking different from his own.
We will never know what might have been, but after our meeting I was sure that the Lord was stirring something in his heart, moving him closer to the ancient Faith. He had befriended Bishop Robert Barron, and at the time of his death was planning to sit for an interview with him. In one of his own final videos, he spoke to the importance—contra his fellow Protestants—of honoring the Virgin Mary, and he offered her as an antidote to modern toxic feminism. The same openness and interest in seeking unity that distinguished him in political and social discourse made him an ecumenical bridge as well.
Charlie was also a tireless champion of the pro-life movement, never shying away from speaking the truth about the dignity of every human life. He boldly confronted the evils of abortion, using his platform on college campuses to advocate for the most vulnerable and to inspire others to stand firm in defense of life.
In the days to come there will be many tributes to Charlie Kirk: to his energy and talents, and to the impact he had on the culture at such a young age. But I suggest we remember him first the way he asked to be remembered: as a man who put his faith first. Let us pray that his soul may find the salvation of Christ in which he placed his faith, and let us pray for the consolation of his wife and two small children he leaves behind.

Charlie Kirk: Friend to Catholics

Join Cy Kellett on Catholic Answers Live as he interviews Emily Torres from the popular Catholic Converts Instagram page. They discuss how social media can be a powerful tool for evangelization, the challenges and rewards of sharing the Catholic faith online, and practical tips for reaching hearts in the digital world. Whether you&#8217;re a seasoned apologist or new to Catholic outreach, this inspiring conversation offers insights into living and witnessing the faith today.
Join The CA Live Club Newsletter: <a href="https://wvw.catholic.com/radioclub?email">Click Here</a>

Evangelizing Through Social Media

I’m protestant. What did the Church Fathers believe about Mary’s assumption?

Why is the Church not receptive to canton marriages?

How would you respond with my reason for not returning to the Church? I won’t return because of how the priest sex scandal was handled.

Why do we have to go right up to the borderline of worshiping the saints?

What’s the logic on assigning day to indulgences?

Is there salvation outside the visible Church?

Is the Protestant bible missing any book from the canon?

I heard your story on the Journey Home. Could you repeat the story of your mother.

Questions from Non-Catholics

This ancient prophecy PROVES Christianity is TRUE…

<div>How would you explain about this pope’s statement that "relationship with Jesus is dangerous and harmful"?</div><div>What Pope Francis is talking about is clear when we look at the entirety of what he said:
<blockquote>We are able to live this journey not only because of others, but together with others. In the Church there is no “do it yourself,” there are no “free agents.” How many times did Pope Benedict describe the Church as an ecclesial &#8220;we”! At times one hears someone say: “I believe in God, I believe in Jesus, but I don’t care about the Church.” How many times have we heard this? And this is not good. There are those who believe they can maintain a personal, direct, and immediate relationship with Jesus Christ outside the communion and the mediation of the Church. These are dangerous and harmful temptations. These are, as the great Paul VI said, absurd dichotomies. It is true that walking together is challenging, and at times can be tiring: it can happen that some brother or some sister creates difficulties, or shocks us. . . . But the Lord entrusted his message of salvation to a few human beings, to us all, to a few witnesses; and it is in our brothers and in our sisters, with their gifts and limitations, that he comes to meet us and make himself known. And this is what it means to belong to the Church. Remember this well: to be Christian means belonging to the Church. The first name is “Christian,” the last name is “belonging to the Church” (<a href="https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/audiences/2014/documents/papa-francesco_20140625_udienza-generale.html">General Audience, </a><a href="https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/audiences/2014/documents/papa-francesco_20140625_udienza-generale.html">Wednesday, 25 June 2014</a>).</blockquote>
Pope Francis was simply pointing out the old saying: Jesus taught Christians to call God Our Father, not My Father. As Christians, we cannot simply wall ourselves off from one another and have a &#8220;Jesus and me&#8221; attitude to the exclusion of others. Jesus calls us to live our Christian faith walking side by side with our brothers and sisters.
</div>

Did the Pope Condemn Personal Relationships with Jesus?

Fr. Moses McPherson, an Orthodox priest, had released a few videos explaining his problems with Catholicism. Joe gives his response.
Transcript:
Joe:
Welcome back to Shameless Popery. I&#8217;m Joe Heschmeyer and one of you recently asked in the comments if I would respond to some attacks on the Catholic Church made by a Russian Orthodox priest in YouTuber. Father Moses McPherson. Now if you&#8217;ve never heard of him, father Moses is a Protestant convert to Eastern Orthodoxy. He was originally ordained as a priest of the Orthodox Church of America, but left that for some reason to become Russian Orthodox. These days he does things like making Mr Beast style videos on YouTube.
CLIP:
Today we bought this 2 million mansion and we&#8217;re going to transform it into a church. Hey, that&#8217;s me, father Moses, top of our new church building.
Joe:
He&#8217;s also perhaps the most public face of movement amongst extremely online orthodox guys where he&#8217;s promoting what he calls absurd levels of manliness. He&#8217;s a bodybuilder who posts images of his muscles and he makes videos like this.
CLIP:
A lot of people ask me, father Moses, how can I increase my manliness to absurd levels? Well, today we are going to explore those behaviors which will take you up and take you down. We have this beautiful chart here that is going to show us where we place modern day activities.
Joe:
Father Moses even made a chart to measure how hot and holy different women were in a video that thankfully has since taken down, but in which he argued that the hottest and holiest women were nuns. And look, I know that Father Moses doesn&#8217;t represent all Orthodox. He doesn&#8217;t represent even all Russian Orthodox. In fact, when the BBC ran an article on Father Moses and other Orthodox presenting Russian orthodoxy as absurdly masculine, the Russian Orthodox Bishop of London wrote a public letter denouncing this as a distortion of orthodoxy and saying, I want to say that if you&#8217;re here because you think that&#8217;s what we&#8217;re here to do, then you are a fool. This is stupidity. So despite those strong words, it&#8217;s probably worth pointing out that Father Moses is part of this kind of changing face of American orthodoxy. Let give you just one data point.
Back in 2007, orthodoxy in the US looked like a normal church. There were slightly more women than men, but the gender balance was roughly equal. Now it is swung wildly in the opposite direction. Orthodox men outnumber women about two to one in the us. So I think Father Moses is worth replying to both for the false claims he&#8217;s making, but also for the false version of Christianity that he&#8217;s espousing. And speaking of espousing, I&#8217;d like to personally espouse my gratitude to all of you supporting me@shamusjoe.com. Your direct support makes this show possible without us needing to take sponsors or anything. So for as little as $5 a month, you can get access to the sources for each episode, exclusive q and a live streams and a community of Christians who are passionate about going deeper with their faith. So if you&#8217;d like to help us out, please visit chim joe.com and subscribe the day and know of my gratitude for you. Alright, so maybe you&#8217;re old enough to remember the obsession with masculinity preach by evangelical Protestants like Mark Driscoll who said of the man of sorrows that I cannot worship a guy I can beat up. But Jesus getting beaten up is a pretty major part of the Christian gospel and I think it&#8217;s also worth pointing out here as Father Moses himself does.
CLIP:
If you&#8217;re a hard and dangerous individual, you don&#8217;t need to tell other people that. It&#8217;s always the people who are telling everybody about how tough and how awesome they are that are the least tough and the least awesome.
Joe:
I would only add to this that I think a hyper fixation on how manly you think you are is extremely unmanly. But let&#8217;s turn to his arguments against Catholicism. What does Father Moses have to say about Catholicism? He has some curious takes. For some reason, many of the Orthodox objections to Catholicism that I&#8217;ve seen seem to be in areas that we actually agree. For instance, I once had an Orthodox priest tell me that the difference between Catholics and Orthodox is that Catholics use only 66 books in their Bible while Orthodox use 73. That was surreal for me as a Catholic to hear because we Catholics use 73 books in our Bible. I was reminded of that surreal reality when I heard a clip that Father Moses posted from one of his sermons, which he entitled Orthodox Salvation verse Catholicism. So I want you to listen and see if you can spot the error
CLIP:
When we get into the heart of what it means to be an Orthodox Christian, meaning that it is to be in this relationship with God, where God transforms the person through this deep and intimate relationship and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is not similar to Catholicism. Catholicism does not have this theology.
Joe:
First thing to say is that is a great description of salvation. The only problem is this is literally Catholic theology. We agree. The only reason it&#8217;s not similar to the Catholic view is that it simply is the Catholic view. As the catechism of the Catholic church explains, the Holy Spirit heals and transforms those who receive him by conforming them to the Son of God and that the fruit of the sacramental life is that the spirit of adoption makes the faithful partakers in the divine nature by uniting them in a living union with the only Son, the savior. In other words, when we get to the heart of what it means to be a Catholic Christian, it is to be in this relationship with God where God transforms the person through this deep and intimate relationship and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is the exact theology that Father Moses claims that we don&#8217;t have.
And we see this not just in the church&#8217;s theological writings, but in her spiritual mystical writings as well. After all, as the catechism points out, prayer and Christian life are inseparable since we find in both the same transforming union in the Holy Spirit who conforms us more and more to Christ Jesus, we see these themes most clearly in the writings of CARite masters like St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross. If you want a good introduction on their spirituality, I&#8217;d recommend Father Thomas Dube the fire within. In that book, he explains the core and essence of the transforming union are nothing other than a complete identification with God in love. And this spiritual marriage of the soul with God is celebrated in the whole book of the song of Songs. And it is no wonder that mystics for the last 20 centuries have gravitated to the song of Songs to explain mystical contemplation. So I&#8217;m grateful to all of the Orthodox and Catholic commenters who gently pointed it out to Father Moses and recognize that this priest appears to be ignorant of even the basics of Catholic theology and spirituality. But this isn&#8217;t Father Moses&#8217; only argument against Catholicism. He has a longer video called Priest confronts Catholicism in which he lays out several arguments. I want to take each of the major ones in turn beginning with his first one.
CLIP:
This is a criticism of what I see currently happening in Catholicism, especially as it relates to the numerous people that contact me on a regular basis that are struggling with their faith in the Catholic Church and the consistent themes that I see coming up and the criticisms of what is actually happening there. So the thing that stands out to me probably most is that it is an occult like atmosphere. People are ingrained and indoctrinated from a young age that they do not have the freedom to ever leave the Catholic church.
Joe:
He says that this is an occult like atmosphere, but I think it&#8217;s clear from his whiteboard that he means to say that Catholics are cult-like not that Catholics are engaging in occult practices specifically. He seems to be arguing that Catholicism is like a cult because people don&#8217;t feel free to leave. Now, obviously people do leave. He claims that numerous Catholics are contacting him on a regular basis, and I don&#8217;t think that he means that these Catholics are worried the Knights of Columbus are going to go round them up or something. Rather, his argument seems to be that Catholicism is a cult because people feel guilty about leaving. They are worried about leaving because the Catholic church claims to be the one true church and teaches that schism is a damnable sin. There&#8217;s some truth to that, but without even a hint of self-awareness, he goes on to say this.
CLIP:
Obviously as an orthodox Christian, Roman Catholicism is not a church. There is one holy Catholic and apostolic church that is going back to the Eastern patriarchs for 2000 years.
Joe:
There are two admissions worth recognizing First Orthodoxy makes the same claim Catholicism does. Namely it claims to be the one holy Catholic and apostolic church. Now if that claim is true, then people should feel guilty and hesitant to leave the body of Christ. But obviously the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Oriental Orthodox Church and the Catholic Church can&#8217;t all be right in claiming to be the one holy Catholic and apostolic church. And I think Father Moses reveals the weakness of his own church&#8217;s position on that question when he claims it goes back to the Eastern patriarchs for 2000 years. The true church isn&#8217;t just Eastern and never was read the church fathers and you find vibrant Christianity in both east and west severing. Half of that tradition severs your claim to catholicity universality. And precisely the strength of the Catholic claim is that it is Catholic.
It is universal. The church lays claimed about the Eastern and Western fathers and the church is truly global, whereas you can see from a map that Eastern Orthodoxy looks like a regional schism from the church that even a thousand years later has failed to spread much beyond the former Soviet block. But in either case, I hope it&#8217;s clear why an Orthodox priest arguing that the church is a cult for acting like the one true church that no one should leave is a bit ironic. What about his other bullet points? Do they fare any better or are they also self-refuting? Well, his second point is on sexual abuse. I want to say at the outset, any kind of sexual abuse is horrible, particularly so when against a child, and even more so when at the hands of someone ordained to serve as a priest of Jesus Christ, it would be better for those wicked men to have mills stones tied around their necks and to be thrown into the sea. And it&#8217;s also a horrible scandal that many bishops covered up abuse rather than handling it properly, taking priest out of ministry, reporting them to the police and the rest. But Father Moses treats the abuse scandal as something unique to the Catholic Church and as a clear debunking of the claim that the gates of hell won&#8217;t prevail against the church.
CLIP:
When somebody says, oh, the gates of Hades will not prevail against the Roman Catholic Church, I don&#8217;t know what prevail would mean then because if people are caught and then hidden and then covered up and then sent somewhere else, and then Bishops will not even release the names of those who&#8217;ve been accused. And then on top of it, we all know that with abuse cases there are a huge percentage of which that go undocumented. People do not even bring them up.
Joe:
Although the Catholic church has received the bulk of media focus on abuse cases, this is in no way a distinctly Catholic phenomenon. And that&#8217;s true whether we&#8217;re talking about the sexual abuse or the coverups. For instance, looking into the Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses in Australia, the Royal Commission into institutional responses to child sexual abuse found 4,000 alleged victims of more than a thousand alleged abusers. And of the 1006 alleged abusers, the Jehovah&#8217;s Witnesses had turned to zero of them into the authorities. So sadly, this impulse for institutional coverup is pretty widespread and well-documented across the board. So if you&#8217;re part of a large religious body and you don&#8217;t know of any abuse cases in your church or denomination, that might not be a sign that everybody in your church is so holy. It might be a sign that there&#8217;s systematic failure to properly report and handle abuse.
And that&#8217;s true within Eastern Orthodoxy as well, particularly in those places where it&#8217;s a state church and a country with a checkered track record on freedom of the press. And we see it in the Russian Orthodox Church in the US as well. Just last year, arch priest, Matthew Williams, was discovered to have abused his own daughters when his wife Elizabeth reported the abuse, which he admitted to church authorities. The church ignored its own policies for investigating allegations. It delayed reporting him to the police and it waited months before disciplining him, months in which his erratic and dangerous behavior continued to escalate. And even after he had physically abused his wife, sexually abused his children, taken the children from their mother metropolitan Nicholas Father Moses&#8217; own metropolitan, still wrote to Elizabeth to suggest that there&#8217;s always a chance to look forward and mutually build a strong family.
The Metropolitan then wrote an email which he accidentally copied her on complaining not about the priest, but about her saying she shouldn&#8217;t be telling the church what to do and how to the flock, in my opinion. Now, my point is not that this scandal as bad as it is disproves orthodoxy, I don&#8217;t think it does. But according to Father Moses&#8217; standard, it seemingly would the third charge Father Moses levies is a charge of relativism. Specifically this idea that because we believe that Muslims and Christians worship the same God, therefore we treat the Trinity as negotiable or not important and therefore we&#8217;re relativists
CLIP:
Next the relativism. Well, we&#8217;ve seen these modern Catholic debates regarding the God of the Muslims and that somehow the God of the Muslims, although that God is not Trinitarian, is somehow the same God of the Roman Catholics.
Joe:
So Father Moses is claiming that the idea that Muslims and Christians worship the same God is relativism and he argues
CLIP:
Christians never, ever thought like this. This is so foreign to Christianity that I would say anyone who teaches this type of relativism is clearly not a Christian.
Joe:
I&#8217;m curious as to whether he would say the same thing explicitly about Patriarch Carroll, the head of the Russian Orthodox Church and the man most Orthodox regard is the spiritual head of all Orthodoxy. As Trent Horne pointed out, patriarch Carroll explicitly holds to the very beliefs that Father Moses claims make somebody not a Christian.
CLIP:
Here&#8217;s video of Russian patriarch Caril saying, Christians and Muslims each turn to the same God, the Creator. And here&#8217;s a 2023 address where the Russian patriarch said We, Christians and Muslims, no one confessed that God is the true creator of the world and the only lawmaker when Jay Dyer saw this posted on X not knowing its source, he said, thanks for proving you&#8217;re not Christian, LOL.
Joe:
So unless Father Moses is willing to openly argue that the patriarch of his own church isn&#8217;t a Christian, I think it&#8217;s clear this is not a good argument for online Orthodox to continue to try to wield against the truth of Catholicism. I think if anything, it shows the chasm between online orthodoxy and the real thing. So let&#8217;s look at his fourth and final main point on the papacy.
CLIP:
It has usurped the understanding of conciliatory. Where is this now? Today? In the early church, we had councils with bishops, with patriarchs, with priests, with deacons, and those relationships were conciliatory. They worked together under the guidance of the Holy Spirit to come to an understanding of what it was that God was transmitting to us, what it was that we needed to hear.
Joe:
Ironically, the Catholic Church has continued to have ecumenical councils after 10 54 and the Orthodox Church. So if the argument is that we need ecumenical councils in order to discern what God is saying to the church, surely that is an argument in favor of Catholicism and against Eastern Orthodoxy. Our most recent council ended in 1965. The most recent council generally accepted by the Russian Orthodox ended in 7 87, but he is right about one thing. Unlike his other arguments, the papacy is unique to Catholicism, but I think that this is actually a good argument for the Catholic Church instead of against it, as I explained recently in giving my own reasons for why I&#8217;m not Orthodox. You can check that video out right here for Shameless Popery, I&#8217;m Joe Heschmeyer. God bless you.
&nbsp;

Catholic Apologist Confronts Fr. Moses

<div class="page" title="Page 267">
<div class="section">
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
DAY 257
</div>
<div class="column">
CHALLENGE
</div>
</div>
<div class="layoutArea">
<div class="column">
“The Catholic idea that there is more than one form of justification doesn’t make any sense. You are either righteous before God or you’re not.”
DEFENSE
This view doesn’t reflect the biblical data (see Day 228).
The key to understanding this issue involves the difference between the quality and the quantity of righteousness.
Along the axis of quality, people hypothetically could range from totally unrighteous (purely evil) to totally righteous (purely good). Viewed in these terms, justification (being declared, reckoned, or made righteous by God) would involve having one’s unrighteousness removed and being instead given a pure righteousness before God.
This corresponds to how justification is commonly understood in Protestant circles. It also corresponds to how initial justification is understood in Catholic circles. Thus the Church acknowledges that, when people first come to God and are forgiven, they “are made innocent, immaculate, pure, guiltless and beloved of God, heirs indeed of God, joint heirs with Christ; so that there is nothing whatever to hinder their entrance into heaven” (Trent, Decree on Original Sin 5).
If justification only operated on a single axis—quality—then from this state, no further improvement would be possible. However, justification also works along another axis—quantity.
Along this axis, there would be the possibility of further improvement in righteousness. The situation may be compared to light. Even if a light is pure white, it may be either dim or bright. One could thus take a lamp that is emitting pure white light and turn up the intensity so that it shines more brightly. In the same way, after God has given a person a pure righteousness before him, he may by his grace lead that person to grow in the quantity of righteousness he has.
This is the understanding the Catholic Church has of ongoing justification. Having been initially justified, people “increase in that justice received through the grace of Christ and are further justified, as it is written: . . . ‘Do you see that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only?’” (Trent, Decree on Justification 10, citing James 2:24).
Note that it is only in regard to ongoing growth in righteousness, not initial justification, that the Church cites James 2:24 (see Day 222).
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>

Justification: Quality and Quantity

<div>Why does it seem like, when I pray or use the rosary, I don’t get an answer or the help I need?</div><div>Perhaps you are getting answers from God, but they’re not the answers you want. In addition, perhaps help is available to you, but you’re overlooking possible support because you are limiting how you think you can be assisted regarding a particular situation(s).
I suggest you talk to your local parish pastor as well one or two good friends who are also good Catholics. That way you’ll get helpful insights expressed charitably.
</div>

Why Am I Praying Without Profit?

Why This YouTuber Left Protestantism for the Eucharist – Sips With Serra

Each year, on Holy Thursday, the Catholic Church celebrates the institution of the priesthood. The Gospel of Luke tells us that Jesus “took bread, and when he had given thanks he broke it and gave it to them, saying, ‘This is my body which is given for you. Do this in remembrance of me’” (22:19).
The Catholic Church has taught that Jesus constituted his apostles priests of the New Testament with these words (see Council of Trent, <a href="https://www.papalencyclicals.net/councils/trent/twenty-second-session.htm">Session 22, Chapter 1</a>). True enough, but these verses do not embody the totality of what happens at ordinations to the priesthood today. At ordinations, the candidates kneel before their bishop as he lays his hands on their heads. The bishop also anoints the candidates’ hands with holy oil, called sacred chrism.
Both the laying on of hands and the anointing with sacred chrism are visible signs of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. But did the apostles receive the Holy Spirit at the Last Supper? If it was up to speculation, who knows what we might say? However, Jesus made the answer very clear: he would not send the Holy Spirit until after his resurrection. “It is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor [that is, the Holy Spirit] will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you” (John 16:7, see also John 14:26). And so I propose that the apostles were ordained as priests not in one place in the New Testament. Instead, I see their priestly ordination occurring in three different phases: at the Last Supper, soon after Jesus’ resurrection, and finally at Pentecost.
St. John is often depicted with an eagle in part because his Gospel theologically soars above the others. While the other Gospels are doing algebra, the John’s is doing calculus. Here is one example: John’s Gospel is the only one to record the following encounter between Jesus and his apostles soon after the Resurrection.
<blockquote>The disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained (20:20-23).</blockquote>
John was well aware of the gift of the Holy Spirit as he wrote his Gospel. He emphasizes for us that Jesus wouldn’t send the Holy Spirit to the apostles until after the Resurrection. Then he tells us precisely when Jesus breathed out the Holy Spirit upon them.
If my theory is correct, I am inclined to think of Pentecost as the third and final part of the apostles’ priesthood ordination. On the day of Pentecost, the Holy Spirit was poured into the apostles so powerfully that the people of Jerusalem heard “the rush of a mighty wind” (Acts 2:2). Because of the powerful preaching of the apostles, and because they spoke in tongues, 3,000 people became Catholics and were baptized that day (v. 41)
Therefore, the apostles experienced three ordination moments. The first occurred at the Last Supper, when they were commanded by Christ to celebrate the Mass. The second occurred soon after the Resurrection, when Christ breathed the Holy Spirit upon them and gave them the authority to forgive sins. The third occurred at Pentecost, when the apostles received the priestly charism of preaching, which resulted in a great number of people entering the Catholic Church through baptism.
Let’s look at three objections. First, what about St. Thomas? He wasn’t with the other apostles when Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit upon them. But this is not a problem. The Old Testament anticipation of this moment can be found at the time of Moses and the seventy elders. Two were not present when God poured fourth his Spirit temporarily, but these had the spirit of God poured into them anyway (see Num. 11:16-30). The story of Moses shows us that the two elders were the exception that proved the rule. Nor every single Israelite, wherever he might be, receive God’s Spirit; only those two elders did. Therefore, the gathering of the apostles, even without Thomas, was important, but not exclusive of this remaining apostle.
Second, John 20:19-23 says Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit upon the disciples rather than the apostles. But the first Christians interpret this passage to refer specifically to the apostles, not the disciples in general. For example, the third-century bishop St. Firmilian refers to Jesus breathing “upon the apostles alone.” (See also St. Hippolytus of Rome, St. Cyprian of Carthage, and St. John Chrysostom, all in <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Faith-Early-Fathers-Three-Set/dp/0814610250/ref=sr_1_2?crid=271SPH4DEYP1B&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.xTBZlpdcAMfNx3-piXJF9xwgg6MVdp8aYYmZNLzVb7CdzJodWmbhVwbqoUkSW5xd-vRYknlvLWxOLiXVaenOuhKgeCesKW-jDAcvnylDP1nr5qlWA2ZZznjppFalgB1FUr4qTq0RSa4vojZKOi-BorHt6ugBDGgVrPhGeLMpge3lzyQbWzC_LtNyXspH_orpVzNkX-0Pr3t-1sRG550ixmXi4VFZ44mqRUnlqZklPks.9I5P8UWXrZvoKJJHQLXel31SlDwA-Ar6NoSDX7Sf1XM&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;keywords=william+jurgens&amp;qid=1774730084&amp;sprefix=william+jurgens%2Caps%2C209&amp;sr=8-2">Jurgens</a>.)
Closer to our day, St. John Henry Newman became a Catholic because he recognized a beautiful consistency between the teachings of the first Christians and the modern Catholic Church. The first Christians interpreted that Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit upon the apostles and gave them the authority to forgive sins. Today, through the ordination liturgy, priests receive the gift of the Holy Spirit and the authority to forgive sins as well. They also receive the authority to celebrate the Mass and the charism of preaching.
Finally, we have our third objection: if Scripture wanted us to interpret these three moments as the institution of the priesthood, wouldn’t it make the point in a more obvious and explicit way? Newman thought otherwise. He <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Newman-Worship-Reverence-Ritual-Selection/dp/1960711202/ref=sr_1_1?crid=8GXLGOKBKBTR&amp;dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.Pf20Z8KBu4uPMhsAZbi6xmvlQf7ZCmZbjmDdETVjECHGjHj071QN20LucGBJIEps.ZwWvKvY0V4v8AhXdlRmpMf7cmnoF56z4UT0owaaDa6g&amp;dib_tag=se&amp;keywords=Newman+on+Worship%2C+Reverence%2C+and+Ritual&amp;qid=1774494666&amp;s=books&amp;sprefix=newman+on+worship%2C+reverence%2C+and+ritual%2Cstripbooks%2C153&amp;sr=1-1">taught</a> that many important teachings in the Bible are attested to in only one or two places.
<blockquote>If it be a good argument against the truth of the Apostolic Succession and similar doctrines, that so little is said about them in Scripture, this is quite as good an argument against nearly all the doctrines which are held by any one who is called a Christian in any sense of the word; as a few instances will show (496).</blockquote>
Newman provided at least two liturgical customs widely accepted today: communal worship and worshiping on Sunday rather than Saturday. Certainly, these teachings do not contradict the Bible. But though there are hints of these teachings found there, the Bible doesn’t explicitly command that the new covenant worship should be on Sundays, or as a church community.
In conclusion, my theory is that the apostles’ priestly ordination occurred in three phases. Each phase has been incorporated into the modern rite of priestly ordination. Priests receive the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands by their bishop and through the anointing of their hands with sacred chrism. This special anointing confers the authority to celebrate the Mass, the charism of preaching, and the authority to forgive sins.
As we celebrate Holy Thursday, may we remember to pray for our priests, who have been entrusted by God with a lofty mission.

How the Apostles Became Priests

<div>Billy Graham was not Catholic, but was exposed to the faith, did he go to heaven?</div><div>That’s a question only God can answer (see CCC 1021-22). Though Billy Graham was not a Catholic, as a Christian he dedicated his life to preaching the redemptive love of Jesus Christ for all mankind, and he had friendships with prominent Catholics like St. John Paul II.
If one refuses to become Catholic knowing that Christ made the Church necessary for salvation, that person couldn’t be saved because it would be tantamount to rejecting Jesus, through whom all salvation comes (CCC 846; Acts 4:12; Timothy 2:4). But only God can answer that question for any non-Catholic (see CCC 846-48). And, of course, each Catholic will also face their own particular judgment before God (CCC 1021-22).
For more on the salvation of non-Catholics, see <a href="https://www.catholic.com/qa/the-salvation-of-non-catholics">our response on the subject.</a>
</div>

Will Billy Graham Go to Heaven?

Karlo Broussard shows from <a href="https://www.catholic.com/tract/scripture-and-tradition">Scripture</a> why a person must be validly baptized in order to be a member of the <a href="https://www.catholic.com/qa/where-does-the-bible-say-the-church-is-the-body-of-christ">Mystical Body of Christ</a>, and explains the three conditions that a <a href="https://www.catholic.com/tract/trinitarian-baptism">baptism</a> must meet to be considered valid.