A Neo-Zealot summarizes the "Confession" of Metropolitan Tychikos

Metropolitan Tychikos of Paphos makes the required confession of faith: he acknowledges the canonical possibility of interrupting the commemoration of a bishop and passes over the Council of Crete

Hieromonk Lavrentie | June 23, 2025

 

After being abusively removed from the See of Paphos and then asked for a written Confession of Faith, Metr. Tychikos does this in order to appease the conflicts. But will this really be the effect?

Although he was asked to recognize all Orthodox Councils, including the recent one in Crete, he did not mention anything about it, but only that he respects all Councils and their decisions taken in the authentic right-glorifying spirit. In addition, he openly states that there is the possibility of ceasing the commemoration of a bishop during services when he preaches heresies, but without falling into zealot excesses.

The text of his Confession, published by the Romfea portal, extends over 5 pages which I will summarize below because I do not have time to translate it in full.

(https://www.romfea.gr/epikairotita-xronika/70426-i-omologia-pisteos-tou-proin-pafou-tyxikoy)

In the preamble, he justifies why he is now making this Confession. He was accused of avoiding declaring his adherence to Orthodoxy and his fidelity to the Church of Cyprus, but his aim was to avoid scandals. However, he now wishes to dispel all accusations.

For the first time, he presents five arguments that he did not validate the interruption of commemoration of the Cypriot hierarchs:

1. In August 2023, he sent a priest [to spiritual court] from his Metropolis who had ceased commemoration to be defrocked.

2. On February 13, 2024, he transmitted the Synod’s message with a warning concerning “Elder Savvas Lavriotis the Athonite”;

3. On May 23, 2024, he issued a statement regarding a self-proclaimed “gerontissa-abbess” Anna, who was preaching in homes without approval;

4. On May 10, 2025, he informed the priests in writing about some Archimandrites who did not belong to and did not recognize any bishop;

5. He ordained as priest someone said to be from the “Thessaloniki group,” [that is, those under the guidance of Fr. Theodore Zisis] but within the Metropolis of Paphos. That person commemorated him during services.

When that priest needed to go to Greece due to family circumstances, he gave him a canonical letter of release for serving, just as he himself had received from Archbishop George, then Metropolitan of Paphos, in order to study in London. He cannot be held accountable for the actions of that priest in Thessaloniki.

Within the Confession of Faith, after presenting the Orthodox Creed, he makes a series of additions.

He accepts the seven Ecumenical Councils and, among the Local ones, “those which were validated by the Ecumenical (Councils) for the safeguarding of the Orthodox dogmas of the Church, when they gathered.” He also accepts all dogmatic definitions and the holy canons issued by these Councils for the proper order of the Church, as being issued through the illumination of the Holy Spirit. He preserves the unity of the faith and keeps what the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church of the Orthodox dogmatizes, without removing or adding anything.

The statements in the paragraph above are from the Arhieraticon, from the confession made by the bishop at his enthronement.

Then he confesses that he remains within the walls of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church, being aware that schism is the greatest evil, which not even the blood of martyrdom can wash away. (This paragraph was chosen as representative by those at Romfea.)

Further on, he writes that, in the spirit of Apostolic Canon 31 and according to Canon 15 of the First-Second Council from the time of St. Photius, any cleric and bishop has the right to cease the commemoration of the name of his superior hierarch when he preaches a heresy condemned by the Councils or by the Fathers, without commemorating anyone else. The exercise of this right prior to any synodal investigation is conditioned by discernment and divine illumination. “If this happens out of zealotism without discernment and without the conditions laid down by the above-mentioned holy canons being met, it is possible that it leads to schism, which, as easily as it is created, just as difficult is it to stop.”

He did not apply this canonical right himself, he always commemorated the Archbishop during services and served with the other synod members, he did not cover anyone who had ceased commemoration, and he did not urge anyone to do so.

He condemns as schismatics those who separate from their bishops for various reasons, that is, reasons which are curable. He also condemns heretics who have been condemned synodally or by the consensus of the Holy Fathers, and a heretic is anyone who deviates even slightly from the right faith.

He remains faithful to the dogmas and decisions of the Orthodox Church and of the Synod of the Church of Cyprus.

+++

Therefore, it is to be noted that he did not expressly recognize the Council of Crete, as Archbishop George publicly pointed out. This fact is praiseworthy and essential.

Secondly, he distances himself from those non-commemorators who have a zealot spirit and do not observe the canonical rules, but he acknowledges the legitimate right of clerics to cease the commemoration of a hierarch who preaches heresy.

As Fr. Theodoros Zisis remarked, just like at the Council of Ferrara-Florence, what matters is whether the Mark of Ephesus of today, that is, Metr. Tychikos, signed the pact that was proposed to him. And he did not do this, but even set those who had ceased commemoration on the right track.

As UOJ notes, it seems that even some Cypriot hierarchs who agreed with the removal of Metr. Tychikos from the see are beginning to doubt the fairness of the Archbishop’s decisions. If this is true, it means that there are serious uncertainties, and they could be clarified on this occasion with the help of God.

(https://spzh.eu/en/news/86885-metropolitan-tychikos-submits-confession-of-faith-to-the-synod-of-cyprus)

The doubt still remains regarding the appeal that Metr. Tychikos made to Constantinople. He declares that it is a right inscribed in the regulations of the Church of Cyprus and is dissatisfied that he did not receive a fair trial, but one that was uncanonical and against the regulations. He requests to be provided with the documentation through which he was removed from the metropolitan see.

 

Romanian source: 

https://theodosie.ro/2025/06/23/mitropolitul-tihic-de-pafos-face-marturisirea-de-credinta-ceruta-recunoaste-posibilitatea-canonica-de-a-intrerupe-pomenirea-unui-episcop-si-trece-peste-sinodul-din-creta/