Posted on 11/19/2022 4:37:14 PM PST by MurphsLaw
Cameron Bertuzzi, a popular Protestant YouTube host, announced Thursday online that he is in the process of converting to Catholicism.
“So, the big announcement is that on Sept. 20, 2022, I decided to become Catholic. I’m currently in an RCIA program and will be confirmed this coming Easter,” Bertuzzi said in a YouTube video.
His conversion “came at the tail end of a deep study into the evidence for and against the papacy,” he said.
“As a Protestant, I went into the study with an open mind. Ultimately, I told myself that I would follow the evidence wherever it leads, even if that conclusion is uncomfortable for me or for my family,” Bertuzzi said.
His Protestant friends were “very confident” that his study would only confirm his Protestant faith, “but they were wrong,” he said.
“What I found was that the evidence strongly suggests that the papacy is true,” he said.
Bertuzzi, whose Capturing Christianity YouTube channel has just short of 150,000 subscribers, said that he will be speaking about the details of his conversion on other channels, not his own.
Matt Fradd, popular Catholic YouTube host of the channel Pints with Aquinas, “got so excited about this news, as you can imagine, he decided to pay to fly me out to the Vatican, the one in Rome, to detail my journey on his channel,” Bertuzzi shared.
“So, if you’re interested in my reasons for conversion, the impact this decision has had on me and my family, and all the rest, then join Matt Fradd and I live on Pints with Aquinas from the Vatican tomorrow,” meaning Friday, Nov. 18.
Bertuzzi has hosted a multitude of well-known Christians and Catholics on his channel. Among them are Catholic apologists Trent Horn and Jimmy Akin of the apostolate Catholic Answers; Bishop Robert Barron of the Diocese of Winona-Rochester; theologian and professor Scott Hahn; Fradd; and Father Vincent Lampert, an exorcist for the Archdiocese of Indianapolis.
Videos with Barron and Lampert both gained hundreds of thousands of views respectively.
Bertuzzi’s channel can be seen here.
Either that or Troll, you pick.
Oh, you noticed? Read post #420 and tell me how respectful that was.
Odd how the more Fundamentalist types constantly overlook the errors, disrespect, and trolling of their cohorts, even on a thread originally about a Jewish conversion to Catholicism.
Yeah, yeah, forum thread vs. open thread. The swarming drowns out any genuine discourse.
Though I do give you credit for acknowledging you jumped in without knowing the background, and that your (I surmise) "gotcha" question was rooted in some degree of historical knowledge.
As you pointed out, how can I point out issues with a post I hadn’t even read before you mentioned it?
Furthermore, that post was not an ad hominem. It was a rough and tumble post on the issues the poster sees in the RCC. I don’t necessarily agree with all of the post, but that is immaterial.
I have not treated you with disrespect. The actions of others should not affect how you respond to me. But you appear to be suspicious of anyone who asks you questions.
is Satanic, because the image of Jesus in it is beautiful, whereas Isaiah (Scripture) tells us "he had no form nor comeliness, that we should desire him".
So yes, after enough of that either being contrary for contrariness' sake, or open and complete rejection of everything not explicitly included in scripture, I do tend to take a suspicious view.
A rough description of my views about Sola Scriptura are here, for your convenience.
What does Sola Scriptura Mean?
The Reformation principle of sola Scriptura has to do with the sufficiency of Scripture as our supreme authority in all spiritual matters. Sola Scriptura simply means that all truth necessary for our salvation and spiritual life is taught either explicitly or implicitly in Scripture. It is not a claim that all truth of every kind is found in Scripture. The most ardent defender of sola Scriptura will concede, for example, that Scripture has little or nothing to say about DNA structures, microbiology, the rules of Chinese grammar, or rocket science. This or that "scientific truth," for example, may or may not be actually true, whether or not it can be supported by Scripture—but Scripture is a "more sure Word," standing above all other truth in its authority and certainty. It is "more sure," according to the apostle Peter, than the data we gather firsthand through our senses (2 Peter 1:19). Therefore, Scripture is the highest and supreme authority on any matter on which it speaks.
But there are many important questions on which Scripture is silent. Sola Scriptura makes no claim to the contrary. Nor does sola Scriptura claim that everything Jesus or the apostles ever taught is preserved in Scripture. It only means that everything necessary, everything binding on our consciences, and everything God requires of us is given to us in Scripture (2 Peter 1:3).
Furthermore, we are forbidden to add to or take away from Scripture (cf. Deut. 4:2; 12:32; Rev. 22:18-19). To add to it is to lay on people a burden that God Himself does not intend for them to bear (cf. Matt. 23:4).
Scripture is therefore the perfect and only standard of spiritual truth, revealing infallibly all that we must believe in order to be saved and all that we must do in order to glorify God. That—no more, no less—is what sola Scriptura means.
"The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man's salvation, faith, and life, is either expressly set down in scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men."
—Westminster Confession of Faith
This excerpt is taken from John MacArthur's contribution in Sola Scriptura: The Protestant Position on the Bible.
Thanks nonetheless for the full citation.
I have disagreements about Sola Scriptura; but I can think of no way to communicate them accurately, in which the words will NOT be very liable to being misconstrued, whether by accident or by design. They have to do with ongoing revelations (whether historically to saints, or appearances of Mary, or doctrine being hammered out); to what is called "dispensationalism" (not held by all Sola Scriptura-folks, but a large subset); and truth for our Spiritual life (as well as the Magisterium of the church to teach and interpret Scripture). Some of the past heresies, as well as some Protestant teachings, are "based" on the Bible but seem to end up with interpretations that most of the rest of of Christendom has historically rejected.
Oh, and "once-saved-always-saved" -- and there are Scriptures on both sides of that as well. For John MacArthur, something about him sets off all my warning buzzers. I don't know if it's spiritual pride, or Pharisaism bordering on idolatry of the written Scriptures, or if there's secret sins among the leadership of the church, but something is off. But I don't necessarily expect you to abide by *my* conscience (Romans 14, which I keep emphasizing on these threads).
Only two choices, and they are both yours?
I think this is sounding a little like Lucy inviting me to kick the football.
Wouldn’t you rather say that the Scriptures I posted are cherry-picked?
At least that way you get to ignore them as being beneath your higher level of intelligence.
I don’t think ‘suspicious’ is the correct word here.
I can't speak for others, but I would much rather hear (read) your finely thought-out views on why SS is NOT sufficient to do the things that GOD requires to get into Heaven.
It works for me.
I wonder why it is NOT enough for Catholics?
If the glove don't fit; you must acquit.
“Neither.”
12And Jesus answered and said to him, “It has been stated, ‘YOU SHALL NOT PUT THE LORD YOUR GOD TO THE TEST.’”
13And so when the devil had finished every temptation, he left Him until an opportune time.
That is a defeat, that battle was lost by Satan that time, he left.
“He used His death on the cross”
Which is the Word prophesied in the OT, so yes Jesus still used the Word because He fulfilled the Word and therefore He used it to defeat Satan.
“He didn’t quote Scripture at other demons, even when casting them out: He commanded them.”
Nope, He didn’t, but I said He defeated Satan with Scripture I didn’t say demons, that is the voices in your head. Quit adding to the discussion and trying to deviate from the facts that you have no defense for. Jesus quoted Scripture and defeated their prince and even Scripture prophesied the death, burial, and resurrection?
“He quoted Scripture at Lucifer because Lucifer was trying to trap Him by *mis*-using Scripture.”
Hmm... that is was Satan always does, you know the garden incident from the beginning was a trap. Your cult is a trap from Satan, your false demon goddess worship is a trap, and that is what he does
Your worship a goddess and cannot defend your position. It’s so obvious that your cult removed the second commandment from the catechism to allow it.
This is a damned church whether you admit it or not, it only allows a small minority to escape, but the majority will be hell bound. Her children are killed that is hell for the biblical illiterate.
“By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. 21 I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. 22 So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. 23 I will strike her children dead.”
“Mary was the mother of Jesus, and not the daughter of the King (Jesus). And Jewish.”
Colossians 1:16
For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities— all things have been created through Him and for Him.
Jesus is Creator of ALL creation to include His mother, He was there when her flesh was knitted together in the womb and He breathed her soul into her at birth. He is the KING of kings, so yes if she was a saved Christian then she was indeed a child of a KING, her Creator KING! The Lord Jesus was first her Creator then she gave birth to Him, He made her, the Holy Spirit conceived the Lord Jesus, Mary did not create Jesus, but it is the other way around. She birthed Him, but do not confuse creation with birthing.
Funny thing is you resorted to name calling, but that is okay I know that you have nothing left. Of all the Jezebel comments I made you only picked out one and, in your attempt, to discredit it you simply proved just how ignorant you are of the Scriptures and the position of GOD the Father, GOD the Son, and GOD the Holy Spirit.
Nice job, you continue to prove why you still fall for the lie of Satan called roman catholicism, your understanding of the Creator, His position, and His Word is just awful.
“...the sufficiency of Scripture ...
It works for me.
I wonder why it is NOT enough for Catholics?”
The magisterium boss Satan knows sola Scripture is sufficient because he had them remove the second commandment, so they could worship their demon goddess.
“Queen Mother is more accurate.”
Really...
Mary as “Queen of Hevean” is an ancient address to Mary used in prayer that dates back to at least the fourth century. The imagery of Mary as queen of heaven was very popular in the Middle Ages.
https://maryqueenofheaven-brooklyn.org/
The word “Queen” appears abut the sixth century, and is common thereafter (Marian Studies, 4, 91-94).
The solidly theological reasons for her title of Queen are expressed splendidly by Pius XII, in his Radiomessage to Fatima
Here is a few more heretical names just in case those two are not enough for hell.
Co-Redemptrix,
Ark of the Covenant,
Beloved daughter of the Father,
Favoured Daughter of the Father,
Cause of Our Joy,
Cause of our Salvation ,
Comfort of the Afflicted,
Destroyer of Heresy,
Ever-virgin ,
Gate of Heaven,
God-bearer,
Great Mother,
Health of the Sick,
Heavenly Chariot,
Help of Christians,
Holy Mary,
Holy Mother of God,
Holy Virgin of Virgins,
House of Gold,
Joy of the Just,
Majesty,
Mirror of Justice,
Morning Star,
Most Holy,
Mother Admirable,
Mother Inviolate,
Mother Most Amiable,
Mother Most Chaste,
Mother Most Pure,
Mother of Christ,
Mother of Divine Grace,
Mother of God,
Mother of Good Counsel,
Mother of Mercy,
Mother of Orphans,
Mother of Our Creator,
Mother of Our Redeemer,
Mother of Sorrows,
Mother of the Church,
Mother of the Poor,
Mother of the Word,
Mother of the Word Incarnate,
Mother Thrice Admirable,
Mother Undefiled,
Mystical Rose,
Nova Eva (the New Eve),
Our Lady of Compassion,
Our Lady of Confidence,
Our Lady of Victory,
Our Lady, Star of the Sea,
Our Mother of Perpetual Help,
Queen Assumed Into Heaven,
Queen Conceived Without Original Sin,
Queen of All Saints,
Queen of Angels,
Queen of Apostles,
Queen of Confessors,
Queen of Families,
Queen of Heaven,
Queen of Martyrs,
Queen of Patriarchs,
Queen of Peace,
Queen of Prophets,
Queen of the Most Holy Rosary,
Queen of Virgins,
Ravisher of Hearts,
Refuge of Sinners,
Resplendant car,
Seat of Wisdom,
She Who Shows the Way,
Singular Vessel of Devotion,
Spiritual Vessel,
Spouse of the Holy Spirit,
Sovereign Mistress of the Angels,
Tabernacle of the Lord,
Temple of the Holy Spirit,
Temple of the Most Holy Trinity,
Throne of Wisdom,
Tower of David,
Tower of Ivory,
Treasure House of God’s Graces,
Untier of Knots,
Vessel of Honor,
Virgin God-bearer,
Virgin Most Faithful,
Virgin Most Merciful,
Virgin Most Powerful,
Virgin Most Prudent,
Virgin Most Renowned,
Virgin Most Venerable
Virgin of virgins,
Speaking of hell: I pity your soul on judgement day.
“I pity your soul on judgement day.”
Why, I follow the Holy Word of GOD! If He doesn’t honor His Word, then it will not matter anyways we are all doomed and He will owe the tradition of the pharisees and apology.
Now let’s debate exactly what I’m getting wrong about the Word of GOD.
Is it the removal of the 2nd commandment as you do... NO
Is it the worship of other god’s as you do... NO
Is it the creation of false dogmas according to man instead of Scripture... NO
So please let’s talk, but your tradition is worthless because it has changed too many times.
Your cults (church fathers) are a century or centuries after the apostles, so how are they fathers since Christ and His apostles stared it and they will have their names inscribed on the eternal Jerusalem’s walls. They are not fathers of the faith; they are delinquent children that taught heresies in the name of the Lord Jesus. Your cult picked them so they could justify their apostasies no more no less.
Your cult claims tradition to be equal to Scripture, but Scripture says that anything that contradicts it is from Satan, so you do the math.
Let’s talk, the Hebrew Scriptures were before Rome and they agree with the New Covenant, but disagree with Rome, so let debate the facts.
Stop the name calling and let’s debate the facts and not the feelings.
“they hate Catholicism”
I get the same argument from homosexuals when I tell them they are living in sin, guess the saying birds of a feather flock together. I love your soul, but yes catholicism is straight form the pits of hell and stands for nearly everything opposite of GOD’s Word from Genesis to Revelation.
My GOD tells me to hate what is evil and love what is good. I have been in your place and feel for your pain and loss, but only the truth can set you free. Funny, that the very verse that pertains to this discussion is the very verse that was spoken to you nearly 2,000 years ago and you still do NOT get it!
Romans 12:9
Let love be without dissimulation. Hating that which is evil, cleaving to that which is good.
Interesting how you romans take who is probably the most humble lady of the Scripture’s and make her into the most evil Jezebel of the whole Bible, only Satan himself could accomplish such evil.
Galatians 1:8
But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.