The Orthodox Ecclesiology of the Synodikon of Orthodoxy and the Ecclesiology of the Council of Crete

Protopresbyter Dimitrios Athanasiou | March 01, 2026

 

 

Brief and necessary elements concerning the ecclesiology of the Synodikon of Orthodoxy

The text of the Synodikon of Orthodoxy is an apologetic and dogmatic confession of the Church. It is not simply a festive celebration, but a clear condemnation of all false knowledge (I Tim. 6:20). The Church characterizes this day as a “due annual thanksgiving to God,” because the victory of the truth was not achieved by military power or human wisdom, but by divine energy, as this was manifested in our Venerable Fathers. As the Apostle Paul teaches: “Stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught” (II Thess. 2:15), so also the Church neither adds nor removes anything, nor introduces innovations, but preserves with exactness that which it received from the Apostles.

The reference to the “prophetic sayings,” the “apostolic exhortations,” and the “evangelical narratives” reveals the unbroken unity of divine Revelation. What the Prophets saw, what the Apostles taught, and what the Church formulated dogmatically in the Ecumenical Councils are one and the same. Saint Basil the Great teaches that the Tradition of the Church is “the living voice of the apostolic teaching,” while Saint Gregory the Theologian emphasizes that the truth has no need of violence, but shines by itself and consumes error.

A central point of the text is the confession of the Incarnation of God the Word. Since “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:14), the depiction of Christ is not a simple symbol, but a confession of His real incarnation. Saint John of Damascus teaches that “the honor of the icon passes to the prototype,” explaining the distinction between worship, which belongs to God alone, and the honorary veneration rendered to the Saints. This distinction was dogmatically established by the Seventh Ecumenical Council, which condemned those who deny the veneration of the Holy Icons.

The phrase “The prophets as they saw, the apostles as they taught, the Church as she received, the teachers as they formulated, the universe as it agreed” expresses the unity of the plan of salvation. Grace was manifested, the truth was proven, and falsehood was abolished. The Church does not create a new faith, but guards the deposit (I Tim. 6:20) which established the universe. As the Apostle Paul confesses: “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith” (II Tim. 4:7).

Anathema against the contemporary heresies

The text culminates in the proclamation: “This is the faith of the Apostles, this is the faith of the Fathers, this is the faith of the Orthodox.” Orthodoxy is not a human ideology, but the living experience of the Holy Spirit, who acts unceasingly within the Church.

In contrast to this faith, the following are anathematized:

First, the Ecumenists, who deny that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic. They confuse truth with falsehood, saying that “all religions lead to the same God.” Thus, they deny the unique Savior Jesus Christ, who said: “I am the way and the truth and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6).

Second, the Catholics (Papists), who introduce novelties into the faith by inserting the “Filioque” into the Symbol of Faith. They deny the essence of God with their own teaching concerning “uncreated energies” and accept that the Pope is infallible. This is an insult against the Holy Spirit, who is the only guardian of the truth.

Third, the Protestants, who deny the Tradition of the Church, the Holy Icons, the intercession of the Saints, and the Divine Liturgy. They have “a form of godliness, but deny its power” (II Timothy 3:5). The Council of Crete supported the liturgical theology, which is the heart of the Orthodox tradition.

Fourth, the Monophysites and Monothelites, who deny the perfect humanity of Christ.

Fifth, all the new heresies, which deny the uncreated divine energy, which view God as a metaphysical “being,” and which sever theology from theosis. As Saint Gregory Palamas condemned Barlaam the Calabrian, so also do we.

 

The Orthodox Ecclesiology of the Synodikon of Orthodoxy and the Ecclesiology of the Council of Crete

 

A. The denial of the uniqueness of the Church

The Synodikon of Orthodoxy proclaims: “This is the faith of the Apostles, this is the faith of the Fathers, this is the faith of the Orthodox.” The Council of Crete, on the contrary, speaks of “churches” in the plural, as if the one Church were divided into “catholic orthodox churches.” They deny the mystery of unity, as the Apostle Paul taught: “One body, one Spirit” (Eph. 4:4).

The Council of Crete replaced the ecclesiology of communion with an ecclesiology of dialogue, as if the Church were not the Body of Christ, but an inter-parliamentary union of religious groups. This is an insult against the Spirit, who unites the Church into one Body.

B. The confusion of truth with falsehood

The Synodikon condemns those who deny the veneration of the Icons, the iconoclasts, as deniers of the Incarnation. The Council of Crete condemned no heresy, but called the Papists, the Protestants, and the Monophysites to “dialogue,” as if falsehood were not deadly, but an opinion open to discussion.

The Council dogmatized: “The Orthodox churches recognize one another as parts of the one Church.” This is falsehood; the Church is not a confederation of parts, but the fullness of Christ. As Saint Maximus the Confessor teaches: “The Church is the full Christ,” not an assembly of autonomous local identities.

C. The denial of the exclusivity of salvation

The Synodikon confesses: “I have fought the good fight, I have kept the faith” (II Tim. 4:7). The Council of Crete refused to confess that “there is no other salvation except that which is in Christ.” The text “The Mission of the Orthodox Church” speaks of an “encounter with other Christian churches,” as if heresies were not cut off from life, but merely “lacking in fullness.”

This is a new heresy, which prepares union with Papism through the denial of uniqueness. As the Seventh Ecumenical Council condemned those who deny veneration, so also we condemn those who deny the uniqueness of salvation within the Church.

D. The texts that were signed at the conferences of Busan (2013), Toronto (2014), Porto Alegre (2015), and Balamand (2016) constitute a preparation for the Council of Crete and deviate from the ecclesiology of the Synodikon of Orthodoxy.

Below we analyze the principal differences.

D.1 The unity of the Church

The Synodikon confesses: “This is the faith of the Apostles, this is the faith of the Fathers, this is the faith of the Orthodox.” It speaks of one Church, unified and indivisible.

The texts of Busan–Toronto–Porto Alegre–Balamand continually speak of “churches” in the plural. They use terms such as “catholic orthodox churches,” “local churches,” and “autocephalous churches.” This shows that they have lost the sense of the one Church, as though the Church were a confederation of independent groups, and not one Body with one Head, Christ.

At Busan (2013) it is stated that the “Orthodox churches” are “parts of the one Church.” This is incorrect. The Church is not divided into parts. It is the fullness of Christ, as Saint Maximus the Confessor says.

D.2 The relationship with the heresies

The Synodikon clearly condemns the heresies. It anathematizes the iconoclasts, the deniers of the Incarnation. It leaves no room for compromise with falsehood.

The texts of the conferences avoid speaking about heresies. They use courteous terms for the Papists and the Protestants. At Toronto (2014) they speak of “other Christian communities” and “sister churches.” At Porto Alegre (2015) they refer to “common witness” with those who do not possess the Orthodox faith.

This is a betrayal of Tradition. Christ said: “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6). These texts appear to say that there are also other ways.

D.3 The hierarchy and synodality

The Synodikon recognizes the Ecumenical Council as the supreme authority. Its decisions are binding for all.

The texts of the conferences promote a new concept of “synodality.” They state that all “local churches” have equal rights. At Toronto it is mentioned that “no church has the right to impose upon another.” This means that they abolish the common faith. Each “church” may do whatever it wishes.

This is anarchy, not ecclesiastical order. The Church is not a democracy in which truth is decided by vote. Truth is revealed by God, not determined by majorities.

D.4 Salvation

The Synodikon is clear: “I have kept the faith” (II Timothy 4:7). We preserve the faith that was handed down, without additions.

The texts of the conferences open the door to syncretism. At Balamand, they speak of “dialogue with other religions,” as if it does not matter whether someone is Christian or not. At Porto Alegre they refer to “common values” with atheists and idolaters.

This is a denial of Christ. The Apostle Peter said: “There is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). These texts appear to say that there are also other names.

E. The World Council of Churches and the Synodikon of Orthodoxy

The World Council of Churches (WCC) was present at the Council of Crete with observers. This in itself is a scandal. The Synodikon of Orthodoxy does not recognize “observers” from heretical groups. It anathematizes heresies; it does not invite them to observe.

The General Secretary of the WCC, Olaf Fykse Tveit, was present at the proceedings. The WCC represents 350 “churches,” including Protestants, Papists, Monophysites, and even heretical groups that do not recognize the Holy Trinity. His presence constituted a profanation of the council.

The Council of Kolymbari (2016) accepted the World Council of Churches (WCC) and its decisions. It included among its topics the relationship of the Orthodox Church with the World Council of Churches. In the text “The Relations of the Orthodox Church with the Rest of the Christian World,” the Council:

• Confirmed the participation of the Orthodox Church in the ecumenical movement and specifically in the WCC, on the basis of the Toronto Statement (1950).

• Warmly welcomed the work of the WCC’s Faith and Order Commission, noting that it “follows with particular interest its theological contribution up to the present day.”

• Recognized the significant participation of Orthodox theologians in the theological texts of the Faith and Order Commission.

E.1 The common ecclesiology of the WCC and the Council of Crete

The WCC is based on a specific ecclesiology: all “churches” are parts of an invisible unity. There is not one true Church, but many “churches” which complement one another.

The Council of Crete adopted this ecclesiology. It speaks of “catholic orthodox churches” in the plural. It states that the “Orthodox churches” recognize one another as “parts of the one Church.” This is the language of the WCC, not of the Synodikon.

The Synodikon says: “This is the faith of the Apostles, this is the faith of the Fathers, this is the faith of the Orthodox.” One faith, one Church. The WCC and the Council of Crete say: many faiths, many churches, which meet at certain common points.

E.2 The denial of uniqueness

The WCC does not believe that Orthodoxy is the only true Church. It holds that all “churches” possess portions of the truth.

The Council of Crete did not dare to state that Orthodoxy is the only salvation. The text “The Mission of the Orthodox Church” speaks of “dialogue with other Christian churches,” as though the Papists and the Protestants were “churches” having some relationship with Christ.

The Synodikon is clear: those who deny the faith of the Apostles are outside the Church. Christ said: “No one comes to the Father except through Me” (John 14:6). The WCC and the Council of Crete say: many come to the Father by many ways.

E.3 The replacement of confession with dialogue

The Synodikon is a confession. We confess the faith; we do not negotiate it.

The WCC is based on dialogue. Everything is discussed; nothing is considered given.

The Council of Crete adopted the logic of dialogue. It condemned no heresy. It did not confess the uniqueness of Orthodoxy. On the contrary, it speaks of “common witness,” “common ministry,” and “cooperation” with those who do not believe in Orthodoxy.

This is BETRAYAL. The holy Fathers did not “cooperate” with heretics. They called them to repentance. The Council of Crete calls them to “dialogue,” as though they were equals.

E.4 The secularization of the Church

The WCC is concerned primarily with social issues: poverty, the environment, rights, and peace. These are good, but they are not the work of the Church.

The Council of Crete followed this line. Its texts speak extensively about “social justice,” “protection of creation,” and “interreligious dialogue.”

The Synodikon honors the Holy Icons, worship, and the living Tradition. The Council of Crete, under the influence of the WCC, transformed the Church into a Non-Governmental Organization.

Conclusion

The Council of Crete, according to its critics, synodically introduced the “Pan-heresy of Ecumenism” through the following critical decisions:

Recognition of heresies as Churches, in violation of the article of the Symbol of Faith, “In One … Church.”

Acceptance of Papism without requiring repentance for its dogmatic errors (filioque, primacy).

Recognition of the WCC and of the ecclesiology of the “equality of confessions.”

Alteration of the concept of baptism, through the recognition of the validity of the baptism of heretics.

Condemnation of the anti-ecumenists, targeting those who struggle for the defense of Tradition.

Adoption of post-patristic theology, departing from the ascetical experience of the Holy Fathers.

The Diocese of Raška and Prizren characterizes the Council as a “robber council” and its decisions as “ecumenist and heretical,” which were presented “cordially only to the Roman Catholics.” Professor Kyriakos Kyriakazopoulos characterizes it as a “Pseudo-Council,” which “is not an Orthodox Council, but is subject to annulment.”

The Council of Crete, regardless of the intentions of its participants, appears to constitute a turning point in the history of the Orthodox Church, with its decisions causing profound ecclesiological confusions and threatening the unity of Orthodoxy on a global level.

In contrast to the patristic faith, as confessed in the Synodikon of Orthodoxy, we condemn the ecclesiology of the so-called “Holy and Great Council” of Crete (2016), which confuses truth with falsehood and sets aside the fundamental teaching concerning the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

 

GREEK BIBLIOGRAPHY ON THE COUNCIL OF CRETE (2016)

1. Metropolitan Hierotheos Vlachos of Nafpaktos. The “Holy and Great Council” in Crete: Theological and Ecclesiological Positions

2. Protopresbyter Theodoros Zisis: After the “Council” of Crete: The Cessation of Commemoration and My Judicial Prosecution

Title: Holy and Great Council: Should We Hope or Be Concerned?

3. Professor Dimitrios Tselengidis

A Brief Assessment of the “Holy and Great Council” at Kolymbari of Crete (July 2016)

A New Intervention Concerning the Pan-Orthodox Council of Crete

Professor Tselengidis was one of the three figures “through whom the pan-Orthodox ecclesiastical conscience was expressed” at the pan-Orthodox level, together with the Metropolitan of Nafpaktos and Fr. Theodoros Zisis.

4. Kyriakos Kyriakazopoulos, Jurist–Theologian

Evaluation of the so-called “Holy and Great Council” of Crete (2016)

The Pseudo-Council of Crete Synodically Introduced the Pan-heresy of Ecumenism

Cessation of Commemoration after the Council of Crete

Characteristic is his position: “The Council is neither valid nor automatically invalid, but is subject to annulment; that is, it may be annulled by a truly Orthodox Council.”

5. Archimandrite Pavlos Dimitrakopoulos

Title: The Council of Crete (2016): Preparation – Convocation – Decisions – Consequences, Publication: 2020

6. Journal Theodromia, Issues of 2016 (Double Issue January–June): A special issue containing texts by bishops, clergy, monks, and laypeople concerning the forthcoming Council.

Included are texts of Saint Justin Popović, Elder Daniel of Katounakia, and Fr. Philotheos Zervakos.

Issues of 2016 (Double Issue July–December):

Cover title: “Neither Holy nor Great nor a Council”

Contents in four parts:

a) Texts of Churches

b) Texts of hierarchs

c) Texts of other clergy and monks

d) Texts of laypeople

Total extent: 704 pages (Volume 18 of Theodromia).

BOOKS BY ATHONITE FATHERS AND MONKS

7. Monk Avvakoum the Athonite. Ecumenism and Orthodoxy

8. Monk Michael the Athonite. Ecumenism: The Orthodoxy of the New Age

9. Monk Nikodemos Bilalis. Ecumenism and the Change of the Paschalion

Publications: Theodromia, Thessaloniki, 2024

Preface: Protopresbyter Theodoros Zisis

MEMORANDA AND OFFICIAL TEXTS [Trans. note: original numbering skips 10 and 11]

12. Holy Community of Mount Athos

Title: Memorandum Concerning the Participation of the Orthodox Church in the World Council of Churches Publication: Theodromia 10 (2008), pp. 206–272

Characterization: “Unsurpassed in historical and theological argumentation and force.”

13. Metropolitan Seraphim of Piraeus

Article: “That the Dialogue with the Pope Should Cease and That We Should Withdraw from the World Council of ‘Churches’” Publication: Theodromia 10 (2008), pp. 273–274.

 

Greek source: https://fdathanasiou-parakatathiki.blogspot.com/2026/03/blog-post_1.html