Introduction
Many Christians grow up with the idea that the Catholic Church is simply another denomination – one option among many. In South Africa, with its strong Protestant heritage and diverse church landscape, Catholicism is often viewed as just one Christian tradition alongside others.
But this assumption raises a serious question: Was the Church that Christ founded meant to be one denomination among many, or something unique, visible, and continuous throughout history? In the first centuries of Christianity there were no modern denominations, but one Church that professed herself to be one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, as expressed in the Nicene Creed – begun at the Council of Nicaea (A.D. 325) and later affirmed at Constantinople (A.D. 381).
This article examines that confession through Scripture and history, and asks whether the four marks of the Church can still be recognized today as concrete, testable realities, and whether the Catholic Church is merely a denomination among many, or something far more.
Part 1
We believe in “ONE” Church
What does it mean for the Church to be “one”? Some have claimed that the Church is basically invisible and therefore cannot be identified through any visible or tangible means. Others argue that “one” does not signify full unity, but only agreement on certain “fundamentals,” leaving the rest of doctrine open to dispute. Let us examine these claims more closely.
When we examine the Church as it appears in the New Testament, we do not encounter a loose spiritual association of believers known only to God. Rather, we find the language of a kingdom, a flock, a city, and an identifiable body to which one can appeal. From the beginning of His public ministry, Christ proclaimed not merely private faith, but a kingdom that had drawn near.
“From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say: Do penance, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matthew 4:17)
“And going, preach, saying: The kingdom of heaven is at hand.” (Matthew 10:7)
This kingdom was not to remain confined to Israel. Christ declared:
“Therefore I say to you, that the kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and shall be given to a nation yielding the fruits thereof.” (Matthew 21:43)
The kingdom is thus transferred from one covenant people to another. Since the synagogue was an organised religious society, it follows naturally that the new covenant community would also take visible, structured form.
A Unity That Can Be Seen
Christ does not speak of multiple competing communities, but of one flock under one shepherd:
“And other sheep I have, that are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold and one shepherd.” (John 10:16)
The unity Christ desires is not merely mystical or invisible. In His high priestly prayer, He makes the purpose of this unity explicit:
“And not for them only do I pray, but for them also who through their word shall believe in me; That they all may be one, as thou, Father, in me, and I in thee; that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.” (John 17:20–21)
This unity is meant to be a sign to the world. A unity that convinces the world cannot be purely internal or invisible; it must be recognisable. Some theologians claim that this unity does not have to be absolute, but that would be an immediate contradiction, since the unity between the 2 persons of the Trinity is so united, one cannot imagine that there would be any disagreements between them, in mind and intellect. We see even in St Paul’s letters that believers are commanded to be one in mind, with no divisions:
“I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.” (1 Corinthians 1:10)
Another interesting point is that Christ even describes His community as something that cannot be hidden:
“You are the light of the world. A city seated on a mountain cannot be hid.” (Matthew 5:14)
A city is visible. It has structure, boundaries, and citizens. It can be entered and departed. It can be recognised.
The Church as Final Court of Appeal
Perhaps the clearest indication that the Church is visible and authoritative appears in Matthew 18:
“And if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them, tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican.” (Matthew 18:15–17)
The instruction “tell the Church” presupposes a body that can be identified and approached. One cannot appeal to what is invisible. Moreover, the Church must possess real authority, for its judgment carries consequences: rejection of the Church results in separation from communion.
This passage presents the Church as a final court of appeal in matters of dispute – a visible society with jurisdiction. It is not merely a spiritual fellowship, but an organised body empowered to bind and loose, to include and exclude.
What history spells out
If we turn to the Early Church Fathers to see what they believed about the unity of the Church, the picture becomes even clearer. Consider, for example, the writings of St. Ignatius of Antioch (c. AD 107) – a disciple of St. John the Apostle – whose letters strongly emphasize visible unity under ecclesial authority. On his way to martyrdom, he wrote letters stressing unity around the bishop.
“Wherever the bishop appears, there let the multitude be; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”
(Letter to the Smyrnaeans 8)
He also wrote:
“Take care, then, to use one Eucharist; for there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one cup unto unity of His blood; there is one altar, as there is one bishop…”
(Letter to the Philadelphians 4)
Writing against heretics, Irenaeus appeals to the universal unity of doctrine across the world:
“The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world… having received this preaching and this faith… preserves it carefully… and believes these points just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart.”
(Against Heresies I.10.2)
He continues:
“For the Church… although scattered throughout the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles… one and the same faith.”
Writing against heretics, St. Irenaeus of Lyons (c. AD 180) appeals to the universal unity of doctrine across the world:
“The Church, though dispersed throughout the whole world… having received this preaching and this faith… preserves it carefully… and believes these points just as if she had but one soul and one and the same heart.”
(Against Heresies I.10.2)
St. Cyprian of Carthage (c. AD 250) also wrote:
“There is one Church and one chair founded upon Peter by the word of the Lord.”
The lists goes on and on.
The early Christians did not understand the Church’s unity as a vague spiritual bond among separated communities. They spoke of one visible body, united in faith, sacraments, and episcopal authority. To separate from this unity was not treated as a minor disagreement, but as schism. When they professed belief in “one Church,” they meant a concrete and identifiable communion – spread across nations, yet united in doctrine and worship.
Part 2
We believe in a “HOLY” Church
Christ is the Head of the Church; therefore, the Church is holy – for a holy Head cannot give rise to a fundamentally corrupt Body. The word “holy” (Hebrew qadosh, Greek hagios) means set apart, consecrated, belonging to God, and distinct from what is profane.
The Church is holy not because all her members are morally perfect, but because she belongs to Christ – consecrated by the Holy Spirit, entrusted with holy doctrine and holy sacraments, and set apart from the spirit of the age.
Scripture also testifies that the Church is Holy:
“Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her…” (Ephesians 5:25–26)
And:
“You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation…” (1 Peter 2:9)
Holy Teaching
The Church is holy because her teaching is not her own, but entrusted to her by Christ and the Apostles. Holiness implies fidelity. A body set apart for God cannot reshape divine revelation according to cultural trends, philosophical movements, or social pressure. From the beginning, Christians understood the faith to be something received and preserved, not reinvented.
The Church does not possess authority to redefine sin, overturn moral law, or dilute apostolic teaching in order to align with the spirit of the age. While many Christian communities in recent centuries have altered positions on issues such as contraception, divorce and remarriage, women’s ordination, or sexual ethics under cultural influence, the Catholic Church maintains that she is bound to what was once delivered to the saints.
Doctrinal stability in the face of shifting ideologies is not rigidity – it is a mark of consecration. A holy Church remains faithful even when fidelity is costly.
Holy Members
The Church is holy not only because she teaches the truth, but because she exists to sanctify. Christ “gave himself up” for her “that he might sanctify her” (Ephesians 5:25–26), entrusting her with the means of grace. Through the sacraments and the preaching of the Word, she does not merely inspire moral improvement – she communicates divine life. Her mission is to transform sinners into saints and lead them into communion with the living God.
It takes only a glance at the lives of the saints to see that the Church’s holiness is not theoretical, it is lived. From the Desert Fathers who battled sin in solitude, to martyrs who shed their blood rather than deny Christ, the Church has continually borne fruit in transformed lives.
Consider Francis of Assisi, who embraced radical poverty and started the worldwide order of the Franciscans; Thérèse of Lisieux, who found sanctity in small acts of love (the so-called “little way”); Padre Pio, who endured extreme suffering for souls; and Maximilian Kolbe, who gave his life for another at Auschwitz. Across centuries, the Church has raised missionaries like Francis Xavier, contemplatives like Teresa of Ávila, and theologians like Thomas Aquinas, Church Fathers such as St. Athanasius along with countless hidden saints known to God alone.
These are not isolated exceptions, but fruits of the same sacramental life: sinners made holy, the weak strengthened by grace. This enduring stream of sanctity testifies not to human genius, but to divine life flowing through a visible, sacramental Church.
Part 3
We believe in an “CATHOLIC” Church
Revisiting the quote from St. Ignatius of Antioch, we are reminded of what it means to be Catholic:
“Wherever the bishop appears, there let the multitude be; even as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.”
Ignatius is not using catholic as a denominational label, as though he were distinguishing one branch of Christianity from another. In his context, catholic means the universal Church – the whole Church of Christ – present wherever the full, apostolic communion is found. This fits the New Testament vision of a Church that is not tribal or local, but destined for every nation: “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations” (Matthew 28:19). The Church is catholic because Christ’s kingdom is meant to gather all peoples into one communion, not to remain confined to one land, one culture, or one faction.
This universality is not merely geographical; it includes a shared confession of faith. St Paul insists there is “one body and one Spirit… one Lord, one faith, one baptism” (Ephesians 4:4–5), and he warns against a fractured Christianity by insisting that believers be “united in the same mind and the same judgment” (1 Corinthians 1:10). A truly catholic Church, then, is a Church that can be found throughout the world and recognised as holding the same apostolic faith in every place – so that Christians in different regions are not separated into rival churches with contradictory doctrines, but belong to one common confession and sacramental life.
Finally, catholicity also means the Church is universal through time. Christ promised, “I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:20), and the apostolic faith is described as something to be guarded and handed on: “Guard the good deposit entrusted to you” (2 Timothy 1:14). If the Church is catholic, it cannot be a short-lived movement that disappears and re-emerges centuries later in a new form; it must remain historically continuous – one Church carrying one Gospel from the apostles onward, present in every age as Christ’s enduring witness to the nations.
Part 4
We believe in an “APOSTOLIC” Church
If Christ founded one visible Church, that Church needed more than goodwill and private interpretation to remain One, Holy and Catholic. The New Testament presents a Church that is taught, governed, and sanctified through ministers who act with Christ-given authority. This authority is not portrayed as a personal talent that dies with its first holders, but as a mission entrusted, exercised publicly, and transmitted.
Christ Entrusts His Own Authority to His Apostles
Our Lord does not send the apostles merely as enthusiastic witnesses; He sends them as His authorised representatives. He therefore makes their reception or rejection a matter of receiving or rejecting Himself. Scripture is blunt:
“He who hears you hears me: and he who despises you despises me. And he who despises me despises him that sent me.” (Luke 10:16)
“He that receiveth you, receiveth me: and he that receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me.” (Matthew 10:40)
This is the biblical logic of authority “in the name of.” Christ Himself comes with the Father’s authority, and He expects His own envoys to be received with corresponding seriousness:
“I am come in the name of my Father, and you receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him you will receive.” (John 5:43)
In the same spirit, the risen Christ formally commissions the apostles and grants them a specific judicial and sacramental authority over sin – something that cannot be reduced to a vague “preach forgiveness” message:
“He said therefore to them again: Peace be to you. As the Father hath sent me, I also send you. When he had said this, he breathed on them; and he said to them: Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.” (John 20:21–23)
From a New Testament standpoint, this authority is so basic that a Christianity in which everyone speaks with equal and competing authority would have been utterly foreign to the apostolic mind.
Apostolic teaching and oral tradition
St Paul commands the Thessalonians: “Stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter” (2 Thessalonians 2:15). Apostolic teaching therefore includes both written and oral transmission. Likewise, St Paul exhorts Timothy to “guard the good deposit entrusted to you” (2 Timothy 1:14), and again to entrust what he has heard to faithful men who will teach others (2 Timothy 2:2). This language of “tradition” and “deposit” reveals continuity, preservation, and succession.
The Church does not create revelation; she safeguards it. Indeed, it was this apostolic body – guided by the same deposit of faith and living tradition – that discerned and compiled the canon of Scripture. Without the authority of the apostolic Church preserving, transmitting, and identifying the inspired writings, we would not even possess the New Testament as we know it today. The Bible itself is a fruit of apostolic tradition faithfully guarded through the centuries.
An Office That Can Be Filled: Succession in the New Testament
If apostolic authority were meant to vanish once the apostles died, we would not expect the apostles themselves to treat it as an office that can be handed on. Yet that is exactly what happens when Judas falls. Peter says:
“For it is written in the book of Psalms: Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be none to dwell therein; and his office let another take.” (Acts 1:20)
The point is simple but decisive: Judas’ role is treated as an office that can be filled by another. The Church does not merely mourn a lost disciple; it fills a vacancy in ministry. This is succession in principle – an authority that outlives the individual.
Ordination and Appointment: The Laying on of Hands
The New Testament also shows how this authority is transmitted. It is not self-assumed; it is conferred through appointment and the laying on of hands. Paul reminds Timothy that his ministry was received in precisely this way:
“Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the priesthood.” (1 Timothy 4:14)
“For which cause I admonish thee, that thou stir up the grace of God which is in thee by the imposition of my hands.” (2 Timothy 1:6)
This same pattern appears when the apostles set men apart for official ministry:
“Whom they set before the apostles; and they praying, imposed hands upon them.” (Acts 6:6)
Because ordination is a real conferral of office and authority, Scripture insists it must not be done carelessly:
“Impose not hands lightly upon any man.” (1 Timothy 5:22)
And the New Testament does not treat priestly leadership as something anyone may claim by personal calling alone. Titus is specifically instructed to appoint priests by delegated apostolic authority:
“For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldst set in order the things that are wanting, and shouldst ordain priests in every city, as I also appointed thee.” (Titus 1:5)
What the fathers taught regarding apostolic succession and teaching
The early Fathers clearly understood apostolic teaching as something publicly preserved in the Church through succession. Irenaeus of Lyons (2nd-century bishop of Lyons, disciple of Polycarp, who was himself a disciple of the Apostle John) argued against heretics by appealing to the visible succession of bishops. In Against Heresies III.3.1, he writes:
“We can enumerate those who were appointed bishops in the churches by the apostles, and their successors down to our own time.”
For Irenaeus, authentic doctrine could be verified by tracing it back through those ordained by the Apostles themselves. Apostolic teaching was not secret knowledge, but publicly transmitted within the Church.
Similarly, Clement of Rome (1st-century bishop of Rome, traditionally understood to have known the Apostles Peter and Paul) testifies in First Clement 42–44 that the Apostles made provision for continuity after their deaths:
“The apostles received the gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ… They appointed the first-fruits of their labours… to be bishops and deacons… and afterwards gave instructions, that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them.”
For Clement, apostolic succession was not a later invention but part of the original design of the Church. Doctrine was safeguarded by identifiable leaders appointed in continuity with the Apostles themselves.
To confess that the Church is apostolic is to confess that she stands on a foundation already laid. As St. Paul writes, she is “built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the chief cornerstone” (Ephesians 2:20). A foundation is not replaced in every generation; it remains the basis of the whole structure. If the Church is truly apostolic, she must remain rooted in that original authority and teaching – preserving what was entrusted from the beginning and continuing the mission Christ gave to His Apostles.
Therefore, ecclesial authority cannot be self-assumed or exercised apart from the Church, but must be received through succession – from bishop to bishop – in an unbroken apostolic line tracing back to the Apostles themselves.
Examination
When we encounter the four marks of the Church – one, holy, catholic, and apostolic – we are compelled to ask serious and personal questions. One should ask the following:
Is my church truly one? Is it visibly united – not only across geography, but across history – recognisably continuous with the Church of the first, second, third, and fourth centuries?
Is my church holy? Not merely in theory, but in reality – does it continually produce men and women whose lives radiate sanctity and bear witness to transforming grace?
Is my church catholic, that is, universal? Does it preserve the faith once delivered to the saints and taught consistently throughout Christian history, rather than reshaping it according to the spirit of the age? Can the same faith be recognized in every country and culture? And can one look up to (and aspire to) the lives of holy men and women from every era of the Church, or only from modern times?
Is my church apostolic? From where did it receive its doctrine, and by what authority? From where did it receive the canon of Scripture itself? Do its ministers stand in a succession that traces back to the apostles, as the early Church insisted?
These are not minor questions. They must be asked honestly – whether one belongs to a Baptist church, a charismatic assembly, the NG Kerk, AGS, or any other denomination.
And if one concludes that the Church of the first thousand years fell into widespread error on essential doctrines – on the Eucharist, confession, the communion of saints, ecclesial authority, and apostolic succession – then even deeper questions arise. For Christ Himself said:
“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.”
(Matthew 16:18)
St Paul calls the Church:
“the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and buttress of the truth.”
(1 Timothy 3:15)
And our Lord promises concerning the Holy Spirit:
“When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth.”
(John 16:13)
If one claims that the Church quickly fell into universal corruption and remained so for centuries, then one must ask: Did the gates of Hell prevail? Did the Church cease to be what Scripture calls the pillar and buttress of the truth? Did the Spirit of truth fail to guide her?
These are difficult questions – but they are necessary. The four marks are not abstract ideals; they are concrete tests of unity, sanctity, universality, and apostolic continuity. And each person must examine them carefully and sincerely.
Conclusion
If these questions are taken seriously, they invite an honest examination of history and of the Church as she has truly existed and continues to exist. For many, such an examination has led countless souls (both simple and learned) to the Catholic Church in communion with the Bishop of Rome. It is my hope that this article may encourage Catholics to deepen their faith, and non-Catholics who seek refuge or a spiritual home amid the turbulence of the modern world to look more closely at this Ark (the Church) through which God Almighty has, in every age, carried His people safely through the stormy seas.
Written by Johandrie van der Walt