Episode #3 Did Paul believe in the Catholic Church?

Taylor Marshall

Published: 09 June 2009 7:31 PM PDT

Episode #3 Did Paul believe in the Catholic Church?

Click on the triangular “play” button above.
28 minutes.

Subscribe to “PaulCast” via iTunes | Subscribe to RSS feed | Download the mp3 directly

This podcast examines Saint Paul’s insistence “that there be no divisions” in the Church. Paul could not conceive of Christians naming themselves after human church leaders. Paul exhorted the Corinthians not to tolerate those who claimed to be “Pauline” Christians. Nor should there be any “Apollonian” or “Petrine” Christians. Given Paul’s insistence against name-bearing sects, we safely conclude that he would fiercely condemn the practice of certain Christians who identify themselves as “Lutherans” or “Calvinists”. Even the word “denomination” comes from the Latin de nomine meaning “of a name”. This denominational arrangement is completely foreign to the teachings of Paul. For this reason, the Catholic Church never accepted a “denominational” understanding of Church.

About the Author

Taylor was an Episcopal priest in Fort Worth, Texas before being received into the Catholic Church by Bishop Kevin Vann of Fort Worth. Taylor was also formerly the Assistant Director of the Catholic Information Center in Washington, D.C., located three blocks north of the White House, where he lectured regularly. He was served under Archbishop John J. Myers and Msgr. William Stetson for the Pastoral Provision of John Paul II, the canonical structure by which Anglican clergy are received into the Catholic Church and then go on to pursue Holy Orders in the Catholic Church. He is a graduate of Westminster Theological Seminary (M.A.R. Theology), Nashotah Theological House (Certificate in Anglican Studies), and University of Dallas (M.A. Philosophy). He is currently a Ph.D. student in Philosophy at the University of Dallas where he studies the Natural Law theory of Saint Thomas Aquinas (Summa Theologiae Ia Iaa qq. 94-108). Taylor and his wife live in Dallas, Texas with their five children. He is the author of The Catholic Perspective on Paul (forthcoming). Visit his personal site at: www.taylormarshall.com Taylor is also the Editor of Christian and American at: www.christianandamerican.com.

9 Comments

Nick

Posted June 18, 2009 at 7:17 AM

I think you mixed up shows, this show #3 is the same show as #2.
Taylor Marshall

Posted June 18, 2009 at 2:28 PM

Nick,

Sorry about that. I’ve corrected it so that it’s now properly Episode #3.
Robin Brookes

Posted July 16, 2009 at 8:32 AM

Which is precisely why the Anglican Church refers to itself as part of the one true, holy, catholic and apostolic church.
Taylor Marshall

Posted July 16, 2009 at 9:06 PM

Technically, it’s the “Anglican Communion”.
Michael McGovern

Posted July 27, 2009 at 8:13 PM

Oh yes, it’s clear now. Calling one’s self a Christian, after a geographical region, is somehow acceptable. Paul would be elated about that,I’m sure. With all due respect,according to the text in Romans, and throughout Scripture, God is sovereign. He reserves the right to save and the right to harden. Scripture is clear, God saves according to His will, not our understanding.
Taylor Marshall

Posted July 28, 2009 at 11:57 AM

Michael,

Are you referring to “Roman Catholic” as regards a geographical location? The term “Roman Catholic” is a slur made by Protestants – it’s not something that we typically call ourselves. We are “Catholic Christians” (i.e. universal Christians), not “Roman Christians”.

I agree with you that God is sovereign. I’m not sure that is an objection. Scripture teaches that God is sovereign all over the place.

It is true that God saves according to His will, but He does usually include our understanding. As Saint Paul wrote: “that their hearts may be encouraged as they are knit together in love, to have all the riches of assured understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, of Christ” (Col 2:2).
Emil Anton

Posted December 7, 2009 at 9:28 AM

pretty much the same stuff as the introduction to “Paul and the Church” in my book, surprise surprise again:)

To take it to a higher level again:
When Paul describes the Church theologically as holy, and when on the other hand empirically there are unholy members in the Church, is it right to simply assume that we can speak about “The Church” in both cases? The Protestant would say the true Church is the invisible Church… It does seem hard to claim that the sanctified Church in Eph 5 equals all the formal members of Catholic parishes in the world. What about the rest of the baptized, and what about unbelieving Catholics..
Richard Cassidy

Posted January 25, 2010 at 10:41 AM

Very nice website and very clear teaching. Thank you very much.
Robert Sessford

Posted March 3, 2010 at 11:21 PM

I have a question…
I hear you say that “Lutheran… Wesleyan….Calvinist… and such tags etc. would be contrary to St. Paul’s intent and teaching.

“This denominational arrangement is completely foreign to the teachings of Paul. For this reason, the Catholic Church never accepted a “denominational” understanding of Church.”

What then would he say about the different scapulars ? Orders? Brotherhoods?

Is someone who calls himself a “Franciscan friar” naming himself? (ie: de nomine)

Would you explain that by saying it is an “order only, and not a “church”"? Well, actually, there are a great many people who call upon the name of Jesus, and believe that he is the Son of the Living God, and trust him for their salvation, AND identify themselves as accepting some of the teachings of these various church fathers (Calvin, Wesley, etc.)YET, consider themselves part of a Church that transcends all human institutions and is JOINED together by the Holy Spirit that is, … the Body of Christ.

Even Pope Benedict recently expressed his desire to recognize Christians of other “denominations”. (sorry, I don’t have a quote ref.)