As new Christians (and hooray!), you both probably didn't follow the progress of "women's ordination" through the Protestant denominations in the 1980s and 1990s, so may be interested in some perspective on that.
I was raised Protestant (Anglican/Evangelical) and converted to Catholicism in 1980.
After converting I retained many ties with my former friends and churches, so followed the progress of this strange movement.
It was driven by feminists and clergy, and based on two passages from scripture ("In Christ there no gentile or Jew, servant or free, woman or man" and "read the signs of the times"). These two passages were taken as overriding all others, and the various other biblical restrictions on women were derided (sic) as just being the product of the times they were written.
These were ludicrous arguments, starting with the passages themselves being taken out of context, and there being no biblical support for the notion that the unwanted passages were for just for their own times.
However, there was no direct theological debate, rather just constant pressure from the activists, with much wailing and accusations from women who claimed that they were being denied a role in the church, and with simps in the then all-male clergy wanting to signal their virtue. In many cases, the simps were probably just trying to keep peace at home - as men do
How did the activists overcome the clear mandate of scripture?
Did they say, "We don't care about scripture, we want women's ordination and will have it".
No, they decided amongst themselves that it was clear that their interpretation was correct (they could "feel" the Holy Spirit), and their numbers steadily increased, until they got the votes in the various presiding assemblies.
So, denominations which had always claimed to be "bible based" now had women in all levels of ministry and authority, while still claiming, as fervently as ever, that they were "bible based".
Now, to my point...
This was a radical transformation of Protestantism.
Protestantism had previously broken from Catholicism on the grounds that scripture is the sole rule of faith, and that scripture is "perspicuous", ie. scripture is clear and can be interpreted by anyone without the need for a church.
Now, that position is debatable, and I don't agree, but it is at least plausible, and the Protestants has been consistent until about 1980.
Then, with women’s ordination, they said, in effect, that scripture is not perspicuous and that the correct interpretation is decided by the collective opinion of the elites, ie. scripture "scholars" and progressive clergy.
So, by 2000, they had replaced the Catholic church as supreme authority with their own elites.
The consequences of that have been disastrous, leading to the following of fads, contempt for simple "Bible believing" Christians, and decline of numbers and relevance, as we see today.
With that bit of history I'll return to your video.
I won't dissuade you from remaining Protestant, but if you do, then I commend most highly the approach you have taken here of rejecting any denomination with female clergy. Quite simply, such are deeply unbiblical, and their protestation that they ARE biblical makes their crime even worse. As you say, seek out a church with a male only clergy.
Unfortunately, there's more to it than that. Some denominations have kept male only clergy, but still been infested with feminism. Sadly, the RCC is one. I don't know for sure, but I suspect that some Protestant micro-denominations with male clergy are still gynocentric and will dump on males.
So, as you say, seek a denomination with male only clergy AND respect for men and fatherhood.
ps. Many Protestants left their denominations when women's ordination was adopted, mostly for the RCC, but some for the Orthodox churches. These people are some of the most educated and strong in their new denominations, and the first to spot and resist the feminist influence which is attacking us. Amongst these, my favourite writer is former Anglican priest Fr Dwight Longenecker, who gave up one of those lovely English parishes where he and his family were happy. You might find him worth following for his comments on culture and Christianity. https://dwightlongenecker.com/ and https://x.com/dlongenecker1
These ones were brave enough to face the consequences of women's ordination as soon as it was introduced. I have no time for others who protested by stayed, and lament the growing infedility of their own churches.
Good interview Paul. I agree with many of Will's perspectives. Especially the internal, spiritual examination of the false altars that we unconsciously worship as men. I believe with Will that Adolescent boys having sex with women before mental maturation is damaging and leads them to women being able to manipulate them. With no fathers in the home, and being around single mothers all day, there are no men they can turn to for guidance. I disagree with Will on the "Finding a good Church". As you have exposed, all churches are filled with snakes with their own agendas. When I go to Church, It's about my internal interrogation. I ignore all physical dimensions, "Church structure, Priest and congregation etc..." and focus on Christ suffering and bleeding on that Cross in pursue of my personal redemption. I believe when we step back and see the worth and power of being a man, women will find their nature place and be content. In the end, women need male leadership. Without it, they are a ship in the storm lost at sea.
Paul, you have a keen eye for quality people! Will Spencer is a brilliant guy. I've long held that the WW2 (greatest generation) played a much bigger role in proliferating immorality than what's accredited to them. Pin up girls like Betty Grable & Joey Heatherton corrupted a whole generation of MEN who willingly took the bait. Lots of racy propaganda in WW2 including wo-MEN in various stages of undress. The Beatles: Interestingly John Lennon said I believe around 1980 in his last interview: "I don't know why people call me anti-Christ" "In fact I'm a very religious man" "I was brought up Christian and the more I read Jesus's parables the more it all makes sense to me" The institution of Christianity: Here's where I'm a little leery of Will's desire to save the institution. God's word is NOT an institution! Defending Jesus's teachings cannot be institutionalized! It's a personal walk in faith and example. Making Christianity into an institution turns it into a 'group think' where the consensus of the group replaces actual faith in God's word. Cheerleaders & football players: Cheerleaders are what the bible calls 'Temple prostitutes' RA RA RA means the sun God! Cheerleaders were created by the Egyptians to disorient the Israelites in battle. RA RA RA means the sun God of Egypt! Anti Semitism: I'm guilty myself. I've long held that Jews played a monstrous role in proliferating feminism. But as Will said there were feminists before and after Hollywood and now it has its own power. It goes back to Satan promising Eve equality! That's where it started! Jesus working on my heart: I was sitting in a friend's living room, and I said: "I don't like Jews" Guess what? My friend was Jewish, and I didn't even know it! His son was there. They let me know they were Jewish without even admonishing me except for a little chiding about me being Italian and I was embarrassed. Anyone who knows me including you Paul, knows that my heart bleeds for Harvey Weinstein. I've lost sleep over what's been done to him, and I continue to lose sleep over what continues to be done to him as I've told you. Chastity: I don't want Will telling me to be chaste when he was promiscuous himself. I've walked the walk more than most professed Christians. I'm 67 years old and the average wo-MAN has been divorced more times than I've been laid. Only a slight exaggeration. I still look like my profile picture, and I want some experience before I die.
You make a good point about the "racy propaganda" (Betty Grable, etc..) in WWII. It's just a gateway drug to pornogapahy, and as such can be very dangerous to men.
I recall the 1970s when racy posters and magazines were everywhere, including in workplaces. I was in a continual state of lust, and trying to sneak longer looks at these enticing images.
Such posters and magazines have now been removed, by feminists. While I question their motives, it has to be a good thing for men!
As a side note: MEN need to boycott woe,men so they come down off their high horses and learn their real value, which isn't as much as they thought it was
Returning a week later with a couple of other comments, from memory. I don't have time to rewatch the whole hour.
1. Paul mentioned at some point the "grief" that a man feels when his belief in marriage and family are utterly betrayed. As I recall, he said that this "grief" went back to finding that his whole life had been misdirected.
I agree entirely, and have been through it (as have many).
After the "grief" many men experience deep "anger" when they discover that their grief is of no concern to society, their family (especially mothers), or, the unkindest cut of all - the church.
These - society, their family, the church - are continually drawing attention to various "victim" groups and will daily talk about how much more we should be doing for them, yet when they see their sons' and brothers' own grief and loss, they just shrug. It doesn't register. And what's worse, they continue to press "women's issues", which include the presumption that husbands are violent bullies.
When a man is going through the worst of it those around him will: worry that he might delete himself (because they know that this is what men do); they expect that he'll be subject to false allegations (because they know that this is what women do); and they expect that his and and the children's future will be jeapardised (because they know that's what the courts to) - yet once it's all over, and he's survived (just) they'll all just revert to dismissing "men's issues" while still caring about everyone else.
When men see this, many of us become deeply angry with the culprits.
Feminism and "women's issues" in the church are particularly hateful to us. It's not just that the churches (including my RCC) have fallen for promoting women into authority, but that these institutions are indifferent to the group in modern society which is, overwhemingluy, suffering the most "grief".
As new Christians (and hooray!), you both probably didn't follow the progress of "women's ordination" through the Protestant denominations in the 1980s and 1990s, so may be interested in some perspective on that.
I was raised Protestant (Anglican/Evangelical) and converted to Catholicism in 1980.
After converting I retained many ties with my former friends and churches, so followed the progress of this strange movement.
It was driven by feminists and clergy, and based on two passages from scripture ("In Christ there no gentile or Jew, servant or free, woman or man" and "read the signs of the times"). These two passages were taken as overriding all others, and the various other biblical restrictions on women were derided (sic) as just being the product of the times they were written.
These were ludicrous arguments, starting with the passages themselves being taken out of context, and there being no biblical support for the notion that the unwanted passages were for just for their own times.
However, there was no direct theological debate, rather just constant pressure from the activists, with much wailing and accusations from women who claimed that they were being denied a role in the church, and with simps in the then all-male clergy wanting to signal their virtue. In many cases, the simps were probably just trying to keep peace at home - as men do
How did the activists overcome the clear mandate of scripture?
Did they say, "We don't care about scripture, we want women's ordination and will have it".
No, they decided amongst themselves that it was clear that their interpretation was correct (they could "feel" the Holy Spirit), and their numbers steadily increased, until they got the votes in the various presiding assemblies.
So, denominations which had always claimed to be "bible based" now had women in all levels of ministry and authority, while still claiming, as fervently as ever, that they were "bible based".
Now, to my point...
This was a radical transformation of Protestantism.
Protestantism had previously broken from Catholicism on the grounds that scripture is the sole rule of faith, and that scripture is "perspicuous", ie. scripture is clear and can be interpreted by anyone without the need for a church.
Now, that position is debatable, and I don't agree, but it is at least plausible, and the Protestants has been consistent until about 1980.
Then, with women’s ordination, they said, in effect, that scripture is not perspicuous and that the correct interpretation is decided by the collective opinion of the elites, ie. scripture "scholars" and progressive clergy.
So, by 2000, they had replaced the Catholic church as supreme authority with their own elites.
The consequences of that have been disastrous, leading to the following of fads, contempt for simple "Bible believing" Christians, and decline of numbers and relevance, as we see today.
With that bit of history I'll return to your video.
I won't dissuade you from remaining Protestant, but if you do, then I commend most highly the approach you have taken here of rejecting any denomination with female clergy. Quite simply, such are deeply unbiblical, and their protestation that they ARE biblical makes their crime even worse. As you say, seek out a church with a male only clergy.
Unfortunately, there's more to it than that. Some denominations have kept male only clergy, but still been infested with feminism. Sadly, the RCC is one. I don't know for sure, but I suspect that some Protestant micro-denominations with male clergy are still gynocentric and will dump on males.
So, as you say, seek a denomination with male only clergy AND respect for men and fatherhood.
Best wishes, and blessings for you both!
ps. Many Protestants left their denominations when women's ordination was adopted, mostly for the RCC, but some for the Orthodox churches. These people are some of the most educated and strong in their new denominations, and the first to spot and resist the feminist influence which is attacking us. Amongst these, my favourite writer is former Anglican priest Fr Dwight Longenecker, who gave up one of those lovely English parishes where he and his family were happy. You might find him worth following for his comments on culture and Christianity. https://dwightlongenecker.com/ and https://x.com/dlongenecker1
These ones were brave enough to face the consequences of women's ordination as soon as it was introduced. I have no time for others who protested by stayed, and lament the growing infedility of their own churches.
That was a most excellent interview! Really spoke to me. I'll be listening to it again tomorrow without a late night head. Great one, Paul.
Glad you enjoyed, Kirb. I love interviewing people who actually have something to say.
Good interview Paul. I agree with many of Will's perspectives. Especially the internal, spiritual examination of the false altars that we unconsciously worship as men. I believe with Will that Adolescent boys having sex with women before mental maturation is damaging and leads them to women being able to manipulate them. With no fathers in the home, and being around single mothers all day, there are no men they can turn to for guidance. I disagree with Will on the "Finding a good Church". As you have exposed, all churches are filled with snakes with their own agendas. When I go to Church, It's about my internal interrogation. I ignore all physical dimensions, "Church structure, Priest and congregation etc..." and focus on Christ suffering and bleeding on that Cross in pursue of my personal redemption. I believe when we step back and see the worth and power of being a man, women will find their nature place and be content. In the end, women need male leadership. Without it, they are a ship in the storm lost at sea.
Paul, you have a keen eye for quality people! Will Spencer is a brilliant guy. I've long held that the WW2 (greatest generation) played a much bigger role in proliferating immorality than what's accredited to them. Pin up girls like Betty Grable & Joey Heatherton corrupted a whole generation of MEN who willingly took the bait. Lots of racy propaganda in WW2 including wo-MEN in various stages of undress. The Beatles: Interestingly John Lennon said I believe around 1980 in his last interview: "I don't know why people call me anti-Christ" "In fact I'm a very religious man" "I was brought up Christian and the more I read Jesus's parables the more it all makes sense to me" The institution of Christianity: Here's where I'm a little leery of Will's desire to save the institution. God's word is NOT an institution! Defending Jesus's teachings cannot be institutionalized! It's a personal walk in faith and example. Making Christianity into an institution turns it into a 'group think' where the consensus of the group replaces actual faith in God's word. Cheerleaders & football players: Cheerleaders are what the bible calls 'Temple prostitutes' RA RA RA means the sun God! Cheerleaders were created by the Egyptians to disorient the Israelites in battle. RA RA RA means the sun God of Egypt! Anti Semitism: I'm guilty myself. I've long held that Jews played a monstrous role in proliferating feminism. But as Will said there were feminists before and after Hollywood and now it has its own power. It goes back to Satan promising Eve equality! That's where it started! Jesus working on my heart: I was sitting in a friend's living room, and I said: "I don't like Jews" Guess what? My friend was Jewish, and I didn't even know it! His son was there. They let me know they were Jewish without even admonishing me except for a little chiding about me being Italian and I was embarrassed. Anyone who knows me including you Paul, knows that my heart bleeds for Harvey Weinstein. I've lost sleep over what's been done to him, and I continue to lose sleep over what continues to be done to him as I've told you. Chastity: I don't want Will telling me to be chaste when he was promiscuous himself. I've walked the walk more than most professed Christians. I'm 67 years old and the average wo-MAN has been divorced more times than I've been laid. Only a slight exaggeration. I still look like my profile picture, and I want some experience before I die.
You make a good point about the "racy propaganda" (Betty Grable, etc..) in WWII. It's just a gateway drug to pornogapahy, and as such can be very dangerous to men.
I recall the 1970s when racy posters and magazines were everywhere, including in workplaces. I was in a continual state of lust, and trying to sneak longer looks at these enticing images.
Such posters and magazines have now been removed, by feminists. While I question their motives, it has to be a good thing for men!
As a side note: MEN need to boycott woe,men so they come down off their high horses and learn their real value, which isn't as much as they thought it was
Returning a week later with a couple of other comments, from memory. I don't have time to rewatch the whole hour.
1. Paul mentioned at some point the "grief" that a man feels when his belief in marriage and family are utterly betrayed. As I recall, he said that this "grief" went back to finding that his whole life had been misdirected.
I agree entirely, and have been through it (as have many).
After the "grief" many men experience deep "anger" when they discover that their grief is of no concern to society, their family (especially mothers), or, the unkindest cut of all - the church.
These - society, their family, the church - are continually drawing attention to various "victim" groups and will daily talk about how much more we should be doing for them, yet when they see their sons' and brothers' own grief and loss, they just shrug. It doesn't register. And what's worse, they continue to press "women's issues", which include the presumption that husbands are violent bullies.
When a man is going through the worst of it those around him will: worry that he might delete himself (because they know that this is what men do); they expect that he'll be subject to false allegations (because they know that this is what women do); and they expect that his and and the children's future will be jeapardised (because they know that's what the courts to) - yet once it's all over, and he's survived (just) they'll all just revert to dismissing "men's issues" while still caring about everyone else.
When men see this, many of us become deeply angry with the culprits.
Feminism and "women's issues" in the church are particularly hateful to us. It's not just that the churches (including my RCC) have fallen for promoting women into authority, but that these institutions are indifferent to the group in modern society which is, overwhemingluy, suffering the most "grief".
2. TBC (maybe!)