INRI33AD@aol.com
Dear Don Wilson;
Pastor, Christ's Church of the Valley.
After numerous inquiries, and in accordance with Matt 18:15, which commands me to first speak to you and your staff privately (which I tried to no avail), I am going to post this letter on the new CCV website, because I feel it important enough for your parishioners to read. But as the injured party, I wanted to send it to you in hopes that we can eventually see eye to eye on this matter. I am writing you personally because I take great exception to your persistent attacks and accusations about the Biblicism of the Catholic Faith. Yet what I take more exception to, is CCV's staff's total apathy and unwillingness to back up its allegations when asked to do so, especially when CCV is commanded thus by the words of Holy Writ:
"But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have." 1 Peter 3:15
I have asked you and your staff over half a dozen times now to substantiate CCV theology. To answer the questions: "Where is that in the Bible?" or "Who actually believed these ideas before the 16th century"? Yet you and your staff refuse to give a "reason for the hope you have". What answer will you give your parishioners when they ask these questions?
Don, I am asking you, the Pastor of this church for your "answer" to what you believe and what you teach as the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I am holding you accountable for your words of discredit against the Catholic faith. Yet I have received nothing other than "please don't ask this anymore" from your associate pastors and nothing from you, the church's pastor, the man who started this church and following. You teach your parishioners, that absolutely no case can be made for the Catholic faith, yet when asked to substantiate your views or for a Biblical argument with historical support, you remain mum. I have a reasonable request from one Christian to another: please do not discredit another's faith unless you are willing to substantiate your charges. Is that request really out of line? That is why I am writing you personally as the ultimate leader and founder of this movement.
You have stated that many of your parishioners are fallen Catholics. I take exception to you targeting those ignorant of their faith, and drawing them into your church with false information. That is not right. In fact, that is a sin against the very person you claim to serve, Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, to build your following with information you know is false.
Many might think I am attacking you in this letter. But I am only requesting that you cease discrediting another's faith if you are unwilling to substantiate your views. That is a reasonable request. There is a case for the Catholic faith, but your church will never know of it, because of the distorted information you present to it about Catholic theology. It is one thing to disagree with another's faith (and actually substantiate that disagreement), it is another thing to disagree with another's faith, and then misrepresent it (either intentionally or unintentionally).
I have repeatedly, yet politely asked for support, for not only your accusations against the Catholic faith, but also for the reasons WHY you have crafted CCV's theology as you have. I ask these questions rhetorically though, because we both know the reason for your silence. You know that not a single human being believed CCV's theology before the last few hundred years. For that was when it was invented. You know you cannot point to a single Christian who believed CCV's distinctive beliefs before the Renaissance era. And you know that since this is true, it is impossible for these ideas to be taught by the Apostles and the early Church. You know this. Hence your silence. And it is your quest to keep this knowledge from your parishioners. For if they were to learn this, why would they continue to embrace a belief system that even your own reformers did not embrace, much less the Apostles and the early Church? Why would any sober Christian continue to support a church whose teachings are not Apostolic? Or even reformational? That is how far CCV's belief system has drifted from orthodox Christianity. The beliefs of Don Wilson were even repudiated by your own reformers and they were totally unknown before the 16th century. What would your parishioners do if they were to learn this? Would they care? Some would, some wouldn't. But at least they would know the truth and the origin of CCV's distinctive theology. And the origin of the theology they base their salvation on is not from the Apostles, it is you.
Scripture tells us to: "Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil." 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
Are the following CCV ideas Apostolic? Do they predate the Renaissance era? I.e. the modern idea of the (UNBiblical) "Bible Only Theory," (find one verse that says the Bible is the final or SOLE authority, it doesn't), the idea that Holy Communion is but a mere symbol, as is Baptism being a mere symbol and not a forgiveness of sin. The 17th century Anabaptist idea of ONLY Baptism by immersion and ONLY as an adult. All of these ideas find their origin in the last few hundred years. None are Apostolic, for we can point to the man and the year these ideas were first conceived. Therefore it is impossible for the Apostles to have taught them. Yet you continue to tell 8000 people that the Apostles did teach these doctrines. This is the reason for your silence. You do not want CCV to know the origins of its theology.
Click here: The Origins of Distinctly Protestant Doctrines
Let me be clear why I am persisting in this manner. You have attacked the Catholic Faith. You and your staff have made charges against it, and then refuse to justify them in any manner. You as the Pastor of CCV, (and leader of this church), have presented nothing. I like you Don. I have only met you once at your 100 class years ago, and you seemed at the time a straight up guy. Yet for many years since, you has attacked the Catholic faith by your misrepresentations of Christian history and Catholic theology, and your accusations that some of its doctrines are not Biblical; that is, not taught by the Apostles to the early Church.
Scripture tells us to:
"Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil." 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
HERE ARE THREE EXAMPLES AMONG MANY, OF YOUR MISREPRESENTATIONS OF CATHOLIC THEOLOGY:
Trent Renner was one of your previous pastors, (and your son in law I believe who is a pastor at another church). He taught your 100 class years ago. He taught ignorant new Christians and fallen Catholics, that the first Pope was in the 4th century! Implying that it was in the 4th century that the Catholic Church was "invented." Yet any encyclopedia tells us that St. Peter was the first Pope is 33AD and it lists the 263 popes to the present day (see link below). Most mainline Protestant denominations concur with what even the secular encyclopedia states: that there is an unbroken succession of bishops and popes from 33AD until today. Why do you teach this falsehood? The use of this word "falsehood" might offend some, but it is the truth. Read any encyclopedia or any history book for yourself. Is this still the CCV curriculum in your 100 class? That the first pope was in the 4th century? That is like saying the holocaust never happened. It's that outrageous. Why do you teach your church and the ignorant what is not true? They believe everything you say whether it is true or not. To purposely teach what you know to be false is wrong. I addressed this with you and Trent in the past, obviously to no avail. Do you still teach this as truth? Any history book or encyclopedia will tell the link from Jesus Christ to John Paul II. Yet CCV denies this link even after being shown the truth.
Click here: Catholic Popes from St. Peter to John Paul II, from the Encyclopedia Britannia
http://www.britannia.com/history/resource/popes.html
Here is another example:
You teach that the Catholic Church "invented" the doctrine of "Transubstantiation" in the 11th century. Transubstantiation being the explanation for how Christ is "Really Present body and blood" in the Eucharist, or Holy Communion. (The Real Presence.) That also is patently false. You teach that no Christian believed this idea before the 11th century. Perhaps the name: "Transubstantiation" was coined at that time, but that does not mean the Apostles did not teach the doctrine to the early Church. Just as the title "Trinity" was used at the Council of Nicea in the 4th century, but the Trinity was not invented in the 4th century! It too was taught by the Apostles to the early Church. Yet neither word is in the Bible. Both "words" are UNBiblical, yet both "ideas" are Apostolic. The Lutherans coined the term "Consubstantiation" in the 16th century and the Catholic Church coined the term "Transubstantiation" in the 11th century. But both embrace the "Real Presence" of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist but describe it in different ways. Did these ideas precede the 16th and 11th centuries? Yes. Yet, Don you teach your church that it was an UNBiblical "Tradition of Man" made up in the 11th century. Again, that is not true. You deny the Real Presence Don, and you teach 8000 people to deny it, one of the most fundamental doctrines Christianity has. (Try reading John 6:47-57.) Any history book will tell what the early Church believed. It's even what your original Protestants believed:
ST. Ignatius of Antioch (Student of John the Apostle and Bishop of Antioch in 110AD):
"I have no taste for corruptible food nor for the pleasures of this life. I desire the bread of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David; and for drink I desire his blood, which is love incorruptible"
(Letter to the Romans 7:3 [A.D. 110]).
Does that sound like CCV's theology in the year 110AD? Does that sound like the Eucharist is but a MERE symbol as you teach 8000 people? The words of these men are not inspired, but they do tell us historically, along with the Bible how they believed in Christ's infant Church. Even the first Protestants believed in the Real Presence! Is everybody wrong but you and your personal following?
For more historical evidence from our Apostolic and post Apostolic Fathers:
Click here: Historical evidence for the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist
Please verify all these quotes from the Library of the Church Fathers at Protestant Calvin College:
Click here: Christian Classics Ethereal Library from *Protestant* Calvin College
Everything I present here is the documented truth. The ideas and evidence not taught at Christ's Church of the Valley. Don I must ask you (rhetorically), why is CCV spreading this misinformation that the Catholic Church makes up doctrines?
Thirdly, you teach CCV that Catholic theology is the "Traditions of Man" and that many doctrines were invented and UNBiblical. If that is so, why do we find that the Apostles and the early Church taught ALL of these very doctrines? AND, many of these very doctrines were even taught by your own original Protestants!? That is the crux here. The doctrines you deny as UNBiblical, were taught, (not just by historic Christianity for 2000 years), but also by *your* own original Protestants. Yet Christian precedence counts for little at CCV and only the personal revelations of Don Wilson are true. It doesn't matter if the idea is a new invention to Christianity, for your 8000 parishioners, if you say it's THE gospel, it's gospel. 8000 people following the personal interpretations of one man. You. With zero substantiation even when asked to present it. With nothing to support your opinion of the Bible outside of your own opinion of the Bible. Haven't you yourself cautioned Christians to be wary if a following is guided more by "the man," than by Christian precepts and historical Christian beliefs? I want to be clear. I am not calling you or your following a cult. You have a Christian organization. But it is troublesome that 8000 people blindly follow your personal version of the Bible with zero historical support. Even when asked for support. If you stand outside and look in, you would agree with me.
Again, the Holy Scriptures tell us to:
"Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil." 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
I ask you Don. Can you find a single Christian soul who believed your distinctive theology before the 16th century? Just one person? I.e. modern ideas like the (UNBiblical) "Bible Only theory," the idea that Holy Communion is but a mere symbol, as is Baptism a mere symbol and not a forgiveness of sin. The 17th century Anabaptist idea of ONLY Baptism by immersion and ONLY as an adult. Can you find a single Christian before the Renaissance era who even heard of these ideas? Even your the first Protestants repudiated all of these ideas save the first. The answer: No, you can't find a single person who held to any of these including the first. And that means it is impossible for the Apostles to have taught these ideas. I know you have visited the following site and read for yourself how the students of the Apostles, taught Christ's early Church the very doctrines you tell your parishioners are apostate or UNBiblical.
Click here: 3rd Unanswered Challenge for Protestant Theology: Is Catholicism Apostolic, name one doctrine that isn't, name one doctrine the early Church believed that the Catholic Faith no longer does.
This is why Catholic theology is true. Because it is "Apostolic." It is the beliefs and teachings of the Apostles and the early Church. Regardless of what you say, nothing is "invented" or made up as you have claimed without substance. Can the same be said for your personal theology? No. You can't find a single person before the Renaissance era who believed or even heard of what you now teach 8000 people as the gospel of Jesus Christ. Even your own original reformers align themselves with the Apostolic Catholic Church on most of your theology. What you teach 8000 is not Christ's Gospel, but your personal Gospel as you gleam it from the Bible 2000 years and 3 languages removed.
That is how far CCV's theology has drifted from orthodox Christianity. "CCV has drifted" you ask? Yes, if none of your distinctly CCV doctrines predate the middle ages, and they even contradict your own reformers, I ask you: what is your link to the teachings of the Apostles then? What is your link to Christ then outside of your modern personal interpretation of the Bible from which you formulate your theology? For an idea to be Biblical, it requires that the Apostles actually *taught the idea* and wrote it into the NT Bible. Don, your theology was not taught by the Apostles and subsequently written into the Bible,,, it was not even taught by your own original Protestants! So if they were not the teachings of the Apostles, they are by definition, UNBiblical, for the Bible is a written record of their teachings. As you know Don, just saying something is "Biblical" doesn't mean it is. For this is what the Mormons do.
Just as the Mormons claim Biblicism for their theology with zero historical support prior to Joseph Smith, your theology claims the same, with zero historical support prior to the Renaissance era. Again, I encourage your staff and congregation to "test everything" and consult the encyclopedia or any history book and find the first person in the history of the world, to teach the ideas and theology of Don Wilson. You and I both know what they will find.
"Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil." 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
Again:
Click here: The Origins of Distinctly Protestant Doctrines
Do you not want your parishioners to know the origins and authors of your modern theology? Can the truth remain hidden?
I know you see the logic here, and that is the reason for your silence. Before Thomas Edison, there was no such thing as a light bulb, and just as before the 2nd and 3rd generational reformers in the 16th and 17th centuries, Don Wilson's theology was *non-existent* as well. Therefore how on earth could have the Apostles taught your modern beliefs to the early Church, if they were invented in the 16-19th centuries and eventually compiled into CCV's theology by you in the 20th century? It's impossible. Your staff and congregation might not see the logic yet, or maybe they will, but many are asking themselves:
"If CCV's theology is true and "Apostolic" as Don has taught us, how come our Pastor isn't refuting the claims made by this Catholic apologist? Hasn't Don told us for years the errors of Catholic theology? Why doesn't he do some of that "Pastor stuff" and validate the claims he has told us for years are Apostolic? We have based our faith on his personal interpretation of the Bible, why will he not confront his detractors when asked to do so, and even commanded to do so by the Holy Bible? Unless there is truth to what this Catholic apologist is telling us, that not a single Christian soul believed Don's theology before the Renaissance era. Who should I follow then, Don Wilson or historic Christianity which even the first reformers embraced?"
The reason Don, as you know, is just that. What I say is true. I have not been rude, or impolite, but I have been persistent. This all started when you attacked the Catholic faith. I didn't attack CCV. I am persistent, for that is what it takes to get others to realize that what they have been taught for years, might not be the teachings of the Apostles to Christ's infant Church. Just because one's Pastor says something is "Biblical" doesn't mean the Apostles taught it. It just means that it is his modern personal interpretation of the Bible. That's all.
I ask again Don, and your parishioners should ask as well. Can you find a single Christian soul who believed CCV's distinctive theology before the 16th century? Just one person? No, you can't. I know you have visited the following site and read for yourself how the students of the Apostles taught Christ's early Church the very doctrines you tell your parishioners are apostate or UNBiblical.
Again:
Click here: 3rd Unanswered Challenge for Protestant Theology: Is Catholicism Apostolic, name one doctrine that isn't, name one doctrine the early Church believed that the Catholic Faith no longer does.
So why are you silent? The reason for your silence is that you recognize the "origins and authors" of your distinctive theology and literally have no answer for my questions.
Yes, they all spring from the 16th century and beyond.
Yes, there is not a single verse in the Bible to substantiate the "Bible Only" idea that you preach as "Biblical".
Yes, every single Catholic Doctrine can be traced to the teachings of the Apostles and the early Church.
Can CCV's? No. But CCV can trace its theology to the second and third generational Protestants. Does that make CCV's theology Apostolic? No. It makes it Renaissanic. Does it make them Biblical? No, for the Apostles did not teach them. By definition, it makes them the ideas and traditions of the Renaissance man, and the modern ideas and traditions adopted by Don Wilson.
So why do you continue to preach as you do? The reason is you have no choice. (Actually you do have a choices, but one path is presently too painful to take.) You have built a huge personal following. You have over 8000 people who look to you and your version of the Bible for their salvation. You are taking on 10's of millions of dollars of debt to finance the growth of your new church and the growth of your distinctive ideas. And this is the first time your faith has been challenged in this manner. Please, do not shoot the messenger. For Scripture says: "Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?"
Gal. 4:16 I am not your enemy, Don. I am simply telling you what you already know, but might not want to acknowledge. And I must spread this information to your staff and to your parishioners because it is the truth. And the truth must be known. For that is what God wills us all to do in the Great Commission (Matt 28:20). Don Wilson, you have without accountability, attacked "The Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth" 1 Tim 3:15. I would be amiss as a Christian if I did not hold you accountable for your words against it.
Your task now is to decide if you really want to believe as the Apostles taught the early Church, and if you do, what is your next course of action. David Corts has intimated to me that he wishes to believe as the Apostles taught the early Church, no matter where it leads him, I can only assume you do as well. No matter where it leads you. For that is what our Lord asks of us. "If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.'' (Matt. 16:24). That is good. With this in mind I must ask you: does it not matter where your theology came from? Or is your message to your staff and CCV parishioners:
1. "Believe my modern personal interpretation of the Bible. Not one Christian believed my ideas before the 16th century and not even our first reformers embraced these ideas, but believe me anyway because what I say is *Biblical*."
Is that your message? Is that your logic? For the only thought process that would condone this logic is the following scenario: that the Apostles taught CCV's theology, then NOT ONE CHRISTIAN SOUL did for 1500+ years (to included the first Protestants) and then all of a sudden the second and third generational Protestants started teaching these ideas *again* except with a different "spin" depending on what new church they were in or founded. Is that the logic you want the CCV faithful to embrace? That is not sound logic. That is what the Mormons would have us believe. That the Apostles taught Mormon theology, and then NOBODY DID for 1800+ years until Joseph Smith did in the 19th century. It is the exact same logic. It's not sound. It's wishful thinking and/or a rationalization of the facts of history.
2. OR,,, do you embrace CCV's theology out of financial necessity. Because you feel you have to, because it is your livelihood, and your church is in debt millions and millions of dollars? You know the Apostles did not teach your ideas nor anyone before the 16th century, but you feel you have to embrace this Renaissance era theology or your life will change significantly. This would unfortunately strand you in Stage 6, of the "7 stages of Christian Spiritual Development."
Click here, the 7 Stages of Christian Spiritual Development.
3. OR,,,perhaps a third option, and I pray it's not this one. That pride itself is driving the rationalization of embracing ideas invented only centuries ago, that have no connection with the Apostles (or even your own original reformers). And it is this pride, and your position as spiritual leader of 8000 people, that prods you to continue to teach them ideas that have no connection to the Apostles and are therefore not Biblical. Again, even your own original reformers repudiated these new ideas centuries ago.
Don, if a company made up unsubstantiated charges about it's competitor to gain market share, and yet when called on the carpet or into court to substantiate these charges, it came up empty, or even refused to support these allegations in any shape or form, would not that company be guilty of being unethical at the very least? I am sure the court would have a stronger word for it. Seriously, would it not be extremely unethical? Is this not what you have done to the Catholic Faith for years to build your congregation? You told me personally how much of your church is made up of fallen Catholics. If not, why the silence? The non-accountability? The "answer" the Bible demands we give for the reasons for our faith? Who believed your theology before the 16th century? And if no one did, reject this theology for what it is, the ideas of Renaissance philosophers and not the teachings of the Apostles to the early Church.
Again this sounds so harsh, but what else am I to do to defend the attacks of Don Wilson's theology upon the Catholic Faith? What would you do in my position? Just let a Christian Pastor "say anything he wants" without being held accountable for his words? Scripture tells us to:
"Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil." 1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
If 8000 people want to wage their soul on Don Wilson's modern personal interpretations of the Bible with zero support outside of Don Wilson's personal opinion of that Bible. Unfortunately, that is their choice. But I must ask you, that if you cannot substantiate the charges you make against the Apostolic Catholic faith when asked,,, please do not make these charges again. For that would be extremely bad form.
A final option.
Only you know the answer to why you teach what you know is impossible for the Apostles to have taught. I would pray that you would embrace this last option:
4. Don, if you sincerely desire to follow the teachings of the Apostles to the early Church, "no matter where it leads you" please consider:
Click here: The Coming Home Network International.
The purpose of The Coming Home Network International (CHNetwork) is to provide fellowship, encouragement and support for Protestant pastors and laymen who are somewhere along the journey or have already been received into the Catholic Church. The CHNetwork is committed to assisting financially and standing beside all inquirers, serving as a friend and an advocate.
Don, I must admit that your are a good preacher. Your theology is Renaissanic, but your do have the ability to lead others to Christ. I understand that you might not yet be there, to consider the CHNetwork. But please consider it. If not today, maybe tomorrow or the next.
I have enclosed the following link:
Click here: Frequently Asked Questions about the Catholic Faith from Columbia University
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/faq-cc.html
Please use it in your study of what Catholic theology really teaches, and the Biblical reasons of why it teaches what it does. The case for the Catholic faith is its Apostolicity. What the Apostles taught, the Catholic Church and Only the Catholic Church still teaches. This is not a bold unsubstantiated statement. It is evidenced by the historical teachings of Christians from day one. Christ, and his apostles are the authors of Catholic theology. History and the Holy Bible tell us the Catholic Church is the Church Christ commissioned in 33AD (Matt 16:16-19). The Holy Scriptures call this Church:
"The Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth" 1 Tim 3:15. And in Matt 18:17 Christ commands Christians to "hear his Church." These are Commandments from Jesus Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity.
Scripture also tells us:
"If we sin deliberately after receiving knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains sacrifice for sins 27 but a fearful prospect of judgment and a flaming fire that is going to consume the adversaries." Hebrews 10: 26
God Bless you Don and all you do,
I just want to believe as the Apostles taught the early Church, no matter where it leads me. That is why I reject new and modern ideas that are impossible for the Apostles and the early Church to have taught. This is only logical. This is why the Holy Scriptures tell us to:
“Test everything. Hold on to the good. Avoid every kind of evil.”
1 Thessalonians 5:21-22
"The Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of truth" 1 Tim 3:15.
Either it is or it isn't. Either we believe the words of the Holy Bible or we don't.
"There is One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism, One God." (Eph 4:4)
Where did your doctrines come from? Are they Apostolic, find out.
Click here: The Origins of Distinctly Protestant Doctrines, the man and the century from Christian history