Popular Protestant YouTube host announces decision to convert to Catholicism

Catholic News Agency.com ^ | 11.17.22 | Joe Bukuras

[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.

[metmom]

The real question is why man has such a desire to worship and serve a virgin goddess deity even though Scripture is quite clear that we are not to worship or serve another god?

Heck, we’re not even to play favorites with others here on earth, much less “gods”.

James 2:9-10 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it.

[MurphsLaw]

Because Jesus Christ is the only ONE.

[metmom]

Interestingly, Catholicism treats Mary being a virgin as somehow virtuous when in those days, it was nothing exceptional.

Every betrothed woman was expected to be a virgin. Mary being a virgin as expected does not set her apart as being any more special or virtuous than the vast majority of women in those days.

And remaining a virgin after marriage was not particularly virtuous either. So their whole argument about her someone how honoring Jesus’s incarnation because of her ongoing virginity is nonsense.

[MHGinTN]

You men where the SCRIPTURES tell us Jesus’s Mother and brothers were outside seeking an audience with Jesus, those were really His brothers by His Mother and adoptive father?... You mean to tell us we should believe the Bible raher than manufactured traditions of men aiming to empower themselves? ...

[kosciusko51]

Thanks for your reply.

For the record, I wasn’t trying to “one-up”, rather I was asking you the same question you asked metmom, but in reverse.

As for the rest of your post, I will get to that later.

[grey_whiskers]

Trying to contact the dead is forbidden in Scripture.

https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Necromancy

Yeah. Notice how all those verses are about consulting the dead so they can foretell the future?

Catholics cannot know whether the person they are praying to is actually in heaven or not or whether they could hear us anyways.

Top. Kek.

Revelation 3:8

3Then another angel, who had a golden censer, came and stood at the altar. He was given much incense to offer, along with the prayers of all the saints, on the golden altar before the throne. 4And the smoke of the incense, together with the prayers of the saints, rose up before God from the hand of the angel.

ALL the saints.

And why should dead people’s prayers be more effective than ours?

C.S. Lewis pointed out that if we are only to pray to God, and God knows what's best for us, then there's no use even asking someone to pass the salt.

Do you think they can get God to give us what He wouldn’t if we ourselves asked?

Misphrasing of the whole situation. Think of the woman with the outflow of blood, "If I can but touch His cloak, I shall be healed." He didn't formally legalistically require that she touch skin-to-skin, for say, 4.026 seconds continuously, before she got healed. God is SO generous, SO merciful, that He'll even answer prayers secondhand. It's not "He wouldn't answer if we asked," it's that "He'll answer even more often than just that."

[metmom]

Saints in NT usage is any believer even those here on earth, not a special class of people who live in heaven as determined by a church.

The Catholic religion determining who are saints and who are not is meaningless. It was never part of the job description found in Scripture of any NT church or elder. It’s completely a Catholic fabrication based on arbitrary and unscriptural criteria.

[MHGinTN]

Don’t bother, Brother, it is just more Catholicism jibberish.

[grey_whiskers]

Saints in NT usage is any believer even those here on earth, not a special class of people who live in heaven as determined by a church.

Nope.

Matthew 27:51-53.

"51At that moment the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth quaked and the rocks were split. 52 The tombs broke open, and the bodies of many saints who had fallen asleep were raised. 53After Jesus’ resurrection, when they had come out of the tombs, they entered the holy city and appeared to many people."

See? Those who have "fallen asleep" too.

...and gosh, by context, that even includes *Jews* since it was the moment of the Death of Jesus.

...which has other implications too, since they were raised *at the Death of Jesus* (bowing in respect) and not after the Resurrection.

I do not presume to make doctrine about that, I'm just noticing.

[MurphsLaw]

I assumed no offense;
And after all,
being “one upped” usually leads to a learning experience.

[Elsie]

And why should dead people’s prayers be more effective than ours?

Connect the dots... (<---cute; eh!)

Ecclesiastes 12:7
"then the dust will return to the earth as it was, and the spirit will return to God who gave it,"

Genesis 3:22
Then the Lord God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil.

If live folks are good to pray for you (who are on earth)
then 'dead' folks (near to GOD) just MUST be so much better!

---

Now - wasn't that easy!?!

--Wannabe_Catholic_Dude(Hail Mary {John's mother} )

[Elsie]

But when(if?) the prayer ‘to a Saint’ is answered the way the prayee wants it to be, then the SAINT gets the credit; not GOD.

And if the prayer is NOT answered - who gets the blame?

[Elsie]

See? Those who have "fallen asleep" too.

I am SO confused!!

I keep hearing that when a 'saint' dies; they get a "Get out of Judgement (GWT)" card and go to be in the presence of the Lord in heaven.

---

Am I now to believe that it takes a special event to get the Dead in Christ out of the ground again??

[Elsie]

they entered the holy city and appeared to many people."

Golly!

The Walking Dead franchise sure depicts them a bit differently!!

And what's this 'appearing to people' mean?

I thought Paul said,

Second Corinthians 5:1-10

We are confident, yes, well pleased rather to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.

[Elsie]

... being “one upped” usually leads to a learning experience. while being schooled usually just tics someone off.

ticks?

[grey_whiskers]

Jesus prayed in Getsemane that the cup would pass from Him, if possible.

The Father said No.

And in Hebrews it says Jesus learned obedience by the things He suffered.

And Jesus also said if anyone would be His disciple, let him take up his cross, and follow Jesus.

What is this blame you speak of?

[MurphsLaw]

You have totally misunderstood what I wrote to you about the general insignificance
Of being Virginal before marriage. Yes that is nothing new… and is not lost on any biblical scholar.
What I was trying to get you to see…
was that in Isaiah 7:14 - the declaration that Immanuel be born of a Virgin- albeit insignificant in custom-
MUST THEN have had to have some significance as to A Virginity of some sort- or there would be no Need to mention, redundantly, a virginal status.
This Virginity, as you will see below, came from the Holy Spirit-
and NOT for some “virtuous” human need - that you are sadly unable to get past the carnal… as the TN man extols.

Now Strong’s also translates 7:14 as “THE” VIRGIN…. and so do certain Bible translations. Point being it could be argued that a specific type of Virgin was selected by God to come into this world.
In any event - you missed the point -
that Isaiah 7:14 mention of Virgin therefore MUST have a special significant virginal requirement - that would otherwise then would NOT NEED any mention at all.

We all agree Mary was a Virgin.
Luther- whom you dismiss on this topic… had some pretty choice words
For those who deified Mary’s Virgin Birth of Jesus- and then would turn around and refuse to accept her perpetual Virginity.
Though not on the side of the Church to be sure…
500 years later he has a pretty good summation of what the Church has always held to, and why.

1) From: That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew [1523] from Luther’s Works [“LW”]: Vol. 45, pp. 199, 205-206; translated by Walther I. Brandt:

A new lie about me is being circulated. I am supposed to have preached and written that Mary, the mother of God, was not a virgin either before or after the birth of Christ, but that she conceived Christ through Joseph, and had more children after that.

[ . . . ]
Now just take a look at the perverse lauders of the mother of God. If you ask them why they hold so strongly to the virginity of Mary, they truly could not say.
These stupid idolators do nothing more than to glorify only the mother of God; they extol her for her virginity and practically make a false deity of her.
But Scripture does not praise this virginity at all for the sake of the mother; neither was she saved on account of her virginity.
Indeed, cursed be this and every other virginity if it exists for its own sake, and accomplishes nothing better than its own profit and praise.

The Spirit extols this virginity, however, because it was needful for the conceiving and bearing of this blessed fruit.
Because of the corruption of our flesh, such blessed fruit could not come, except through a virgin.
Thus this tender virginity existed in the service of others to the glory of God, not to its own glory.
If it had been possible for him to have come from a [married] woman, he would not have selected a virgin for this, since virginity is contrary to the physical nature within us,
was condemned of old in the law, and is extolled here solely because the flesh is tainted
and its built-in physical nature cannot bestow her fruit except by means of an accursed act.
Hence we see that St. Paul nowhere calls the mother of God a virgin, but only a woman, as he says in Galatians 3 [4:4], “The Son of God was born of a woman.”
He did not mean to say she was not a virgin, but to extol her virginity to the highest with the praise that is proper to it,
as much as to say: In this birth none but a woman was involved, no man participated;
that is, everything connected with it was reserved to the woman, the conceiving, bearing, suckling,
and nourishing of the child were functions no man can perform. It is therefore the child of a woman only;
hence, she must certainly be a virgin.
But a virgin may also be a man; a mother can be none other than a woman.

For this reason, too, Scripture does not quibble or speak about the virginity of Mary after the birth of Christ, a matter about which the hypocrites are greatly concerned, as if it were something of the utmost importance on which our whole salvation depended.
Actually, we should be satisfied simply to hold that she remained a virgin after the birth of Christ because Scripture does not state or indicate that she later lost her virginity. We certainly need not be so terribly afraid that someone will demonstrate,
out of his own head apart from Scripture, that she did not remain a virgin.
But the Scripture stops with this, that she was a virgin before and at the birth of Christ; for up to this point God had need of her virginity in order to give us the promised blessed seed without sin.

[Elsie]

What is this blame you speak of?

C'mon man!

Surely you have had a 'Never Failing' novena that didn't work as promised.

---

Tradition says those who pray the novena will obtain their request.

Recite the prayer below 15 times per day for 25 days.

(Beginning Nov. 30 and ending Dec. 24).

 

Here’s the prayer:

Hail and blessed be the hour and moment
in which the Son of God was born
of the most pure Virgin Mary,
at midnight, in Bethlehem, in piercing cold.

In that hour vouchsafe, I beseech Thee,
O my God, to hear my prayer and grant my desires,
(mention your request)
through the merits of Our Savior Jesus Christ,
and of His Blessed Mother.

Amen.

---

https://www.churchpop.com/2022/11/30/need-a-christmas-miracle-how-to-pray-the-never-failing-st-andrew-christmas-novena/

[Elsie]

But the Scripture stops with this,

Yeah, it stops with so MANY things, leaving a vacuum that Nature Rome cannot resist.

[Elsie]

...and of His Blessed Mother.