The Church considers Paul as the second greatest of the Apostles after Peter; for example my home church and school growing up was named Sts. Peter and Paul. The Church has no problem with Paul whatsoever; the Catechism references Paul throughout.
I myself don’t agree with all the tenets of Calvinism, but refuse to join in with any myopic condemnations of John Calvin. His actions were no more and no less excessive than many other religious leaders of that era and before, whether Protestant or Catholic. His beliefs were sincerely arrived at and I do not question his faith nor the faith of those who sincerely follow the tenets of the denomination that arose in his wake.
The pursuit and the maintenance of power trump everything else for many people, including Calvin. I do not doubt his sincerity; however sincerity does not ensure correctness, neither does it ensure truth.
Do I disagree with many scriptural interpretations within Calvinism? Yes, I do, and have made that fairly plain. However, disagreement is permissible upon some matters, even within your own church, MarkBsnr.
On some matters, sure. On basics of doctrine, no. I cannot disagree with the Trinitarian formula and remain in the Church, for instance.
Glad to hear it, since it has been made evident on this thread and others that many do not follow their own church in holding the Apostle Paul to such a level of esteem.
I've seen FReepers use the term "Paulician" derogatorily more times than I can count. I've even seen the particularly risible "Paulistinians" more than once.
Now, who would do such a thing, lol?