Can Women Be Ministers?

[Albion]

Hi Faithful Pilgrim,
This is an interesting topic.
A topic that is independent of denomination and should be addressed based on reference scriptures.
To understand whether or not women can be ordained ministers we shouldn't "cherry-pick" our favorite verse, but look at the scriptures as a whole.

My take home message from the bible is that women CAN indeed be ministers.

Why?

Anti-women minister argument:

#1. The idea that women should not be ministers come primarily from 1 Timothy 2:11–12

11 Let a woman learn quietly with all submissiveness. 12 please do not permit a woman to teach or to exercise authority over a man; rather, she is to remain quiet.

Wrong, This is an issue from some of the smaller churches, but it is NOT the argument for most of Christianity. What that means is that even if you demolish this particular objection to women clergy, nothing at all is done to address the objection to women's ordination as it exists in the Catholic, Orthodox Eastern, Anglican, Lutheran, Reformed and other prominent branches of Christianity where most of the followers of Jesus have their membership.

To a lesser degree :
1 Corinthians 14:34
The women should keep silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be in submission, as the Law also says.

Same mistake as treated above.

 

[All4Christ]

Perhaps we could take another approach that looking at Paul's epistles. What can we see from Jesus Christ's approach to leading the Church? I know what I think, and I will try to post that later - but I am curious for how you all interpret the examples in the gospels.

 

[jargew]

Wrong, This is an issue from some of the smaller churches, but it is NOT the argument for most of Christianity. What that means is that even if you demolish this particular objection to women clergy, nothing at all is done to address the objection to women's ordination as it exists in the Catholic, Orthodox Eastern, Anglican, Lutheran, Reformed and other prominent branches of Christianity where most of the followers of Jesus have their membership.


Same mistake as treated above.

Not quite sure I understand your point. There are 800 million protestants who are very interested in this issue.
Even so, a consideration of a question based on scripture, and a conclusion based on said scriptures, has nothing to do with the dogma of an individual church.
The question was "should women be allowed to act as ministers"?.
This is a purely theological question, and based on scripture, I say yes.
This has nothing to do with whether or not a particular denomination decides to only have men as ministers because of mere tradition or whatever other criteria are used.

Perhaps I should reformulate the question I answered to be "If I were going to start a church, would I be open women ministers, based purely on scripture"?

Ps. I might be wrong, but you seem a little angry......

 

[Albion]

Not quite sure I understand your point. There are 800 million protestants who are very interested in this issue.

And relatively few of them belong to churches which refuse to ordain women FOR THE REASON YOU GAVE. So if you are interested in making a case FOR women's ordination, it has to be on another basis.

The question was "should women be allowed to act as ministers"?.
This is a purely theological question, and based on scripture, I say yes.

Right. But you said "yes" simply by arguing that, in God's eyes, there is no difference between any living humans. This is the God who had a "Chosen Race" remember and who made Eve to be quite different in certain ways from Adam. We all have equal worth in God's eyes, but the Bible is also clear that we have different functions in his church. That's also from scripture as are a number of other verses that establish male clergy. You have to deal with these if you are to discredit the traditional view, not just find one general statement and make it "fit."

Perhaps I should reformulate the question I answered to be "If I were going to start a church, would I be open women ministers, based purely on scripture"?

Sure, but then all of scripture has to be accounted for. Not only have you so far said "yes" based on one verse but you also overlooked all the verses--and the arguments--used by the churches attended by most Protestants. Do it the right way and see how it turns out.

Ps. I might be wrong, but you seem a little angry......

Actually, I'm not. But I probably am a bit exasperated. However, that's not because of your post in particular. It's more because this topic has been discussed to death here at CF, in literally thousands of posts in a number of different threads. So to have a new one that takes account of almost NONE of the reasons that the churches do not ordain women is...well, frustrating. I'll try to keep it in check.

 

[miamited]

Hi FP,

I am a young earth creationist. I believe that about 6,000 years ago God created this realm. All of it! I believe that when He created the man and the woman, that He created them to fulfill specific roles. I believe that in God's establishment of these roles, that the job of being leaders among the people for Him, in other words spiritual leaders, that He always assigned that role to men.

Beginning with the priestly headship of the old covenant temple, it was always and specifically given to be the job of the men of the Levite tribe. It's in the law. For centuries, men and women among God's people, were satisfied with their roles. Today, not so much.

Today, many think that we should all be equal in every way for every job. But, that's the world's agenda. So, I believe that if pleasing God is what we seek, both men and women, that we should understand our roles as God created them to be and be satisfied with those roles.

Yes, absolutely! A woman can be a preacher. All it takes is some training and a fellowship that is willing to set her in that position. But the greater question is whether or not God wants her to be a preacher? Is that what God created the female for? Paul seems to think that even a woman having a question about spiritual things, should wait and discuss it with her husband, rather than make her question known aloud in the fellowship.

I believe that there is a very good reason for God's establishment of the roles in this manner. First of all, the woman is the weaker sex. I don't mean this in physical strength, but rather in spiritual strength.

When Satan set out to bring mankind into rebellion to God just as he was, you can trust that it was not a task that he took lightly. Satan is wiser and more crafty than you or I could ever hope to imagine. He set out to try and destroy the perfection that God had created and you'd better believe that he'd thought long and hard about the best way to do this. We find that he decided to go to Eve. I mean Adam was there and Satan could just as easily have pulled Adam aside and said all that he said to Eve, but he didn't. He chose Eve because he knew that the female would be easier to turn. Eve then destroyed Adam by enticing him to eat of the fruit with her. You better believe that Satan was just sitting there all smiles as Eve did his work for him.

Now, I know that there will be many who will pooh-pooh this understanding and that's ok with me, but that's exactly how the Scriptures portray the event. They tell us that Satan was more crafty than all the creatures that God had created and that he spoke to Eve. In fact, Satan never opens his mouth to Adam as far as we know. Eve does all the work for him. Even Adam blames Eve when God comes to call and then Eve blames Satan.

Many will say that doesn't really prove this idea of male and female roles or make any difference to God as to who sinned and who was responsible for leading each one into sin. I would certainly agree that if this were the only place where this hierarchy comes up in the Scriptures, that it might be just a one off. But it isn't.

As I previously wrote, the establishment of the priesthood was through the male members of the Levite tribe. Also, Paul's explanation that pastors and deacons should be men with high moral standards and worthy of their calling. Paul's writing that women should be silent in the fellowships. And, of course, for those who have decided differently, the question is always the same one that Satan asked of Eve: Did God really say? I believe that He has.

Now, let me be quick to point out that I don't, by this understanding, place women any lower than men in their worth to God. All I'm saying is that God seems to have established roles for the man to fulfill and for the woman to fulfill and the job of being a teacher or leader among God's people has always been for the men.

Finally, the female was created to be more nurturing. Invariably, even on these threads, and no I'm not saying it's some unbreakable rule, but females tend to be less comfortable agreeing with and believing that there is a hell and God really is going to set people in that place after the judgment and it will be a place of great torment for ever and ever. Why? Because, due to their nurturing nature, they have a hard time rationalizing this reality with a God who says of Himself that He is love.

I offer this up with some bit of experience in dealing with the subject. My mother is a pastor. She and I are pretty much polar opposites in our understanding of who God is. She's all about the women's liberation agenda. Even reading a book at one time titled, 'When God was a Woman'. I cringe when I visit her and have to sit and listen to her teach from the Scriptures. However, most often she doesn't. She just tells some cute little homey tale and then makes some general point from her homey tale that we should apply in life. Not a whole lot different from the teachings of Buddhism or Hinduism. She just gives her instructions and teachings in a building designated as a Christian Church. Don't worry, I love my mother. However, I have to love her despite not agreeing with her.

Ok everybody. Let her rip!!!!

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[All4Christ]

@miamited - I actually don't think that women should be priests or ordained clergy, but I hate it when people try to use the whole Eve was tricked first scenario to say that women are weaker spiritually. And all the stuff about women not being comfortable about hell and judgment...

Consider that women were the ones who still visited the tomb while the disciples were scared inside. God deigned to become incarnate by being born in a woman. She traditionally has been considered to be the New Eve, because of her obedience. Even if we were considered to be weaker spiritually because of that situation, we were redeemed in Christ. Phoebe worked alongside her husband. Take a look at Dorcas... Lydia... Deborah... Ruth... the list goes on.

I have to leave, otherwise I'd spend more time on this...but seriously, your argument does damage to the whole women shouldn't be ministers argument.

Christ became man by the Virgin that the disobedience which issued from the serpent might be destroyed in the same way it originated. Eve was still an undefiled virgin when she conceived the word of the serpent and brought forth disobedience and death. But the Virgin received faith and joy, at the announcement of the angel Gabriel...and she replied, "Be it done to me according you your word". So through the mediation of the Virgin he came into the world, through whom God would crush the serpent (St Justin Martyr, Apologia, ch. 100; 150 AD).

The seduction of a fallen angel drew Eve, a virgin espoused to a man, while the glad tidings of the holy angel drew Mary, a Virgin already espoused, to begin the plan which would dissolve the bonds of that first snare...For as the former was lead astray by the word of an angel, so that she fled from God when she had disobeyed his word, so did the latter, by and angelic communication, receive the glad tidings that she should bear God, and obeyed his word. If the former disobeyed God, the latter obeyed, so that the Virgin Mary might become the advocate of the virgin Eve. Thus, as the human race fell into bondage to death by means of a virgin, so it is rescued by a virgin; virginal disobedience is balanced in the opposite scale by virginal obedience (St. Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 3, ch XXII, par. 4; 189 AD).

 

[Sola1517]

As the title suggests, are women allowed to be ministers, specifically elders and deacons?

In 1 Timothy chapter 3, Paul lists the qualifications for the elders and deacons. For both of them, he uses the masculine pronoun and they must be faithful to their wife.

I don't know what verse egalitarians use, so I won't pretend to know what verses they use to avoid misrepresenting them. I do recall, however, Paul referring to Phoebe as a deaconness, but from my conversation with lther Christians, might not necessarily be the same thing as a deacon, but more of a nun.

My mother and I debated this and she believes women cannot be pastors, but can otherwise hold any position in the church.

I used to agree with her, but now I think deacons and elders are to be exclusively male.

This is a tricky topic as I don't see it as big of an issue as say- baptism, and I want to be open to the possibility that God may call women to be pastors, elders, and deacons. I don't want to say that God cannot choose women to fill those roles.

What doth thou thinketh, CF?

What do you think of Kay Arthur?

 

[miamited]

Hi all4christ,

I think there are and have been many fine godly women. The question wasn't whether women could believe the gospel or be saved on the day of God's judgment? I accept that wholeheartedly. I'm sure that Paul knew better than you or I how faithful Dorcas was. How encouraging and helpful Lydia was to him.

However, as I said, the question isn't, have there ever been any godly women? The question was whether women should accept the role of being a pastor over a fellowship. I think the Scriptures are fairly clear about it. Yes, I believe that there are some valid reasons that God may have reserved the right of His pastors to be men. I cannot say with any certainty that my ideas about that are necessarily the truth of the matter, but I believe that they are worth considering when we try to go beyond what the Scriptures tell us and ask, "Why?"

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Cimorene]

Of course.

 

[FireDragon76]

I used to go to an Eastern Orthodox church. The argument there is that Christ was a man, and only a male priest can iconically represent Christ in the bloodless sacrifice of the Eucharist (another reason why Orthodox priests tend to all have beards, and many even have long hair). It is a very different argument from most conservative Protestants, who believe women cannot teach men- a view that the Orthodox reject, at least in the western world.

Most mainline Protestants accept women pastors for multiple reasons, some anthropological, some because they do not read the Bible with the same hermeneutic as conservative Christians.

 

[Albion]

I used to go to an Eastern Orthodox church. The argument there is that Christ was a man, and only a male priest can iconically represent Christ in the bloodless sacrifice of the Eucharist (another reason why Orthodox priests tend to all have beards, and many even have long hair). It is a very different argument from most conservative Protestants, who believe women cannot teach men- a view that the Orthodox reject, at least in the western world.

Most mainline Protestants accept women pastors for multiple reasons, some anthropological, some because they do not read the Bible with the same hermeneutic as conservative Christians.

Just a moment. Using terms like "conservative Protestants" and "mainline Protestants" may slant the answer to this question. With most of the Protestant churches which retain the all-male clergy policy, the justification is neither of those two mentioned above but, rather, 1) the Bible's stated qualifications for being ordained and 2) the testimony of the history of the early church.

 

[FireDragon76]

Right... but conservative Protestants that reject women's ordination tend to say that the Bible says women cannot teach or lead men, that's their justification for doing so. I would argue it's down to Biblicism, where the plain letter of the text is read completely out of the wider context. It would be like saying the 5th Commandment means pacifism and anarchism is the only option for a Christian, even though the principle behind the 5th Commandment may justify taking of life in some circumstances. Likewise, just because the Bible lists some general qualifications for who should be ordained doesn't mean that we as Christians need not search out a deeper theology in the entire witness of the Bible and Christian tradition- especially if we do not have an iconic understanding of the priesthood (which is why I mentioned the EO).

 

[High Fidelity]

Right... but conservative Protestants that reject women's ordination tend to say that the Bible says women cannot teach or lead men, that's their justification for doing so. I would argue it's down to Biblicism, where the plain letter of the text is read completely out of the wider context. It would be like saying the 5th Commandment means pacifism and anarchism is the only option for a Christian, even though the principle behind the 5th Commandment may justify taking of life in some circumstances. Likewise, just because the Bible lists some general qualifications for who should be ordained doesn't mean that we as Christians need not search out a deeper theology in the entire witness of the Bible and Christian tradition- especially if we do not have an iconic understanding of the priesthood (which is why I mentioned the EO).

The 5th Commandment parallel doesn't stand up because Romans justifies self-defence.

Scripture unequivocally outlines the requirements for the office of overseers and deacons and is not adequately challenged elsewhere as clarification in Scripture.

 

[Albion]

Right... but conservative Protestants that reject women's ordination tend to say that the Bible says women cannot teach or lead men

Once again, by throwing in that one word, you narrow the field to only certain conservative churches--and they're the unnamed ones that you have in mind. As for the other conservative churches that do not ordain women, they do not go by this standard of "cannot lead or teach men."

 

[Lady&TheCoatofmanycolors]

Hi FP,

I am a young earth creationist. I believe that about 6,000 years ago God created this realm. All of it! I believe that when He created the man and the woman, that He created them to fulfill specific roles. I believe that in God's establishment of these roles, that the job of being leaders among the people for Him, in other words spiritual leaders, that He always assigned that role to men.

Beginning with the priestly headship of the old covenant temple, it was always and specifically given to be the job of the men of the Levite tribe. It's in the law. For centuries, men and women among God's people, were satisfied with their roles. Today, not so much.

Today, many think that we should all be equal in every way for every job. But, that's the world's agenda. So, I believe that if pleasing God is what we seek, both men and women, that we should understand our roles as God created them to be and be satisfied with those roles.

Yes, absolutely! A woman can be a preacher. All it takes is some training and a fellowship that is willing to set her in that position. But the greater question is whether or not God wants her to be a preacher? Is that what God created the female for? Paul seems to think that even a woman having a question about spiritual things, should wait and discuss it with her husband, rather than make her question known aloud in the fellowship.

I believe that there is a very good reason for God's establishment of the roles in this manner. First of all, the woman is the weaker sex. I don't mean this in physical strength, but rather in spiritual strength.

When Satan set out to bring mankind into rebellion to God just as he was, you can trust that it was not a task that he took lightly. Satan is wiser and more crafty than you or I could ever hope to imagine. He set out to try and destroy the perfection that God had created and you'd better believe that he'd thought long and hard about the best way to do this. We find that he decided to go to Eve. I mean Adam was there and Satan could just as easily have pulled Adam aside and said all that he said to Eve, but he didn't. He chose Eve because he knew that the female would be easier to turn. Eve then destroyed Adam by enticing him to eat of the fruit with her. You better believe that Satan was just sitting there all smiles as Eve did his work for him.

Now, I know that there will be many who will pooh-pooh this understanding and that's ok with me, but that's exactly how the Scriptures portray the event. They tell us that Satan was more crafty than all the creatures that God had created and that he spoke to Eve. In fact, Satan never opens his mouth to Adam as far as we know. Eve does all the work for him. Even Adam blames Eve when God comes to call and then Eve blames Satan.

Many will say that doesn't really prove this idea of male and female roles or make any difference to God as to who sinned and who was responsible for leading each one into sin. I would certainly agree that if this were the only place where this hierarchy comes up in the Scriptures, that it might be just a one off. But it isn't.

As I previously wrote, the establishment of the priesthood was through the male members of the Levite tribe. Also, Paul's explanation that pastors and deacons should be men with high moral standards and worthy of their calling. Paul's writing that women should be silent in the fellowships. And, of course, for those who have decided differently, the question is always the same one that Satan asked of Eve: Did God really say? I believe that He has.

Now, let me be quick to point out that I don't, by this understanding, place women any lower than men in their worth to God. All I'm saying is that God seems to have established roles for the man to fulfill and for the woman to fulfill and the job of being a teacher or leader among God's people has always been for the men.

Finally, the female was created to be more nurturing. Invariably, even on these threads, and no I'm not saying it's some unbreakable rule, but females tend to be less comfortable agreeing with and believing that there is a hell and God really is going to set people in that place after the judgment and it will be a place of great torment for ever and ever. Why? Because, due to their nurturing nature, they have a hard time rationalizing this reality with a God who says of Himself that He is love.

I offer this up with some bit of experience in dealing with the subject. My mother is a pastor. She and I are pretty much polar opposites in our understanding of who God is. She's all about the women's liberation agenda. Even reading a book at one time titled, 'When God was a Woman'. I cringe when I visit her and have to sit and listen to her teach from the Scriptures. However, most often she doesn't. She just tells some cute little homey tale and then makes some general point from her homey tale that we should apply in life. Not a whole lot different from the teachings of Buddhism or Hinduism. She just gives her instructions and teachings in a building designated as a Christian Church. Don't worry, I love my mother. However, I have to love her despite not agreeing with her.

Ok everybody. Let her rip!!!!

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

Why did God create Debroah ? Just to be a wife?

 

[Lady&TheCoatofmanycolors]

It’s hard to argue that Paul’s statements there are meant to be universally applied when so many women from scripture are honored by God and praised by their community for teaching and exercising leadership.
IT happens , we need to remember the whole word .

 

[Albion]

Why did God create Debroah ? Just to be a wife?

Apparently God intended for Deborah to have a leadership role but in some capacity other than ordained minister/deacon/priest/bishop/pastor.

 

[miamited]

Why did God create Debroah ? Just to be a wife?

Hi lady,

Deborah was a judge. I'm not sure that there were any gender qualification for judges, but even Deborah understood that her position wasn't normal. When she spoke with Barak son of Abinoam of Kedesh about going up against Sisera, the commander of Jabin's army, Barak didn't want to go unless Deborah went with him. She agreed to go, but told him that because of his requiring her to go, then God would give them into a 'woman's hand. She didn't say that because he was requiring her to go that God would deliver them into her hand, but said a woman's hand.

She made special note to let him know that his request meant that God would give the victory over to a gender and not a person. Why is that?s It seems obvious to me that Deborah understood that isn't the way it should be.

So, Deborah was a judge and as far as I know there was no problem with that in God's sight, but even she understood that there were things that men were supposed to do and things that women were supposed to do. Now, where there is absence of any instruction, then we can work without instruction. but where there is instruction then we should follow it.

As I said, God has used women to do some great things among us. Zapporah saved Moses from God's wrath. Miriam sang a great song to God confirming and praising His work in freeing them from their oppression in Egypt. Hannah was the mother of Samuel, one of the great prophets and judges. Mary was greatly blessed of God in being chosen to be the woman through whom His Son would be born to us. But, in this matter of fellowships choosing pastors and deacons and other leaders of the individual fellowships, Paul has written down for us some instructions that, if we believe that Paul did speak for God, indicate that these positions should be filled by men.

You see, friend, since the beginning it has always been that man just doesn't want to follow what God asks of us. The Scriptures are chock-a-block full of examples where God has asked one thing and mankind has determined that they will do another. God asks for obedience in all things. Any fellowship may choose whoever they would like to lead them. They can choose a thief or adulterer or a man who has been married and divorced and who has unruly children. They can choose someone who isn't particularly familiar with the Scriptures or understands them. But, if they want to choose someone who God would honor, then it should be someone who is upright, loves the Lord, is able to rightly divide the Scriptures, has reasonable and loving control over their children and family, and is the husband of one wife. A fellowship is free to choose anyone that they would like to lead them, but these are the instructions given through the Scriptures regarding this matter.

Do with them what you will.

BTW, you demean your own gender by saying that I might think that God raised up Deborah to 'only' be a wife. Godly wives are a treasure. Godly wives are one of the greatest gifts that man can have while sojourning on this earth and godly wives make the very best mothers. Being a godly wife is one of the greatest achievements for a woman to aspire to in God's eyes. I think that we all, those of us who are born again, need to understand that our desire should be to be satisfied with what God has created us to be. That's one of the greatest dangers among the children of God; we just aren't satisfied with what God has provided for us.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

 

[Lady&TheCoatofmanycolors]

Hi lady,

Deborah was a judge. I'm not sure that there were any gender qualification for judges, but even Deborah understood that her position wasn't normal. When she spoke with Barak son of Abinoam of Kedesh about going up against Sisera, the commander of Jabin's army, Barak didn't want to go unless Deborah went with him. She agreed to go, but told him that because of his requiring her to go, then God would give them into a 'woman's hand. She didn't say that because he was requiring her to go that God would deliver them into her hand, but said a woman's hand.

She made special note to let him know that his request meant that God would give the victory over to a gender and not a person. Why is that?s It seems obvious to me that Deborah understood that isn't the way it should be.

So, Deborah was a judge and as far as I know there was no problem with that in God's sight, but even she understood that there were things that men were supposed to do and things that women were supposed to do. Now, where there is absence of any instruction, then we can work without instruction. but where there is instruction then we should follow it.

As I said, God has used women to do some great things among us. Zapporah saved Moses from God's wrath. Miriam sang a great song to God confirming and praising His work in freeing them from their oppression in Egypt. Hannah was the mother of Samuel, one of the great prophets and judges. Mary was greatly blessed of God in being chosen to be the woman through whom His Son would be born to us. But, in this matter of fellowships choosing pastors and deacons and other leaders of the individual fellowships, Paul has written down for us some instructions that, if we believe that Paul did speak for God, indicate that these positions should be filled by men.

You see, friend, since the beginning it has always been that man just doesn't want to follow what God asks of us. The Scriptures are chock-a-block full of examples where God has asked one thing and mankind has determined that they will do another. God asks for obedience in all things. Any fellowship may choose whoever they would like to lead them. They can choose a thief or adulterer or a man who has been married and divorced and who has unruly children. They can choose someone who isn't particularly familiar with the Scriptures or understands them. But, if they want to choose someone who God would honor, then it should be someone who is upright, loves the Lord, is able to rightly divide the Scriptures, has reasonable and loving control over their children and family, and is the husband of one wife. A fellowship is free to choose anyone that they would like to lead them, but these are the instructions given through the Scriptures regarding this matter.

Do with them what you will.

BTW, you demean your own gender by saying that I might think that God raised up Deborah to 'only' be a wife. Godly wives are a treasure. Godly wives are one of the greatest gifts that man can have while sojourning on this earth and godly wives make the very best mothers. Being a godly wife is one of the greatest achievements for a woman to aspire to in God's eyes. I think that we all, those of us who are born again, need to understand that our desire should be to be satisfied with what God has created us to be. That's one of the greatest dangers among the children of God; we just aren't satisfied with what God has provided for us.

God bless you.
In Christ, Ted

I don't feel that demeans my Gender in asking that question in general? I also agree that Godly wife's are the Best Kind of wives & that Godly Husbands are held in the Highets regard .

In which way is that question demeaning to the Female gender ? It was only posed to have a question answered . Nothing more nothing less. Speaking against my own gender would be the qualifier for that , one would think.

I am Fully convinced that the Apostle Paul was All for women ministering . I did not say that I agreed that women should be shepherding / or pastoring .

In fact we have new testament Female Deconesses , Apostles ( Phoebe for instance) there is neither male nor female .. we are to Carry Out the great commission alike.

To say that I demeaned my Gender in this is slightly condescending .

Thanks for sharing the view you uphold on roles.

 

[Albion]

Not quite sure I understand your point. There are 800 million protestants who are very interested in this issue.

What I replied "wrong" to there was the claim that the 'women should be in submission' verse is the reason Protestants don't ordain women (those churches which don't do so, that is). It's not. There are other reasons, both Scriptural and historical, which are the basis for the all-male clergy of most of the Protestant denominations which do not ordain women.