Church history teaches us that the doctrinal debates and the ecumenical and local councils that were held in the first millennium have revealed to us indisputably that the fathers who fought heretics and heretics never tried only to preserve the meaning of the Bible, but often took to quoting from the letter of the Bible as well. However, the Church has never departed from the spirit of the Bible, let alone its letter. And since its inception, it has been in it the apostolic line with which it has confronted all the problems of its time. What does all this have to do with the title of the book?

If, after reading the Holy Bible, we do not find in it anything that calls for the priesthood of women directly, does this not mean (the priesthood of women) that there is a place and a demand for a new revelation on the horizon?(16)Doesn’t such a demand, after the declaration of the position of the Bible on the issue of women’s priesthood, mean that there is a deep desire to deviate from the Church’s apostolic line? The Church, which exempted women from the priesthood over two thousand years, is constantly calling on us to follow its example, especially since deviating from the apostolic line is a denial of the Church and its apostleship, given its profound unity in all ages.

Here too we can repeat what the late Father John Meindorff said: “We always say that the Church is apostolic. What do these words mean?

It simply means that her faith is based on what was testified by those who lived with the Lord. And this testimony does not change in its essence at all because the Lord, by His death on the cross, defined its features and its essence once and for all. apax” (17)Thus, there is no possibility of a new revelation replacing what the Lord brought in the fullness of time (Galatians 4:4), which means again that the Gospel of Christ the Lord cannot be written anew, changed, altered, modified, or developed in any way, for the Lord was explicit when he said: “I did not come to destroy but to fulfill” (Matthew 15:7).(18)What does it mean that the Lord did not come to destroy but to fulfill?

These words mean that the Lord did not come to cancel what had already been given, but to bring it to completion and perfection. And perfection is by nature perfection, and nothing is lacking in it. Consequently, what is established in the New Testament is not modified or changed. If revelation was completed with the coming of Christ, then we must search in it for an answer to the question concerning the priesthood of women.

In this sense, every Christian who encounters questions, problems and challenges must travel to the past through the Holy Bible read in the light of the life of the Church, so that he may be a contemporary of Christ, hear his words, and then return with a satisfactory answer to any dilemma or problem that besets him and encounters him.

I said that this matter requires traveling to the past, but it does not require riding a plane or a car. The journey to the past is through the world of the Holy Book, reading it deeply and enjoying its words, which contain the provisions for eternal life.

When we resort to the Church’s book and the experience of the Fathers in order to solve our problems, we do not claim to be Salafis, but we simply try to present our problems to ourselves and to our Lord, just as the Holy Fathers did, and then we resort to what our faithful fathers said to the Lord, and the answer comes. And faithfulness to the Lord is what makes the Church modern par excellence, not just boasting about modernity. Because those who boast about modernity may be the most backward and reactionary people.

However, in the Orthodox Church we do not rely on the Holy Bible alone, nor on tradition alone, but we rely on both together. And by relying on both together, it becomes clear to us that the Lord had previously chosen men for the priesthood, not women. Hence, we take Jesus’ position as a criterion for the answer, and a reference for this issue, and every other issue. From Jesus we start, and in Him we settle.

In fact, the Church has followed the example of her Lord throughout the ages, in everything, especially in the question presented to her in this book, to the priesthood and the episcopate, both men and women.(19). What happened to make the demand for a female priesthood come about? Why do we abandon Jesus as the standard for the life and practices of the Church? Why do we change what is established and present when the Lord himself wanted things to be this way? Doesn’t thinking about a female priesthood call us to change the ancient practice that the Church has known throughout history? And if we accept the possibility of change, then, does this not mean that the positions of the Church were previously deficient because they were subject to change? This is a dangerous conclusion and a conclusion that is naturally difficult to accept, because the risks resulting from such a conclusion are innumerable.

Again, I say that the Lord chose men, not women, for the priesthood. He chose Jewish men, circumcised and uncircumcised. In the early church, it was clear that these candidates for ministry were supposed to carry the mind, thought, and love of Christ, as the divine Paul teaches us: “The spiritual man judges all things, but no one is judged by him. For who has known the mind of the Lord, that he should instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ” (1 Corinthians 2:16).

We have said that the Lord chose circumcised men for the priesthood. However, the Church did not find in circumcision an obstacle to entering the new faith. Let us hear: “From your brothers the apostles and elders, to the brethren who were converted from the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria… It seemed good to us to choose men to send to you with the beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have given their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ…” (Acts 15:23-28). Since then, all priests have been, in principle, open to Jews and Gentiles alike. But it is also certain that neither the apostles nor any of their successors accepted the priesthood of women. Hence, the exclusion of women from the priesthood is not based on Scriptural verses that the Church has read and on which it has taken its position, but rather it has relied on its experience, heritage and teachings that the holy fathers have adhered to throughout the generations. Accordingly, the priesthood of women today is rejected, because it contradicts the concept of the unity of the Church and the unity of its practice based on the internal continuity between the text of the Holy Bible, on the one hand, and the thought and life of the Church, on the other hand, throughout the ages.

(16) We believe that divine revelation is immutable, unchangeable and unamendable.

(17) See, (“The Orthodox church” sep. 1975, 4).

(18) “Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them, but to fill them” (Matthew 5:17).

(19) Those who call for women's priesthood know that the Bible does not contain anything that calls for this type of priesthood.