Epistle of the Faithful to the Holy Synod of the Genuine Orthodox Church of Romania

January 2025

 

"For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God." (Romans 10:2-3)

 

Your Eminence Archbishop and Metropolitan Evloghie,

Your Graces, Members of the Holy Synod of the Genuine Orthodox Church of Romania,

As sons and daughters of the Church you shepherd, we share our concern with you, for we are truly discouraged by the situation we find ourselves in today as a Church, namely, being severed from the True Orthodoxy worldwide, on the verge of falling into the abyss of schism, in a world where Christians should be united in Christ, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. [1]

Being convinced that this has happened not out of ill will, but out of care for us and for the laws of the Church, we ask you not to overlook our concern and to kindly consider reading this material, along with the related annexes, for perhaps a hasty decision was made due to the pressures of other Christians or priests who have that zeal "not according to knowledge," [2] as the Apostle Paul says, but whose attitude is not justified by any Holy Father.

"The 20th century witnessed a 'patristic revival,' an abstract academic phenomenon detached from real life, bearing the imprint of some of the petty passions of the modern academic world—superiority, self-sufficiency, ruthless criticism of others' opinions, and the formation of factions or cliques of  'initiates' who dictate which concepts are 'fashionable' and which are not (…) Such 'zealots' fail to realize that they are undermining the very Orthodox foundation beneath their feet, reducing the continuous Orthodox tradition to a mere 'direct line' that a small group among them supposedly has with the "great Fathers" of the past (…) In this case, the 'patristic revival' dangerously approaches a kind of Protestantism. These scholars, in their academic 'correctness,' often lose the humility and inner delicacy that seal the authentic transmission of the Orthodox tradition from father to son (and not just from professor to student)." [3]

This is what Father Seraphim Rose, one of the great Orthodox ascetics and authors of the last century, a "disciple" of the "school" of St. John Maximovitch, affirmed. And, unfortunately, his words remain just as relevant in our own century—a century filled with individualism, selfishness, pride, and debauchery.

From the very beginning, we confess that it is, most likely, not our place to bring these matters to your attention, considering your rich spiritual experience and years of prayer. However, out of fear of remaining in the difficult situation we find ourselves in, we feel compelled to act and not remain silent, as the Savior teaches us. [4] For we are but children in comparison to Your Eminences, yet "Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings You have ordained praise, (...) to silence the enemy and avenger." [5]

Among the faithful, a schismatic spirit has emerged—a spirit filled with hatred and contention, far removed from that of the Holy Fathers, due to the Blessed Union willed by God with our brothers from Greece. And indeed, "Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity! For there the Lord has commanded the blessing, even life forevermore." [6]

And again: "We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love his brother remains in death." [7]

And once more: "Her many sins are forgiven, for she loved much. But he to whom little is forgiven, loves little." [8]

Beloved hierarchs, it pains us deeply that we have come to consider ourselves the only Orthodox Christians in the world, thereby negating the conciliar nature of the Church. In doing so, we gradually adopt the attitude of the Pharisee in the Gospel, [9] believing that by merely following the law, we have the right to boast before the world and before God that we are the righteous ones of this age. But woe to us!—we who know the law but do not live by it, choosing instead to interpret it as we see fit. "To some who were confident in their own righteousness and looked down on everyone else, He told this parable." [10]

Yet, this "rupture" has come for our humbling, and we should rejoice that the Savior has not forgotten us but instead humbles us now so that we may have time for repentance, as the Psalmist says: "Make us glad according to the days in which You have afflicted us, and the years in which we have seen evil." [11] And again, "For there must be heresies among you, that those who are approved may be made manifest among you." [12] This is how the unworthy are revealed, how the deceivers are exposed, and how, even before the Day of Judgment, the souls of the righteous and the unrighteous are separated, as the chaff is separated from the wheat. [13]

Thus, with humility and profound sorrow, we wish to express our concern regarding the Report of the Dogmatic Commission, particularly its final decision that Metropolitan Kyprianos Koutsoumpas is a heretic and that his writings are heretical.

"Let investigations be made to see whether the accusation is rooted in the ignorance of the accuser or whether it collapses under its own weight. For many things that are good appear evil to those with an unstable criterion of judgment, just as weights of equal mass do not seem equal when the scales are unbalanced, and even honey can taste bitter to one whose sense of taste is impaired by illness. The eye, when unhealthy, does not perceive objects clearly but imagines many things that are not real. The same happens when assessing the power of a discourse: if the judge is less competent than the writer, the evaluation may be flawed. The one who judges the value of a discourse must have the same level of training as the one who composed it. Would anyone untrained in agriculture presume to judge matters of farming? Could someone unfamiliar with the principles of harmony distinguish between correctness and error in musical compositions? Could just anyone evaluate a discourse without demonstrating who taught them, how many years they studied, and whether they have learned even the basics of rhetoric? Likewise, in spiritual matters, not just anyone is permitted to examine spoken words, but only those who have been given the spirit of understanding, as the Apostle teaches us concerning the distribution of spiritual gifts." [14]

Since we believe that the pressures applied to break communion with our sister Churches are far removed from the Orthodox spirit—as evidenced by the attitude of those who support this idea—we have undertaken a thorough investigation of Metropolitan Kyprianos' writings to determine for ourselves whether they are truly heretical or not.

Firstly, we believe that these individuals suffer from a savior complex.

"What happens in the case of 'saviors'? They look around, searching for a need for help—whether real or imagined. They volunteer themselves to do all sorts of things for others, sometimes without even asking if this help is necessary or welcome. They simply identify someone’s need, 'roll up their sleeves,' and get to work. However, the person on the receiving end often feels outright 'invaded,' suffocated, or pressured into accepting unsolicited help—help that creates unwanted obligations towards the so-called savior." [15]

And yet, the Divine Apostle Paul teaches us: "If there is no interpreter, let him keep silent in the Church and speak to himself and to God." [16]

So why, and for what reason, has no one explained to these individuals that they must not interpret the laws of the Church according to their own will? Instead, they have been emboldened and even supported by the clergy! Had they done such things in the time of Saint Glicherie or any of the stricter Holy Fathers, they most likely would have been anathematized, for they are promoters of the plague of schism!

We, as laypeople, have repeatedly tried to present this issue peacefully, with arguments based on the Tradition of the Church, but we are always left with the impression that no meaningful communication is possible. In everything, they believe they are right, they claim to be "specialists," and no other perspective is permitted.

A schism has formed within the Church, threatening to create an "Orthodox sect" that prides itself on the intellectual correctness of its views. (One only has to look at how many factions the old ROCOR splintered into for the same reason—each claiming to be the "True Church," yet almost none of them can be true since they are neither in the Church of Christ nor in Christ, the Truth). [17]

"The devil deceives those whom he can keep in the blindness of the old path, [18] leading them astray onto a new one, even snatching people from within the Church. [19] While they believe they have drawn closer to the light and escaped the darkness of the world, without realizing it, they plunge once again into obscurity. And though they do not remain steadfast in the Gospel of Christ and His law, they still call themselves Christians. Walking in darkness, they imagine that they possess the light." [20]

Anathema or Condemnation by the Church

The Fourth Ecumenical Council decreed that "no Christian believer should pronounce anathema upon anyone," as this right belongs solely to the Church. It follows, then, that we must be exceedingly cautious when using terms such as "heresy" and "heretic" in reference to our fellow Christians, particularly when we lack the ability to "speak the truth in love" [21] as the Holy Fathers did.

A compelling example of truth spoken in love is found in the words of St. Basil the Great, in his 65th letter to Atarbios, Bishop of Neocaesarea, who sought to reconcile the Orthodox with the Arians:

"What will be the end of this silence if, despite my advancing age, I wait for you to take the first step in greeting me, while your love chooses to persist even longer in the harmful decision of avoiding communion? As for me, considering that, in matters of love, defeat is as valuable as victory, I confess that in this struggle you have the right to believe you have overcome me. Thus, I take the first step in writing, for I know that 'love hopes all things, endures all things,' 'does not seek its own,' and therefore 'never fails.' For he who humbles himself out of love before his neighbor is by no means to be despised. So, you too, demonstrating the first fruit of the Spirit—love—should set aside the sullen tone of anger, which you have shown me through your silence, and instead plant in your heart joy and peace toward your brethren of the same faith, as well as diligence and concern for the good preservation of the Churches of the Lord. (...) Therefore, I urge you to cast away from your soul any thought that communion with others is unnecessary. To sever yourself from fellowship with your brothers is not the mark of a man who lives by the principle of love and who claims to fulfill the commandment of Christ."

Moving beyond these essential matters, as we have previously mentioned, we began an in-depth examination of the texts and sources cited by Metropolitan Kyprianos, seeking, "as the Spirit gave us utterance," [22] to understand the basis of his accusations.

Thus, by translating the majority of the texts from Greek Patrology cited in Metropolitan Kyprianos' theses, as well as some of his writings and those of his followers, we reached a striking conclusion:

The priests of the dogmatic commission have not actually read these texts. Many of the referenced writings have never been translated into Romanian, and the commission members appear to have interpreted Metropolitan Kyprianos' theses subjectively, without actually understanding the spirit in which they were written, nor the meaning and context of the referenced ideas.

Furthermore, the methodology of scientific research in theology teaches us that the central focus of any investigation must be the study of primary and secondary sources.

Thus, considering that the primary sources were not examined by the dogmatic commission, and that the argumentation was built around secondary sources (various opinions that claim to be theological, coming from the so-called Archbishop Gregory [George] of Denver, Bishops Philaretos [Bassett] of Pallini, Matthew [Karpathakis] of Vresthena, and their disciples—who, moreover, are outside the Church), along with their own subjective opinions, misinterpreting the very texts they cited, the commission, having approached the issue hastily and superficially, has indirectly (and surely unintentionally) declared that:

 

● St. Basil the Great,

● St. Theodore the Studite,

● St. Theophylact of Bulgaria,

● St. John of Damascus,

● St. John Climacus,

● The Church writer Clement of Alexandria,

● And others like them

...are heretics and that they held erroneous teachings.

Moreover, following the Official Confession of Faith issued by the Holy Synod, it has effectively anathematized them, which is both undesirable and inconceivable, given that these very Holy Fathers were, in fact, the "authors and defenders" of the "theory of the ailing members."

The View of the Holy Fathers on the Possible Errors of Other Church Fathers

Let us consider, hypothetically, that Metropolitan Kyprianos' teaching was indeed incorrect. Even in such a case, we would have no justification to anathematize him, for his struggle and writings against ecumenism reveal his character as a Father of the Church. To support this assertion, we present the following arguments:

● Upon hearing accusations against certain Church Fathers, such as "If they have not spoken rightly, they must be entirely rejected along with the heretics," St. Photius the Great responded:

 "Were there not troubled circumstances that forced many Fathers either to speak in an unclear manner or to adapt their words to the context, under the attacks of their enemies, or even out of human ignorance, to which they too were subject? ... If some have spoken ambiguously or, for reasons unknown to us, have deviated from the right path, but they were not questioned, nor urged to seek the truth, we accept them among the Fathers as if they had not said those things—because of the righteousness of their lives, their distinguished virtue, and their unwavering faith in other respects. However, we do not follow their teachings where they have strayed from the path of truth... As for us, who know that some of our Holy Fathers and Teachers have deviated from the true dogmas, we do not take as doctrine those parts where they have erred, but we embrace the individuals themselves."

"From this, we deduce that those who teach differently, before the matter has been thoroughly examined by the Church and the Orthodox teaching has been clearly presented to them, must be treated with forbearance." [23]

● "Historians of the controversy over grace in 5th-century Gaul (relating to Blessed Augustine's) have noted how remarkably mild this debate was compared to disputes against Nestorius, Pelagius, and other notorious heretics. This debate was always regarded as a dispute within the Church, not as a battle between the Church and heretics. No one ever called Augustine a heretic, and neither did Augustine label those who criticized him as heretics. It is noteworthy that the accusations of 'heresy' came from heretics themselves, not from the Church." [24]

● At the Fifth Ecumenical Council, in the final Oros, Blessed Augustine is mentioned only in a positive light. "It is evident that, by the 6th century, Blessed Augustine was recognized as a Church Father, spoken of in praiseworthy terms—praise that was not diminished by the acknowledgment that his teachings were sometimes imprecise and that he had to correct himself." Likewise, St. Mark of Ephesus affirmed: "It is possible for someone to be a Teacher and yet not everything he says to be entirely true; otherwise, what need would there have been for the Ecumenical Councils?" [25]

● "Undoubtedly, when errors arise, we must strive to correct them. The 'Western influences' of modern times must be combated, and the errors of the ancient Fathers should not be followed. As for Blessed Augustine, there is no doubt that his teaching missed the mark in many respects—on grace and nature, on the Holy Trinity, and so forth. However, his doctrine is not 'heretical' but rather exaggerated. The ones who have truly taught the deep and authentic Christian doctrines on these matters are the Eastern Fathers." [26]

● "We, the Christians of the latter days, are not even worthy to gaze from afar upon the lofty theology that the Holy Fathers both learned and lived. We quote the great Fathers, yet we ourselves are not in their spirit. As a general rule, it can be said that those who shout the loudest against 'Western influence' and who show the least patience toward those whose theology is not 'pure'—are often the very ones most infected by Western influences, frequently without even realizing it. The spirit of discrediting everyone who does not agree with your 'correct' opinions—whether in theology, iconography, liturgical services, spiritual life, or any other matter—has become extremely widespread today. We Orthodox Christians of today—if we are honest with ourselves—are in a 'Western captivity' worse than that experienced by any of the Church Fathers. In past centuries, Western influences may have led to some theologically imprecise formulations of doctrine, but today, Western captivity infiltrates and often dominates even the very atmosphere and tone of our Orthodoxy. Although often 'theoretically correct,' our Orthodoxy frequently lacks the true Christian spirit and the indescribable taste of authentic Christianity. Therefore, let us be more humble, more loving, and more forgiving in the way we approach the Holy Fathers." [27]

● Additionally, we briefly mention some Church Fathers who either held beliefs that were later considered heretical or were interpreted as promoters of certain heresies:

● Clement of Alexandria, Athenagoras of Athens, Tertullian, Epiphanius of Salamis, Eusebius of Caesarea, and others expressed reservations regarding the veneration of icons. [28]

● Under the influence of Jewish eschatology and especially to sustain Christian hope during times of persecution, the following figures advocated millenarianism (chiliasm): Bishop Papias of Hierapolis (Eusebius of Caesarea, Church History, XXXIX, 11-13), St. Justin Martyr and Philosopher (Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, LXXX-LXXXI), St. Irenaeus of Lyons (Adversus Haereses V, 28, 3), Apologist Tertullian (Adversus Marcionem III, 24), St. Hippolytus, Apollinaris of Laodicea, Lactantius, Sulpicius Severus, Victorinus of Poetovio, St. Ambrose of Milan, and others. [29]

● St. Gregory of Nyssa and Didymus the Blind supported Apocatastasis, an Origenist speculation about the end of history, which held that: The world, which came into being after humanity's fall into sin, would eventually be restored to its original state. Salvation would be universal, occurring in successive stages of perfection, through the grace of Christ, who does not allow His creation to perish eternally or undergo everlasting punishment. [30]

Conclusions

"The Church is one; it extends in length and breadth among many people through abundant fruitfulness. Just as the sun has many rays, yet the light is one, and just as the oak tree has many branches, yet there is one trunk rooted firmly in the ground, (...). Pluck a ray from the body of the sun—unity does not allow the division of light. Break a branch from the trunk—the severed part will no longer sprout. Cut a river off from its source—the severed stream dries up. In the same way, the Lord’s Church, bathed in light, spreads its rays over the whole earth. Yet the light is one; it spreads everywhere, but the unity of the body is not severed. It stretches its fruitful branches across the whole world; its flowing rivers expand even further. Nevertheless, there is only one Head, one Origin, and one Mother overflowing with abundant fruitfulness: from her womb, we are born; with her milk, we are nourished; and by her breath, we are given life." [31]

"This mystery of unity, this chain of inseparable and tightly bound harmony, is revealed when, in the Gospel, the tunic of the Lord Jesus Christ is not divided or torn. Rather, when lots are cast for Christ’s garment—to determine who would wear the Lord’s robe—the clothing remains whole, and the tunic is possessed intact and undivided. (...) He bore that unity which came from above, that is, from heaven and the Father, which could never be torn apart by the one who received and possessed it. Instead, such a person obtained at once, undivided and unbroken, its full strength: No one who divides and splits Christ’s Church can possess Christ’s garment." [32]

"The serpent has deceived from the beginning of the world and, by luring unsuspecting souls with deceitful words, has seduced them in their naïve lack of foresight. This is how he even attempted to tempt the Lord Himself, as if he could deceive and mislead Him—approaching Him in secret. Yet, he was recognized and crushed. And that is why he was cast down: because he was exposed and unmasked." [33]

"Let us prove our continuity with the unbroken Christian tradition of our past not only by striving for precision in dogma but also through our love for the people who have transmitted it to us. We know many converts who cling to 'correctness' like a baby to a bottle and who, perhaps, would better save their souls if they were a little less 'correct' but more humble." [34]

Whoever lacks love does not have God. The Apostle John states: "God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him." [35] Those who refuse to remain of one mind within the Church of God cannot remain with God. [36]

Therefore, with deep respect, we humbly appeal to Your Eminences and Your Graces, asking you to consider the matters presented in these documents—documents that come from the more silent and obedient part of the Church, the part that strives with all its strength to practice both obedience and repentance when required. We do not expect our personal opinions to be considered theological positions, but we urge you not to disregard arguments documented with patristic texts—for to reject these would mean to reject the entire Teaching and Tradition passed down by the Holy Fathers.

I ask you to forgive my frankness, but I feel that time is already very short, and anyone who can do something should do it now. I know that God will continue to protect His Church and that He will cause the true Orthodox mission—which is only just beginning in our Church—to flourish. (...) However, the tragedy of souls caught in a schism caused by obstinacy will be immeasurable. [37]

Therefore, let us not become like the sect of the Cathars, whom St. Basil the Great referred to in Epistle 188. Let us learn to have both love and zeal for the new saints who have fought with all their might against the heresy of ecumenism. Let us learn to discern what is truly Orthodox and to follow the Tradition of the Holy Fathers.

Based on the information presented in this document, we firmly believe that Metropolitan Kyprianos not only is he not a heretic, nor has he taught any doctrine foreign to the Church, but he is worthy of honor among the Great Theologians of all times. Moreover, we believe that he prays for us, alongside St. Glicherie the Confessor.

With all this said, we pray to the Good God to bring enlightenment and peace among the faithful and the servants of the Church, to remember us on the Day of the Dread Judgment, and regarding those who oppose Metropolitan Kyprianos and the Conciliarity and Unity of the Church, we entrust them to the mercy of the Lord: "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." [38]

 

NOTES

1. Cf. John 14:6

2. Romans 10:2

3. Fr. Seraphim Rose, The Place of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church, translated into Romanian by Constantin Făgețean.

4. Cf. Luke 19:40.

5. Ps. 8:6.

6. 4th Antiphon in the 8th tone.

7. 1 John 3:14.

8. Luke 7:47.

9. Cf. Luke 18:10-14.

10. Luke 18:9.

11. Ps. 89:17.

12. 1 Corinthians 11:19.

13. Saint Cyprian of Carthage, On the Unity of the Universal Church.

14. Saint Basil the Great, Epistle 204.

15. https://liviabutac.ro/educatie-psihologica/despre-sindromul-salvatorului/

16. Corinthians 14:28.

17. Cf. John 14:6.

18. Of the disobedience of the first parents, deceived by the devil since heaven.

19. The devil has no regard for the holiness of the Church: he skillfully and deceitfully drives some Christians out of the Church itself, filling them with hatred, giving them the false impression that they are the owners of the truth and that they are right.

20. Saint Cyprian of Carthage, op. cit.

21. Cf. Ephesians 4:15.

22. Cf. Acts 2:4.

23. Fr. Seraphim Rose, The Place of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church, translated into Romanian by Constantin Făgețean.

24. Ibid.

25. Ibid.

26. Ibid.

27. Ibid.

28. https://www.scribd.com/document/41381126/EPIFANIE-DE-SALAMINA

29. https://saccsiv.wordpress.com/2022/02/02/milenarismul-sau-hiliasmul-o-ratacire-cu-caracter-eshatologic-a-unor-culte-neoprotestante/

30. https://ro.orthodoxwiki.org/Apocatastaz%C4%83

31. Saint Cyprian of Carthage, op. cit.

32. Ibid.

33. Ibid.

34. Fr. Seraphim Rose, The Place of Blessed Augustine in the Orthodox Church, translated into Romanian by Constantin Făgețean.

35. 1 John 4:16.

36. Saint Cyprian of Carthage, op. cit.

37. Fr. Seraphim Rose, https://ortodoxiamarturisitoare.wordpress.com/2017/09/25/actual-parintele-serafim-rose-despre-super corectitudine-sau-boala-corectitudinii-apararea-fara-compromis-a-adevarului-trebuie-combinata-cu-o-calda-si-vie-ortodoxi/

38. Luke 23:34.

 

English translation from the original Romanian. Translator unknown.

Greek translation: https://krufo-sxoleio.blogspot.com/2025/03/blog-post.html