On the "Confession of Faith" of Bishop Tychikos

Dimitris Chatzinikolaou, former Assistant Professor of the University of Ioannina

 

In the “Confession of Faith” which Bishop Tychikos submitted to the “Holy Synod of the Church of Cyprus”

[https://www.orthodoxianewsagency.gr/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/%CE%91%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%BA%CE%BF%CE%AF%CE%BD%CF%89%CF%83%CE%B7-%CE%BA%CE%B1%CE%B9-%CE%9F%CE%BC%CE%BF%CE%BB%CE%BF%CE%B3%CE%AF%CE%B1-%CE%9C%CE%B7%CF%84%CF%81%CE%BF%CF%80%CE%BF%CE%BB%CE%AF%CF%84%CE%B7-%CE%A0%CE%AC%CF%86%CE%BF%CF%85-%CE%BA.-%CE%A4%CF%85%CF%87%CE%B9%CE%BA%CE%BF%CF%8D_45257848-29a7-4e00-9daf-7e1fd050aaa61_1016055e-066c-4908-aed2-6571e5431792-1.pdf],

he easily allows it to be understood that he is against walling off, because, supposedly, the two conditions set by the 15th Canon of the First-Second Council under Photios the Great (861) for walling off prior to a Pan-Orthodox synodal judgment do not exist, namely: (1) that Ecumenism is supposedly not being preached with boldness and publicly, and (2) that it is supposedly not a heresy already condemned by Synods or Fathers! He himself, moreover, adds a third condition, implying that the Fathers of the First-Second Council... failed to point it out, namely: (3) that the decision for someone to wall himself off or not from heresy presupposes “divine illumination”! That is, whoever is thinking about walling off must first ask himself whether he possesses “divine illumination” and proceed to walling off only if he answers this question in the affirmative!

As for the first condition, namely, whether Ecumenism is being preached or not officially, loudly, and on a global level, in both deeds and words, I ask Mr. Tychikos and all those who rejoiced over this “Confession of Faith”:

1) Have the Ecumenists anathematized the Patriarchal Encyclical of 1920 and the participation of the Orthodox Church as an equal member in the “World Council of Churches” (W.C.C.), accepting that by Herself She is not complete and that only in Her union with the hundreds of heretical “churches” will She become complete (“Toronto Statement,” 1950), thereby rejecting—indirectly yet clearly—the Symbol of Faith, which states that the Church of Christ, the Orthodox Church, is One?

2) Have they anathematized the common prayers and concelebrations with heretics, the union agreements with the Monophysites (Chambésy, 1991) and the Papists (Balamand, 1993)?

3) Have they anathematized the “lifting” of the schism of 1054, which they officially carried out on December 7, 1965?

(https://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/speeches/1965/documents/hf_p-vi_spe_19651207_common-declaration.html and the New York Times of December 8, 1965, which states that “the state of non-communion is abolished,” that is, the schism is lifted.)

4) Have they anathematized the pseudo-council of Kolymbari (2016), by which they recognized the aforementioned pseudo-churches “by their historical name,” such as, for example, Papism as the “Catholic Church,” whereas such is the name and identity of the Orthodox Church?

5) Have they anathematized the antichristian declarations, as well as those who made them, such as, for example, the statement that the “outdated Greek garments” must be abolished—that is, the doctrines of the Trinity of God, of His Incarnation, etc.—and replaced with new ones that are more believable to modern man? (Iakovos “of America,” New York Times, September 25, 1967, p. 40); that Christ did not have sinlessness from the beginning, but acquired it (Stylianos “of Australia,” periodical of the Holy Archdiocese of Australia Voice of Orthodoxy, vol. 9, no. 12, Dec. 1988); that “in the holy mosques, God is worshipped through the Koran” (Theodoros “of Alexandria,” 2020); that the Koran is “holy” (Bartholomew, 2005); that all religions are different “paths” leading to God (Athenagoras, Bartholomew, Elpidophoros, etc.), thereby insulting indirectly yet clearly Christ Himself as a liar and deceiver, He Who taught that He is the only Way by which man may reach God (John 14:6)? And thousands of other such things. Have they anathematized any of these, Mr. Tychikos? Surely not! So then, does the first condition for walling off exist or not?

As for the second “condition,” namely whether Ecumenism has been recognized and condemned as heresy by Synods or Fathers, I ask Mr. Tychikos:

1. Is he unaware of the anathemas of Ecumenical Councils against individual heretical doctrines of Ecumenism?

2. Is he unaware of the anathema against Ecumenism by the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad under Saint Philaret (ROCOR, 1983), as well as the anathema by the Old Calendar [GOC] Synod (1998)?

3. Is he unaware of the recognition of Ecumenism as heresy—or rather as a “pan-heresy”—by contemporary saints and Fathers, such as Saint Chrysostomos of Florina (+1955), Saint John Maximovitch (+1966), Saint Justin Popovich (+1979), and many other Orthodox theologians?
So then, Mr. Tychikos, does the second condition for walling off exist or not?

As for the third “condition,” namely whether the one who is faced with the dilemma of walling off or not possesses “divine illumination”—a condition which, of course, the said holy Canon does not mention—I believe this is a deceitful addition, reminiscent of “Morphou,” who has stated that walling off is for the few, such as Fr. T. Zisis, who “knows the boundaries”! However, for someone to conclude about himself that he possesses “divine illumination” is a sign that he is already deluded and therefore the Ecumenists will “be right” in labeling the “wallers-off” [sic] as deluded and possessed of luciferian pride! But the Lord enlightens all those of good will who have a pure heart to discern the true shepherd from the stranger: “He who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice … and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. But a stranger they will not follow, but will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers” (John 10:2–5). That is why St. Athanasius the Great says: “Every man, having received discernment from God, shall be condemned if he follows an unskilled shepherd, and accepts false glory as if it were true; for what communion has light with darkness?” (Patrologia Graeca, or in brief, P.G., 26, p. 1321). Therefore, Mr. Tychikos, even the third “condition” which you arbitrarily added to the Canon does, in fact, exist.

In conclusion, your condemnation of walling off in the “Confession of Faith” which you submitted to the Ecumenists, Mr. Tychikos, is erroneous. Unfortunately, in this way you lead to damnation (according to St. Athanasius the Great, as just mentioned) also those who thereafter decide to remain in communion with the pan-heresy of the Ecumenists. “For Chrysostom has declared with a loud and mighty voice that the enemies of God are not only the heretics, but also those who commune with them” (St. Theodore the Studite, P.G. 99, p. 1049). May you have good repentance.

 

Greek source: https://orthodox-voice.blogspot.com/2025/06/blog-post_61.html