Testimonies from Councils and Fathers concerning the division of the one Church into two flocks (“healthy” and “sick”) due to heresy and an uncondemned heretic.

[With a brief commentary on so-called “Cyprianism”]

Protopresbyter Dimitrios Athanasiou | December 29, 2025

[An anti-Ecumenist priest walled-off from the Official Church of Greece.]

 

 

Introduction

From the book of Hieromonk Eugenios, The Concept of Defilement, we publish from pages 549–555 a text bearing the above title. The text is composed in plain, comprehensible language. At the end of the text, there are concise conclusions.

The main points of the text are the following:

“The Church is one, but in critical periods it appears divided into two flocks due to heresies or delusion:

• The ‘healthy’ flock consists of those who preserve the correct faith.

• The ‘sick’ flock includes those who have been led astray by false teachings, without having been officially condemned.

Despite the division, both flocks perform mysteries, while the Church remains one. The aim of the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils was the unity of the Church, the restoration of the divided flocks, and the removal of delusion. The ‘illness’ of the second flock refers to the spiritual harm caused by heresy, and its removal protects the healthy flock and allows for its spiritual growth.

Overall, the distinction between ‘healthy’ and ‘sick’ flock is temporary and therapeutic, with the purpose of returning all to the unity of the One Church.”

Among the groups of the G.O.C., this is called Cyprianism and is even considered by many to be a heresy.

Opinion of the author [Fr. Dimitrios]

The term Cyprianism does not correspond to a historically recognized heresy, nor does it describe a structured dogmatic system that introduces an innovation of faith or alters the ecclesiological mindset of Orthodoxy.

The positions attributed to the so-called “Cyprianism” — especially that the heretic is mystically severed from the Body of Christ prior to synodal condemnation, while remaining canonically within the visible ecclesiastical structure until judged by a synod — do not constitute heresy, but rather a patristic distinction clearly attested in the writings of the Holy Fathers. The distinction between the mystical and the visible body of the Church is established in Orthodox ecclesiology and is presupposed both by the Holy Canons and by the synodal practice of the Church.

The accusation that this position nullifies the competence of Local Synods is a distorted generalization. Tradition fully acknowledges the authority of bishops and local synods to condemn heresies and those inclined toward heresy; at the same time, however, it teaches that when a heresy acquires a universal or pan-Orthodox dimension, a corresponding synodal judgment is required. This gradation is not “ecclesiological relativism,” but an expression of canonical exactness.

The argument concerning the “inability of the Church to expel heretics in the absence of an Ecumenical Council” is based on hypothetical reasoning and not on patristic ecclesiology. The Church acknowledges a second manner of severance from itself: apostasy and self-severance, when someone publicly and persistently accepts or preaches heresy.

The argument that the Church cannot expel heretics without the convocation of an Ecumenical Council comes into conflict with the long tradition of the Fathers and with Canon Law. Orthodox ecclesiology recognizes two primary ways by which a member ceases to belong to the Body of Christ:

1. The Synodal Condemnation

This constitutes the “judicial path,” whereby the official Church, through Local or Ecumenical Councils, identifies the delusion and pronounces the penalty of excommunication or deposition. However, the Council does not “create” the heresy, but ascertains and confirms an already existing spiritual condition.

2. Self-Severance (Apostasy)

According to patristic theology, heresy is not merely a legal offense, but a spiritual condition that severs a person from the Life of the Church. Saint Maximus the Confessor maintained that heretics, even before synodal condemnation, have been alienated from the Church due to the corruption of the faith. He himself broke communion with the Patriarchate of Constantinople when it fell into Monothelitism, even before the convocation of the Sixth Ecumenical Council. The 15th Canon of the First-Second Council acknowledges the obligation of the faithful to cease commemorating a bishop who preaches heresy “with bared head” (publicly and openly), which has already been condemned by Councils, even before there is a specific synodal judgment concerning the individual. The Church exists where the word of truth is rightly divided. As Saint Gregory Palamas emphasizes, those who belong to the Church of Christ are those who belong to the Truth. Those who reject the Truth exclude themselves from sacramental and spiritual communion, regardless of whether an institutional body has had time to convene. Therefore, the expectation of an Ecumenical Council as the exclusive prerequisite for the identification of a heretic is often a pretext to avoid confession of the faith, for it transforms the Church from “the pillar and ground of the truth” into a bureaucratic institution that remains inert in the face of doctrinal distortion.

The application of the concepts of “Cyprianism” primarily concerns the heretics within the visible Church (the “Ecumenists”) who remain “sick members” until synodal condemnation or secession.

The Papists, on the other hand, are generally considered to be outside the visible boundaries of the Orthodox Church, since the Schism of 1054 and the subsequent Councils (such as the Hesychast Councils of the 14th century) have condemned and anathematized them. As such, the teaching concerning “sick members” applies to Orthodox who align themselves with Ecumenism, and not to Roman Catholics who have already seceded.

***

Testimonies from Councils and Fathers concerning the division of the one Church into two flocks (“healthy” and “sick”) due to heresy and an uncondemned heretic:

 

Testimony of Saint Basil the Great (concerning the Arians):

“In such a critical time, great effort and much care are needed to assist the Churches. And the greatest benefit is for those parts which have until now been divided to be united.”

In another letter (the 92nd):

“For this purpose we especially need your help [of the Westerners]: so that those who confess the apostolic faith, having dissolved the schisms they devised, may henceforth submit to the authority of the Church. Thus, the Body of Christ will once again be whole, and all its members will return to fullness...”

Note: In this letter, Saint Basil the Great beseeches the bishops of the West to assist synodally in uniting the Churches of the East.

Testimony of Saint Cyril of Alexandria (to John of Antioch after their reconciliation):

“…and [I pray that God] may unite the divided parts and, having removed the scandals that came between us, may crown with concord and peace both our Churches and yours.”

Testimony of the same Saint (to Patriarch Maximian of Constantinople):

“Behold, look! The divided members of the body of the Church have been united once again with one another.”

Introductory Address of the Sixth [Ecumenical] Council:

“What other offering of gifts to God could be more precious from you than the fervent proof of your love and faith toward Him, and the peaceful state of the holy Churches which you have achieved? For this purpose, you have exerted very great efforts, beyond your other duties, striving for concord among those who had been divided. For you reign justly with the help of Christ, and Christ through you desires to grant peace to His Churches.

God Himself has now moved your serene authority and stirred you with zeal for Orthodoxy, so that you might convene this Ecumenical Council. The purpose was to overturn the criminal deed of heresy which had recently arisen and to confirm the preaching of the truth; thus, as this proceeds, the structure of the Church may be firm and without divisions.

For you did not consider it tolerable, most wise king, that we should agree and find common ground in other matters, yet be cut off and divided in the very subject of our life (the faith); and this, while we are members of one another and constitute the one Body of Christ, through our common faith in Him and with one another.

[…] Since, therefore, things stood thus, it was necessary that your Christ-loving benevolence should gather together this most holy and numerous assembly, deeming it right to achieve both: to remove the cause of the division of the Churches, and to restore to unity those things which had been separated. For you did not endure, God-honored sovereign, to see much longer the invention of false teaching recently woven, tearing the garment of Orthodoxy. But, as an instrument of the Holy Spirit —if we may dare to say so— together with us and through us, you rewove the torn portion and restored it to its wholeness.”

Testimony of Saint Tarasius (from the Acts of the Seventh Ecumenical Council):

“For I observe and see that the Church of our Christ and God, which is founded upon the rock [of faith], is now divided and fragmented…”

Testimony of the Seventh Ecumenical Council (from a letter to Emperors Constantine and Irene):

“…so that, having driven away the division of the Churches, we may restore to unity those parts which have been severed…”

Testimony from the Feast of the Sunday of Orthodoxy (referring to the end of Iconoclasm):

“Beholding this greatest benefaction, let us applaud with joy that the divided members of Christ [the faithful and the churches] have been gathered again into unity, and let us glorify God who has granted us peace.” (Third troparion of the First Ode of the Canon)

It should further be noted that, just as occurred in the periods prior to the convocation of the Third, Sixth, and Seventh Ecumenical Councils, as well as in the time of Saint Basil the Great, so also in other historical moments the Church appears divided in two (that is, into two flocks). This happened due to heresies and the activity of heretics who had not yet been officially condemned. The same phenomenon is observed also in the periods preceding the Fourth Ecumenical Council, the Eighth Ecumenical (due to schism), and the Ninth Ecumenical Council.

According to the above, then, the Church is divided into two flocks: one is the “healthy” (those who uphold the correct faith), and the other is the “sick” (those who have been led astray by delusion or heresy).

As Saint Basil the Great calls them [the documentation is found at the end of this section], into the second flock has entered the illness and defilement of impiety, resulting in its transformation from a healthy part into a sick one. In contrast, the first part remained healthy precisely because it kept its distance from the second. But take heed of this: two Churches are not created; the Church is one. What happens is that the flock is divided in two, or that the local Churches are in a state of separation from one another.

To make this more understandable, let us look to Holy Scripture. The Lord says: “And I say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church” (Matt. 16:18). The Apostle Paul says: “Take heed therefore unto yourselves and to all the flock, over which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to shepherd the Church of the Lord and God, which He purchased with His own blood” (Acts 20:28). These two passages refer to the One Church that we confess in the Symbol of Faith.

In other places, the Apostle Paul says: “Then had the Churches rest throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria” (Acts 9:31), and elsewhere: “Greet one another with a holy kiss; the Churches of Christ greet you” (Rom. 16:16). Here, the reference is to the local Churches, which all together constitute the One Catholic Church of Christ, yet each one of them is also the Catholic Church. Ultimately, this is a mystery, but the phrase “the Churches” refers to the individual local Christian communities.

Now coming to the passages under examination: Saint Basil the Great speaks of “uniting the Churches which until now were divided.” Saint Cyril refers to “our Churches and yours.” The Sixth Ecumenical Council seeks “to remove the division of the Churches and to restore to unity those parts that have been separated.” Finally, the Seventh Ecumenical Council says, “so that [we may cast off the division of the Churches]” … “driving away the disagreement among the Churches, let us restore to unity those parts that have been separated.” And from the Sunday of Orthodoxy: “the separated members of Christ have again been gathered into unity.” In these texts, the meaning is that the local Churches must be united—or have been united—that is, their flocks are to become one again, ceasing to be in separation and without ecclesiastical communion. The phrase of Saint Tarasius (“I see the Church… torn and fragmented”) means that the Church of God appears as divided into two flocks or into two local Churches that are not in communion with each other.

Both of these parts perform mysteries as members of the Church. Saint Basil the Great and all the Orthodox held that the Arians had valid (substantial) priesthood. The same was accepted by the Third Ecumenical Council concerning the “Council of Apostasy,” by the Sixth Ecumenical Council regarding Macarius and others, by the Seventh Ecumenical Council regarding the Iconoclasts, as well as by the Council of 843 concerning the Iconoclasts after the Seventh Ecumenical. The same occurred with the Fifth Ecumenical Council concerning the Nestorians of the West, the Eighth Ecumenical concerning the schismatic Ignatians, and the Ninth Ecumenical concerning the followers of Barlaam and Akindynos (see also regarding Saint Maximus the Confessor and Saint Gregory Palamas).

The question is: what does the “sickness” (morbid state) of one part mean, and why must we distance ourselves from it, even though it performs mysteries? The answer to this very delicate issue is given throughout the entire book, but concisely in Chapter VII: “Final Conclusions.”

The designation of the two flocks of the Church as “healthy” and “sick” (diseased), according to Saint Basil the Great, is based on the following:

“These describe the image of those who distort the teachings of the Lord and do not genuinely learn from His word, but have been corrupted by the teaching of the evil one. These mingle with the healthy body of the Church [i.e., the Orthodox], with the intention of secretly transmitting their own spiritual harm to the more well-intentioned and simple-minded faithful.

“For the healthy part here [the portion of the Orthodox], which defends the piety of the Fathers, has suffered greatly, as the devil strives in many and varied ways to shake it. But may it be, through your prayers, that the evil heresy of Arius which misleads the people be extinguished, and that the good teaching of our Fathers gathered in Nicaea may shine again, so that the doxology to the Holy Trinity may be in harmony with the saving baptism.

“The most pitiable of all is that even the part which appears to be healthy [the Orthodox] has become internally divided... To us, in addition to the open war of the heretics, has been added the conflict with those who appear to believe the same as we do, a fact which has brought the Churches into a state of utmost weakness.

“We remain steadfast in the same position, while others are those who continually change [he refers to Eustathius of Sebasteia], and now openly join the camp of the opponents. You yourself know how highly we valued communion with them, so long as they still belonged to the healthy portion [the Orthodox].

“But you, our beloved and much-desired brothers, become physicians for the wounded and trainers for the healthy. Heal the sick [diseased] part [the Arians], and prepare the healthy part [the Orthodox] for the practice of piety.

“Remain steadfast in the faith; look around you throughout the whole world and see that this sick part [referring to the Pneumatomachians] is small. The entire rest of the Church, from one end of the world to the other, which received the Gospel, remains faithful to this sound and correct teaching.”

1. The Unity of the Church and the Division of the Flocks

The text highlights that the Church remains one, but in critical periods it appears divided into two flocks:

• The “healthy” flock: the faithful who preserve the correct faith and follow the teachings of the Fathers.
• The “sick” flock: the faithful who have been led astray by heresies or false teachings, without having yet been officially condemned.

This division does not create two Churches; the Church remains one, while the local Churches may be in a state of separation or have interrupted ecclesiastical relations with one another. Saint Basil the Great uses the metaphor of “illness” to describe the spiritual damage caused by heresy and delusion.

2. Aim of the Fathers and the Councils

All the cited texts emphasize that the aim of the Fathers and the Ecumenical Councils was the unity of the Church:

• Saint Basil the Great: seeks the union of the Churches that had been divided due to the Arians.
• Saint Cyril of Alexandria: prays for the union of the divided parts and the removal of scandals.
• Sixth and Seventh Ecumenical Councils: explicitly state that the goal is the removal of division and the restoration of the flocks to unity.
• Sunday of Orthodoxy: celebrates the reunification of the “separated members of Christ.”

Overall, this line of thought shows that faith and unity are interlinked, and that the correction of heretics does not mean the dissolution of the Church, but the restoration of unity.

3. The Meaning of “Sickness”

The “sickness” or “morbid condition” of the second flock does not refer to an inability to perform the mysteries; the mysteries are celebrated properly and remain valid, even in a flock that has deviated in doctrine. On the contrary, the “sickness” is spiritual:

• It is the distortion of the truth of the Gospel and the spread of delusion.
• It poses a threat of transmission to the Orthodox faithful.
• Separation from the “sick” part protects the healthy flock and allows for its spiritual growth.
• Saint Basil the Great likens the work of the Fathers to that of physicians caring for the ill, with the goal of restoring the “sick” and preserving the “healthy.”

4. The Ecclesiological Perspective

The text emphasizes the unity of the One Church and the distinction between the local Churches and the Body of the Church:

• The One Church exists universally, while the local Churches are parts of the One Church.
• The Fathers and the Councils observe that division can occur among the local flocks without the unity of the Church being lost.
• Ecclesiastical divisions are temporary and can be healed through councils and the conciliar effort toward unity.

5. Conclusion

The main message of the text is:

• The Church is one, but it may appear divided due to heresies or delusion.
• The divided flocks are called “healthy” and “sick,” depending on their adherence to the truth of the faith.
• Despite the division, both flocks perform mysteries; however, spiritual guidance requires distancing from the sickness for protection and healing.
• The Ecumenical Councils and the Fathers always pursued unity and the restoration of the divided Churches.
• In other words, the division into two flocks is a temporary and therapeutic distinction, not a schism; the goal is the return of all to the unified body of the Church.

 

Greek source: https://apotixisi.blogspot.com/2025/12/blog-post_40.html