The Defrocking of the Metropolitan of Oropos, Cyprian
From :
The Voice of Orthodoxy
(Foni tis Orthodoxias)
The official periodical of the Synod of GOC of Greece
(At that time under the presidency of
Archbishop Chrysostom Kiousis)
Issue 811
January-February 1987
page 23
The Defrocking of the Metropolitan of Oropos, Cyprian
The Holy Synod on November 4, 1986 (November 18 by the Civil New Calendar)
defrocked the Metropolitan of Oropos Cyprian Koutsoubas and it returned him to the order of
monks, because he fell into the heresy of Ecumenism and cut himself off from our Church. This is
a sad event for the history of our struggle, as it has been proven that the defrocked Metropolitan
Kyprianos Koutsoubas for more than a decade of years managed to deceive the Church of the True
Orthodox Christians of Greece pretending to be a pure Orthodox Christian. He even managed to
climb the ladder of all the levels of the priesthood, becoming a bishop, while his heart was literally
being devoured by the kakodox sermons of new-calendaristic ecumenism. No one denies that the
defrocking of a bishop is certainly something tragic for the Church, however, as we stated also in
the event of the defrocking of the former Archbishop Auxentios, often this act of the mother Church is unavoidable. One such case is that of the here spoken about former Metropolitan and
now Monk Cyprian Koutsoubas and we explain the reasons
- When a bishop preaches heresy, and more so with an “naked head”, as Kyrpianos did, the
Church must take the required measures to protect Her flock from the heresy being
proclaimed. The most efficient way of reacting to this situation is to cut off the rotting part
from her body to prevent the spread of the gangrene of heresy to the healthy members
(parts) of the Church. This is the way the Church has always worked throughout her ages
long history. In this case, the Monk Cyprian believed wrongly (kakodoxed) to such an
extreme as to preach that the New Calendarists make up the saving One, Holy, Catholic, and
Apostolic Church, whereas we, who follow the patristic Orthodox calendar are not….the
Church. O what a horrifying blasphemy from the lips of one person who appears as an Old
Calendar bishop! - However, there is another reason why the defrocking of Cyprian was unavoidable for the
Church. Cyprian cutting himself off from the Church became the cause of a schism and
founded by his own brainstorming a so-called “Holy Synod of Resistance”. When did the
Holy Fathers create a similar synod of “resistors” and give themselves over to collecting and
proselytizing the more simple faithful?
If the defrocked Metropolitan Cyprian had alone cut himself off from the Church and
confined himself to his monastery, the Holy Synod would have shown forbearance praying
for his return, as it does for its other separated from the synod bishops Gabriel of Cyclades
and Akakaios of Diavleia, whom the synod never wanted to defrock up until this day for this
very reason. From the moment though that Cyprian conceived the diabolical plan to agitate
the Church, founding schismatic parishes in various places in order to beguile people and
even more so to ordain a host of bishops, then things are different. In this case, the Church,
unfortunately, had no other solution. The Church was forced, due to the extreme actions of
Metropolitan Cyprian, to go forward with his defrocking.
The unfortunate thing though, is that the now Monk Cyprian instead of repenting and
understanding his actions against the Orthodox Church, continues to lure and mislead others into
heresy and schism. Just as many other heretics that were condemned by the Church did not repent,
Cyprian has not repented. Therefore the words of the Apostle Paul to Tito, “ Reject a divisive man
after a first and second admonition, knowing that such a man is corrupt and sinful; he is self-condemned (Titus 3:10-11) are now valid for him. And Cyprian insisting upon the kakodoxy of
ecumenism “sins as one self-condemned”.
We are truly sorrowed by the fall of Cyprian. We are more sorrowed by the fact that many innocent
souls are led astray by his new and heretical preachings and are cut off from the Church. We are
even more so sorrowed and saddened by the fact that there exist theologians and others who
theologize, who, instead of advising the fallen Cyprian to return to Orthodoxy, push him on in his
delusion (prelest) and unrepentant stance.
We pray that this so unpleasant event, the fall of the Monk Cyprian, be the saving
motivation for the needed questioning of all the True Orthodox Christians who are of healthy faith
and must come to know that heresy can touch the very curbs of our Church if we are not careful. So
a vigilant observation of all heretical movements and views, and a denunciation and obsolescence
of every heretic is required, as our synod very well performed in the case of Cyprian Koutsoubas,
whose repentance and return we will never stop awaiting.
5
th
Decision/ 1986
In Korydallos
and in the Church of the Holy Great Martyr Marina (Vasilissis Sofias and Kritis Sts.)
Today the 5/18 of November, 1986, the Holy Synod of the Church of the True Orthodox Christians
of Greece met in an extraordinary meeting as a synodical court under the presidency of His
Beautitude Archbishop Chrysostom of Athens and with the presence of the following members of
the synod their Eminences Metropolitans; Kallinikos of Fthiotis and Thavmakos, Maximos of
Magnisia, Kallinikos of Achaia and all Peloponnisos, Matthew of Onoi, Kalliopios of Pentapolis,
Stephen of Chios, Psara and Oinousses, Athanasios of Acharnai and New Ionia, Justin of Evripos
and Evia and the following who were not able to attend but let the synod know of their agreement
with the decisions taken, Their Eminences Metropolitans; Gerontios of Piraeus and Salamis, Peter
of Astoria, Kallinikos of Dodekanisos,and Efthymios of Thessaloniki.
The meeting was called to judge the accusations, which will be listed later, against;
Metropolitans Cyprian of Oropos and Fyli and John of Sardinia
and those bishops ordained by them;
1.Chrysostom Gonzales (Mexican) 2. Nifon Kigudu (Kenyan) 3. Chrysostom Kouskoutopoulos 4.
Chrysostom Marlasis
and three others who are unknown to us;
One Swede, one Italian, and One Austrian
who make up the novel “Holy Synod of Resistance”
and who did not appear before the Court, even though they were lawfully summoned to appear as is
shown by the receipt of delivery by the bailiff of Athens Evangelos Moumelas.
Having verified the legal quorum and following the usual prayer, His Beatitude Archbishop
Chrysostom of Athens and President of the Holy Synod announced the beginning of the session.
The duty of secretary was placed upon the Chief Secretary of the Holy Synod, His Eminence
Metropolitan Kallinikos (Later Archbishop Kallinikos of Athens) of Achaia and all Pelopponisos, who read the indictment which reads as
follows:
“All of the accused:
A. Fell from the Orthodox Faith given to us by the Holy and God-bearing Fathers of the Church and
the decision of the Holy Synods of our Church of the years 1935, 1950, and 1974 and embraced
Ecumenistic kakodoxies according to which the schismatic New Calendarists make up the
traditional One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church which is a treasury of saving Grace and an
Ark of salvation and that our Church of the True Orthodox Christians is not the Church.
B. Give the Holy Mysteries of our Church without distinction and examination to the innovators
schismatic and ecumenist New Calendarists.
C. Cut themselves off from our Church and set up their own altar and the so-called “Holy Synod of
Resistance” with the members of this synod being the Metropolitans Cyprian of Oropos and John of
Sardinia and those who were uncanonically ordained by them and who make up the other accused.
In addition to this Metropolitan Cyprian is especially accused of having deceived his superior
authority and the pious people of our Church of the GOC of Greece for a whole 15 year period
during which he appeared as a confessor of the faith of our Church in order to achieve his
ordination to the episcopacy, and later to reveal his true goals which were the abduction of the
episcopacy and the founding of a “church” inspired by his own imagination in order promote his
unorthodox thinkings.
Metropolitan Kalliopios, the rapporteur of this case read his proposal which is as follows:
Holy President, Holy Members of the Sacred Synod,
In performing the decision of the Holy Synod of October 3/16, 1986 in which by letter I was asked
to make a report on the accused Metropolitan of Oropos and Fyli who cut himself off from the
Church of G.O.C. and publicly and with a naked head proclaimed already condemned kakodoxies, I
reverently cite the following: - His Eminence Metropolitan Cyprian of Oropos and Fyli up until the year 1968 belonged to
the schismatic state “church” of the New Calendarist innovators from which he received the
first two orders of the priesthood..
In the year 1968 (on the Sunday of Orthodoxy) Cyprian replaced the new calendar that
he was using up until that time in the worship life of his monastery with the Old Calendar, without
stopping the commemoration of the name of the New Calendarist bishop of Attica Nikodimos or
discontinuing communion with the state church of innovators. (see the periodical “St. Cyprian”,
issue 52, August 1971, page 51). The reasons that prevented the accused Metropolitan Cyprian
from joining our Church of G.O.C. of Greece are described by Cyprian himself in his book “How I
Learnt about the Patristic Calendar and how I Returned to it”, in which he states the following
blasphemous comments;
“From 1924 to 1968 the Church of Greece is divided. We have the New Calendarists and the Old
Calendarists. This is a wound for our Church and the joy of the devil and the heretics. The goodhating devil led the martyrs and confessors of the patristic traditions, the Old Calendarists, to
extremes. I do not hesitate to say that if those blessed ones did not go to extremes, today we would
already have returned to the patristic calendar and we all would be united and able to fight together
against heresies, and especially today papism, that attack us continuously. Those who follow the
Old Calendar began to believe that the Grace of the Holy Spirit deserted the official Church by its
going to the new calendar. O! delusion (prelest)! They also proclaimed that our holy mysteries
(woe!) are not valid! When I studied the matter of the church calendar, my heart found rest with the
patristic calendar. And when God made me worthy of becoming a monk in 1961 in the newly
founded monastery of Sts. Cyprian and Justina in Fyli of Attica, even then more so did I desire to
return to the patristic calendar.That which made me delay and hold off from returning to the
patristic calendar was the fanaticism and extremism of the Old Calendarists. I wanted to follow (the
Old Calendar) in 1964-1965, but I didn’t do it because they wanted me to make a confession of faith
and to renounce the official Church. That convulsed me and I held off. After that again, my desire
for the Old Calendar was pressuring me to return to it. The visit during that same year of a
clergyman of the Old Calendar to our monastery who told me that the Mysteries of the official
Church are without sanctifying grace, disturbed me. I threw him out of our monastery and once
again I delayed. The same thing happened to me again in 1967. Someone can often see very sad
things in people of Christ, in the continuators of his saving work. While they (the Old Calendarists)
received their episcopal ordinations from bishops (of ROCOR) that are in communion with the New
Calendarists, they convince the simple, but holy and pious people that follow them, that the New
Calendar leads people to hell. In this way, they make people fanatical and many of them look at
their brothers as enemies and damned, while they considered themselves as saved. The opposite of
what someone should believe, in other words; that all the others will be saved and only I will be
damned.
As far as the Μatthewite group, what can I say?! They are known for their spiritual delusion
(prelest). While they have an uncanonical origin of their ordinations by being ordained by one
bishop, they are totally unapproachable and remain closed into their prelest and their extremes.
They do not accept at all the Mysteries of the official Church, they re-chrismate the faithful when
they return to the Old Calendar from the New and they re-ordain the clergy. O! What a great
blasphemy against the Holy Spirit! O prelest! O condemnation for those people!
Their spiritual delusions and extremisms make a greater gulf of separation and do not allow
anyone to cross the bridge. How much the devil deceives them! All the Orthodox Churches, the
Patriarchate of Jerusalem, the monasteries of Mount Athos, while being with the traditional Patristic
calendar, are in communion with the official Church while they (the Old Calendarists) totally deny
this. Since the other sister Churches did not condemn this act of the official Church of Greece, how
can we stand up and condemn it? The most prudent and wisest for all those who love the Patristic
Calendar would be for us to follow it without dividing ourselves from the MOTHER official
Church of Greece.”
Finally, on January 3/16 he (Cyprian) stopped commemorating the name of the New
Calendarist “bishop” of Attica Nikodimos and joined our Church of G.O.C. of Greece embracing
the widely confessed ecclesiology of our Church as laid out by the Holy Synod of our evermemorable Metropolitan Chrysostom formerly of Florina through the Encyclical #13 of the 26th of
May of 1950 and which was reconfirmed by the Holy Synod by the Encyclical #1191 of the 5th of
June of the year 1974, which states that the Mysteries of the the New Calendarists lack sanctifying
grace and which commands all clergy of the G.O.C. “to confine themselves to to serving only
members of our Church”.
Being totally compliant to the already confessed belief concerning the Mysteries of the
church of the innovators and of not serving the New Calendarists, the accused (Cyprian) speaking at
the feast day of his own monastery on October 2/15, 1974, while the services were being presided
over by Metropolitan Gerontios of Piereus and Salamis, declared his dedication to the Encyclical
number 1191, stating that he would no longer serve innovating New Calendarists with the
Mysteries!
Having as certain and bearing this Orthodox ecclesiology of our Church, the accused was
ordained Metropolitan of Oropos on February 7/20 by Metropolitans Kallistos of Corinth and
Anthony of Attica and Megaris who were both known for there dedication to the teaching of our
Church concerning the lack of sanctifying grace of Mysteries of the New Calendarists and
concerning not serving the Mysteries for them.
Actually, Metropolitan Kallistos in the beginning of the year 1983 published the booklet
“Giving an Account” and on May 24, 1983 the booklet “Confession of Faith- Epistle” in both of
which he proclaims that the church of the papal calendar as having remained without repentance in
the pan-heresy of ecumenism is cut off from the whole of the Church and is an official heresy and
her Mysteries are therefore void” (see His Eminence Kallistos “Giving Account (Ἁπολογία)”
Athens, 1983, page 31).
In his letter of May 30, 1983, Metropolitan Cyprian writes to Metropolitan Kallistos of
Corinth saying “By your texts, you profess the new to us teaching of the loss of Divine Grace by all
the Orthodox Church that accepted the calendar innovation of 1924. Your view is according to us
unwitnessed, unacceptable, anti-patristic and as such anti-orthodox. The Holy Ecumenical Synods
first Godly researched and traditionally proved and then decided. You did the opposite. Antitraditionally and without any previous collusion with the other member of our Holy Synod…(see
Letter of Cyprian “Our positions” in issue 191 of the periodical “Agios Kyprianos” November
1984, pages 382-383).
Firstly, in Metropolitan Cyprian’s letter to Metropolitan Kallistos, we must note the
hypocrisy of Metropolitan Cyprian when he dares to claim that the belief concerning the perdition
of sanctifying grace of the Mysteries of the New Calendarists, which he (Cyprian) himself was
saying that he believed and confessed together with the all of the Church of the G.O.C. right up
until that time, is anti-orthodox!
Under these circumstances, Metropolitan Kallistos of Corinth sent a declaration to the Holy
Synod on October 16/29, 1983 in which he objected to those kakodoxies of Metropolitan Cyprian
as well as to certain actions of Metropolitan Cyprian like that “in Fyli, on the Feast of the Saints
Cyprian and Justina the leaders there together with all the bishops that were there, fell into their
own anathema and condemnation by praying and serving, by chanting together with schismatic and
heretical chanters not quailing the anathema and curses of the Fathers”, and announcing his
(Metropolitan Kallistos’) secession from our Church.
Our Holy Synod by its announcement numbered 106 of October 18th of 1983, signed also by
Metropolitan Cyprian, punished Metropolitan Kallistos for his uncanonical action of separating
himself from the Church, but proclaimed its faith saying, “the Holy Synod of our Church being
regulated by the dogma of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church and the undeceived
teaching of Her God-inspired Fathers keeps unaltered the confession of Faith of our evermemorable Metropolitan Chrysostom formerly of Florina that was made in 1935. And so we
consider every ecumenist and innovator according to the dogma to be a heretic and outside the
Church which is the only Ark of salvation of the human race and inside which the Grace of the
Holy Spirit works in the Mysteries”.
Even though the above profession of faith was made, on August 27, 1984 Metropolitan
Cyprian accepted into ecclesiastical communion (praying together) during the Divine Liturgy the
ecumenist Patriarch of Alexandria Nicholas . This event was marked by the Holy Synod sending
the following strict document calling Metropolitan Cyprian to explain himself. The document says:
“The Holy Synod of the the Church of the G.O.C. of Greece of Greece during its meeting of
the 4th of September of 1984 (Church calendar) having learnt of of your letter #103 and dated
August 6, 1984 and found that its content is totally contrary to the known teaching of the Orthodox
Church and that it reflects the pan-heresy of ecumenism and in combination with the event that on
Sunday, August 27 (Church Calendar) you not only accepted in joint prayer the “patriarch”
Nicholas of Alexandria but also announced to the congregation with special joy the presence of and
praying with that known ecumenist in your temple. And lastly, you travelled to the United States of
America without the knowledge and approval of your superior authority jumping into a foreign
eparchy which is under the jurisdiction of our Synodical Exarch there, even though this is not
allowed by the Holy and Sacred Canons. This places your Eminence in the position to answer to
the Synod which calls you before it at 5 pm, Tuesday September 19 (Church calendar) and at the
Holy Monastery of the Transfiguration in Glyka Nera, Attica to answer to these above accusations.
If you fail to appear, the Holy Synod will proceed to try you on the above mentioned charges in
absentia.”
Metropolitan Cyprian did not appear on the set date to make his plea, and the Holy Synod
found the charges against him as substantial and true and so they punished him at its meeting of
September 9th, 1984 with 40 days of suspension from serving which he did in no way complete.
After this, Metropolitan Cyprian formed his own “church” with a “Holy Synod of
Resistance” with members of this synod being he himself and Metropolitan John of Sardinia which
on April 5, 1985, disavowed the Holy Synod of our Church and cut themselves off with
justifications based on lies.
Following this rebellion of Metropolitan Cyprian, the Holy Synod through its decision #28
of February 10th 1986 placed Metropolitan Cyprian under indefinite suspension sending his case to
the Synodal Court and thus this report was called for (see periodical “The Voice of the Fathers
(“Φωνὴ τῶν Πατέρων”) issue 13, May-June 1986 page 4), Metropolitan Cyprian did not respect
this suspension not only regularly performing services, but also ordaining while under suspension to
the rank of bishop the formerly married Nifon Kigudu and Chrysostom Gonzales, and later on
Chrysostom Marlasis and Chrysostom Kouskoutopolos and two unknown to us foreigners- one
Swede and one Italian.
We can conclude from the above mentioned circumstances that Metropolitan Cyprian
Koutsoubas came to the Church of the G.O.C. with a plan to form his own personal “church”
preaching heretical teaching that is contrary to the Faith passed down to us and kept by our Church
until now.
After his accession in 1969 to the ecclesiology of the Church of Genuine Orthodox
Christians of Greece as expressed by the Holy Synod in its confessions of faith of the years 1935,
1950, and 1974 which clearly state that the Church of Greece that introduced the papal calendar
became schismatic according to the decisions of three Panorthodox Synods of the years 1583, 1587
and 1593 and that her Mysteries lack sanctifying grace as stated by the First Canon of St. Basil the
Great, Cyprian carefully hide his unorthodox beliefs that he had professed in his book entitled
“How I Learnt about the Patristic Calendar and how I Returned to it” (“Πὼς ἐγνώρισα το Πάτριον
Ἐορτολόγιον καὶ ἐπέστρεψα εἰς αὐτο”) (see the above pages 1-3).
Only ten years later, that is in the year 1979, he convinced the Metropolitans Kallistos of
Corinth and Anthony of Attica and Megaris who were both strictly dedicated to the Orthodox belief
of our Church and they ordained him a Metropolitan. Cyprian however, immediately put into use
his diabolical plan to form his own “church”so that he could freely preach his unorthodox beliefs
(κακοδοξίας). While a member of our Holy Synod, he formed a corporation with the title “Church
of Orthodox Christians of Greece” (October 20, 1982) “which is legally represented by its
temporary 5-member administrative council which was elected by its founders and made up of the
following monks of the Holy Monastery of Sts. Cyprian and Justina, Fyli, Attica; - Cyprian, according to the world Dimitrios Koutsoubas
- Cyprian, according to the world Peter Gioulis
- Chrysostom, according to the world Marlasis
- Athanasios, according to the world Anthony Georgiotis
and Apostolos Kagioglou (who is married)
Interesting to note is the fact that the above-mentioned, all of which were clergy, who
founded a “church” were either too embarrassed, or scared without any pressure, to sign the
document using their episcopal or priestly titles and thus denied their priesthood!
The fact that they formed a “church” proves that already from that time they were preparing
their separation from our Church of which Cyprian was a synodal member.
Thus, finding an excuse in the confession of Faith of our Church as expressed by
Metropolitan Kallistos of Corinth in his works “Giving an Account” and “Confession of FaithEpistle”, Cyprian began to publicly preach with a “naked head” his kakodoxies according to which
the innovating schismatic New Calendarists were members of the One, Holy, Catholic, and
Apostolic Church and that their Mysteries were grace-filled. True to these ecumenistical teachings
and in ignorance of the Holy Synod, Cyprian began to accept in prayer with him new calendar
clergy and to commune laity which made Metropolitan Kallistos cut himself off from our Holy
Synod as to not celebrate with Cyprian.
The Holy Synod made Metropolitan Kallistos accountable for cutting himself off from the
Synod because he should have first, as was his responsibility, denounced the unorthodox actions of
Metropolitan Cyprian Koutsoubas to the Holy Synod. It should be noted however, that it is a lie
propagated by Metropolitan Cyprian that the Holy Synod criticized the Orthodox beliefs of
Metropolitan Kallistos which were none other than those of our Church.
It is clear from everything that we have shown above that Metropolitan Cyprian contradicted
himself as far as what he had previously said concerning the grace of the Mysteries of the New
Calendarists and he signed the decison of the Holy Synod of the 18th of Octorber 1983 against
Metropolitan Kallistos separation in which Cyprian confesses the invalidity of the Mysteries of the
New Calendarists, only to return in a little time to his own expression which is an ecumenistic
kakodoxia and to claim that the G.O.C. comprises the “resistant” members of the ailing church of
the ecumenists New Calendarist innovators. No longer being able to control himself in his deathbearing for his soul tumbling, he reached the point of annulling the Holy Synod of our Church and
removing himself from it. This unfortunate one founded his own “church” with a Holy Synod
having himself as president and one other member, the already separated from us Metropolitan John
of Sardinia who was displeased because the Synod did not ordain as his auxiliary bishop Evlogios
of Milan.. The two of them then proceeded to “ordain” seven bishops. He finally asserted to
Archimandrite Paul Stratigeas that the canonical Archbishop of Athens was Seraphim Tikas (the
“archbishop” of the state “church”).
All of this shows that not only did he fall from our Orthodox Faith and move to the heresy of
ecumenism which has as its most important patrons the mason “Patriarchs” Meletios Metaxakis and
Athinagoras Spyrou but also the swindling of our Church of which he hypocritically accepted the
faith and teaching up until the time he could accomplish what he desired which was his episcopal
ordination. He also shammed our laity appearing as G.O.C. It was later clear that he had as much to
do with G.O.C. as those Uniates wolves disguised as sheep have to do with Orthodoxy.
Metropolitan Cyprian Koutsoubas fell from his Orthodox Faith professing that “those local
churches that follow the calendar innovation never lost Divine Grace”
But if Metropolitan Cyprian believed that, why did he leave the innovating church of the New
Calendarists if it was a treasury of Divine Grace and an Ark of salvation? Saving Divine Grace is
distributed to the faithful only inside the fold of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church
which is the only Ark of salvation and which exists in no other church. In this case, since
Metropolitan Cyprian professes the church of the New Calendarists as a treasury of Divine Grace
then he is stating that this church of the New Calendarists is not an innovation but rather the
continuation of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic founded by Christ and that our Church of
the G.O.C. of Greece is a fake and therefore does not save and sanctify its members as beyond any
doubt it then lacks the saving Divine Grace that cannot be provided by TWO churches but only by
ONE.
So the institution of walling himself off from the church of the innovating New Calendarists
examined under the light of his belief that this church was a treasury of Divine Grace and thus that
the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church is not a God-pleasing work but rather as he says a
movement of Satan, shows that Metropolitan Cyprian Koutsoubas thinks and speaks as a spiritually
misled person. The faithful must cut themselves off and separate themselves from every unlawful
gathering of the faithful and schismatic and heretical community which comprise fake “churches”
(such as that of the innovating ecumenist New Calendarists) and unite with the One, Holy,
Catholic, and Apostolic Church and never do the opposite which is what Metropolitan Cyprian
Koutsoubas unfortunately professes.
Metropolitan Cyprian Koutsoubas fell from the Orthodox Faith when he professed “our
walling ourselves off from the innovators before the time of a synodal examination is the correct
and patristically traditional resistance against delusion and in no way means that we constitute the
Church”!
Metropolitan Cyprian Koutsoubas blasphemes when he alleges that we do not constitute the
Church. If we do not constitute the Church then what do we comprise?
However, if Metropolitan Cyprian does not believe that the Genuine Orthodox Christians
constitute the Church, then why did he come to the G.O.C. which always professed that they
constitute the Church?
Why did he pretend to believe what the G.O.C. believed up until the time that he was
ordained a bishop?
Why did he accept to be ordained a bishop by bishops who always professed that the G.O.C.
constitutes the Church?
If the Church of Christ is made up of schismatic New Calendarists, then why doesn’t he
recognize his defrocking as a priest by these same ones since he recognizes their Mysteries?
If the G.O.C. do not constitute the Church, then why did Cyprian desert the church of the
schismatic New Calendarists which he recognizes and join the fold of a church that he considers
non-existent?
If we the G.O.C. do not constitute the Church, how did Cyprian dare with such ease not only
to be ordained a bishop but also to “found” his own “church” and “holy synod”?
Metropolitan Cyprian fell from the Orthodox Faith when he professed that “this new
teaching that the innovators lost Divine Grace is not God-pleasing nor in agreement with the Holy
Tradition of our Fathers and does not constitute the correct and praise-worthy and thus resultful
resistance of the Orthodox, but rather a strange innovation in the struggle against the innovators”.
The teaching concerning the perdition of Divine Grace of the Mysteries of schismatics and
heretics is neither new preaching nor first-seen because saving Divine Grace exists only in the fold
of the One, Holy, Catholic, Apostolic, Orthodox Church of Christ and nowhere else is not of novel
appearance as it was the patrisitic traditional faith that was always supported continuously down to
our time by the encyclicals of the holy synods of our Church of the years 1935, 1950 (which was
under the presidency of His Eminence Chrysostom formerly of Florina) and 1974.
Unqualified rather and novel are the misfortunate and pouting lips of Metropolitan Cyprian
Koutsoubas that proclaimed the dogma of the pan-heresy of ecumenism.
Unfortunately, the kakodoxies of Metropolitan Cyprian are also embraced, as could be
expected, by those who were illegally ordained by him like Chrysostom Gonzales. Chrysostom
Gonzales in a letter that he wrote to the formidable ecumenist and Latin-minded “archbishop”
Iakovos Koukouzis of America states that he (Chrysostom) read with a special interest and joy the
decision of their Holy Synod to embrace the Old Calendarist communities and bishops of America
in a dialogue of love”. Chrysostom Gonzales then speaks poorly of the zealot G.O.C. ‘s when he
writes “some groups of Old Calendarists in the name of zealous devotion to the Faith went beyond
the bounds of dedication and have landed up seeing their New Calendarist brethren in a spirit
without love up to the point where they question the Orthodoxy of the New Calendarists” and that
they are so foolish as to give dogmatic meaning to the 13 days of the Julian Calendar”. He
continues by proclaiming their new ecclesiology writing, “We have walled ourselves off from that
which our conscience doesn’t allow us to accept and that which we see as unwise innovation, but
WE never denied the existence of Grace in our Mother Church. We have priests and bishops for the
governing of our movement through oeconomia and the need to govern ourselves. We are not
another Church above and against our Mother Church.” He doesn’t neglect to praise the formidable
ecumenist and thus writes, “Whatever our differences may be, allow me to express to Your
Eminence that I am aware of your noteworthy contributions to the Orthodox Church in America, the
increase of understanding of the contributions of the Greek-Americans to the social sector of
America and the witness of the Greek people in Western society in general. It is my wish that to
your many praise-worthy achievements may one day be added the achievement of bringing your
Orthodox brethren (Old Calendarists) at least together if not to a union, and who wouldn’t want such
a thing?” And he finishes by saying, “I, as the youngest and least among the the traditional bishops
in this country ask for your forgiveness for any unintentional insult and I humbly kiss your right
hand” The least monk, Bishop Chrysostom of Oreoi, Exarch in America of the True (Old Calendar)
Orthodox Church of Greece (Synod of Metropolitan Cyprian of Oropos and Fyli) (Letter of July
18, 1986 Old Style)
FOR THESE REASONS I SUGGEST
That - Metropolitan Cyprian Koutsoubas be proclaimed guilty and punished with the
penalty of defrocking:
a. Because he fell from the Orthodox Faith that was given us by the Holy and God-bearing Fathers
and by the decisions of the Holy Synod of our Church in the years 1935, 1950, and 1974, and he
embraced ecumenistic kakodoxies stating that the schismatic New Calendarists constitute the
uninnovated One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church which is the treasury of saving Grace and
the Ark of salvation and that the Church of the G.O.C. of Greece is not the Church.
b. Because he gives the Holy Mysteries of our Church to innovative schismatics and ecumenists
New Calendarists without any discernment in spite of his promises not to.
c. Because he cut himself off from our Church together with Metropolitan John whom our church
made bishops and they set up their own altar and a “Holy Synod of Resistance” and even
proceeding to ordain 7 bishops.
d. Because for a period of 15 years he beguiled his superior ecclesiastical authority and the faithful
and devout people of the Church of the G.O.C. of Greece, appearing as a confessor of the Faith of
our Church in order to succeed at being ordained a bishop and after that to reveal his true goals
which were the snatching of the rank of bishop and the founding of his own new “church” that
would spread his kakodoxa beliefs. - Metropolitan John of Sardinia be proclaimed guilty and punished with the penalty of
defrocking for the same reasons and actions as those of Metropolitan Cyprian. - Those bishops that were ordained by the two above-mentioned Metropolitans
a. Chrysostom Gonzales b. Nifon Kigudu c. Chrysostom Marlasis d. Chrysostom Kouskoutopoulos
and two more foreigners; one Italian and one Swede who we do not know, be proclaimed guilty and
punished with defrocking because they embraced the kakodoxa and ecumenical mindsets of
Metropolitan Cyprian and cut themselves off from our Church and accepted an uncanonical and
illegal ordination. - The actions of the above-mentioned Metropolitans Cyprian and John and those
bishops who were ordained by them are mentioned and condemned by Sacred
Canons of the Canons of the Church such as Canon 34 of the Quinisext Holy
Ecumenical Council which states, “In view of the fact that the sacerdotal
Canon clearly states that as the crime of conspiracy or of faction is utterly
forbidden even by civil laws, it is much more fitting still that this be
prohibited from occurring in the Church of God, we too are sedulous to
insist that if any Clergymen or Monks be found either conspiring together or
engaging in factional intrigues or hatching plots against Bishops or fellow
Clergymen, they shall forfeit their own rank altogether.” and the 6th Canon of
the Synod of Gangra which commands, “If anyone conducts a church of his own
apart from the Church, and, scorning the Church, wishes to perform the functions
of the Church, without a presbyter’s helping, with the approval and consent of a
bishop, let him be anathema.” and the 5th Canon of Antioch which orders that,
“If any Presbyter, or Deacon, having shown contempt for his own Bishop, has
excommunicated himself from the church, and has formed a congregation of his
own, and has set up an altar, and, in spite of the Bishop’s inviting him to return,
if he should remain disobedient, and should refuse to obey or even to submit to
him, when he calls him once and twice,i let him be utterly deposed, and be no
longer accorded any remedy, nor be capable of having his honor restored. But if
he should stick to his position, making a lot of noise and creating an upheaval in
the church, let him be brought back by an appeal to the civil authorities as a
riotous character.” (see also the 10th and 11th Canon of the Synod of Carthage and
the 13th Canon of the 1st 2nd Synod), the 14th Canon of the First-Second Council
commanding, “If any Presbyter, or Deacon, having shown contempt for his own
Bishop, has excommunicated himself from the church, and has formed a
congregation of his own, and has set up an altar, and, in spite of the Bishop’s
inviting him to return, if he should remain disobedient, and should refuse to obey
or even to submit to him, when he calls him once and twice,i let him be utterly
deposed, and be no longer accorded any remedy, nor be capable of having his
honor restored. But if he should stick to his position, making a lot of noise and
creating an upheaval in the church, let him be brought back by an appeal to the
civil authorities as a riotous character.” The 15th Canon of the same Council
commands, “The rules laid down with reference to Presbyters and Bishops and
Metropolitans are still more applicable to Patriarchs. So that in case any
Presbyter or Bishop or Metropolitan dares to secede or apostatize from the
communion of his own Patriarch, and fails to mention the latter’s name in
accordance with custom duly fixed and ordained, in the divine Mystagogy, but,
before a conciliar verdict has been pronounced and has passed judgment against
him, creates a schism, the holy Council has decreed that this person shall be held
an alien to every priestly function if only he be convicted of having committed
this transgression of the law. Accordingly, these rules have been sealed and
ordained as respecting those persons who under the pretext of charges against
their own presidents stand aloof, and create a schism, and disrupt the union of the
Church. But as for those persons, on the other hand, who, on account of some
heresy condemned by holy Councils, or Fathers, withdrawing themselves from
communion with their president, who, that is to say, is preaching the heresy
publicly, and teaching it barehead in church, such persons not only are not
subject to any canonical penalty on account of their having walled themselves off
from any and all communion with the one called a Bishop before any conciliar or
synodal verdict has been rendered, but, on the contrary, they shall be deemed
worthy to enjoy the honor which befits them among Orthodox Christians. For
they have defied, not Bishops, but pseudo-bishops and pseudo-teachers; and they
have not sundered the union of the Church with any schism, but, on the contrary,
have been sedulous to rescue the Church from schisms and divisions.”
In Athens on the 10th of October, 1986 (Old Calendar)
The Rapporteur
+Kalliopios of Pentapolis
Following this, all the documents of the folder of the case were read, among which were the 15th
issue of the periodical “The Voice of the Fathers” (“Φωνὴ τῶν Πατέρων”), a letter from a
Hieromonk Siluan from Italy in which it is stated that “Recently the Old Calendarists of Fyli
ordained to the episcopacy a man who is sought after by the courts and who does not have a good
past” and the extrajudicial reply of the accused Metropolitan Cyprian that is numbered 1/14-11-
1986 and has already been published elsewhere.
The Holy Synod having discussed the matter, rejected the complaint in the extrajudicial
reply of the accused Metropolitan Cyprian that the Holy Synod unauthorizedly tries his case since
he had cut himself off from the Synod a year before, because the Synod believes that the canonical
jurisdiction and authority of the Orthodox Church is never catalyzed by any member who leaves it.
Especially when we are speaking about clergy, the Church that ordains them retains beyond a
shadow of a doubt the right to defrock her clergy when such reasons exist.
The Synod then unanimously decided that the charge that the accused truly fell from the Orthodox
Faith that we have received from the Holy and God-bearing Fathers as interpreted in the decisions
of the Holy Synod of our Church in the years 1935, 1950 and 1974 and embraced the ecumenistic
kakodoxies which state that the schismatic New Calendarists and heretical ecumenists constitute
the “One, Holy Catholic, and Apostolic Church” which is the treasury of saving Grace and the Ark
of salvation and that our own Church of the G.O.C. of Greece is not the Church.
The claim that the accused actually do give the Holy Mysteries of the Church without
discernment and examination to the innovating schismatics and heretical ecumenists was also
proven true.
The charge that the accused Metropolitan Cyprian of Oropos and John of Sardinia rioting
against their superior authority, that is the Synod to which they belonged, and while under the
penalty of suspension from serving did proceed with a coup in which they ordained bishops who
constitute the rest of those accused with them was proven true.
Lastly, it has been proven particularly concerning Metropolitan Cyprian that he, for a whole
15 year period, had deceived his higher authority which is the Holy Synod to which he belonged
and which raised him to the rank of bishop as well as the faithful and devout people of the Church
of the G.O.C. of Greece, apparently confessing the Faith of our Church in order to succeed at being
ordained a bishop and after that to reveal his true goals which were the snatching of the rank of
bishop and the founding of a “church” of his own thinking for the propagation of his kakodoxa
thinking. This mindset of Cyprian is dramatically illustrated in his above-mentioned extrajudicial
reply numbered 1/14-11-1986 in which he does not only not dare to confess the Orthodox Faith, but
also continues to characterize the Orthodox confession of Faith of our Church that she alone is the
One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, the only treasury of saving Grace as kakodoxia.
The Holy Synod unanimously judged the all the above-mentioned persons according to the
indictment, mainly based on the Sacred Canons of the Church
a. Canon 34 of the Quinisext Holy Ecumenical Council which states, “In view of the fact that the
sacerdotal Canon clearly states that as the crime of conspiracy or of faction is utterly
forbidden even by civil laws, it is much more fitting still that this be prohibited from occurring
in the Church of God, we too are sedulous to insist that if any Clergymen or Monks be found
either conspiring together or engaging in factional intrigues or hatching plots against Bishops
or fellow Clergymen, they shall forfeit their own rank altogether.” b. the 6th Canon of the Synod
of Gangra which commands, “If anyone conducts a church of his own apart from the Church, and,
scorning the Church, wishes to perform the functions of the Church, without a presbyter’s helping,
with the approval and consent of a bishop, let him be anathema.” c. the 5th Canon of Antioch
which orders that, “If any Presbyter, or Deacon, having shown contempt for his own Bishop, has
excommunicated himself from the church, and has formed a congregation of his own, and has set up
an altar, and, in spite of the Bishop’s inviting him to return, if he should remain disobedient, and
should refuse to obey or even to submit to him, when he calls him once and twice,i let him be
utterly deposed, and be no longer accorded any remedy, nor be capable of having his honor
restored. But if he should stick to his position, making a lot of noise and creating an upheaval in the
church, let him be brought back by an appeal to the civil authorities as a riotous character.” (see also
the 10th and 11th Canon of the Synod of Carthage and the 13th Canon of the 1st 2nd Synod) d. the 14th
Canon of the First-Second Council commanding, “If any Presbyter, or Deacon, having shown
contempt for his own Bishop, has excommunicated himself from the church, and has formed a
congregation of his own, and has set up an altar, and, in spite of the Bishop’s inviting him to return,
if he should remain disobedient, and should refuse to obey or even to submit to him, when he calls
him once and twice,i let him be utterly deposed, and be no longer accorded any remedy, nor be
capable of having his honor restored. But if he should stick to his position, making a lot of noise
and creating an upheaval in the church, let him be brought back by an appeal to the civil authorities
as a riotous character.” e. The 15th Canon of the same Council commands, “The rules laid down
with reference to Presbyters and Bishops and Metropolitans are still more applicable to Patriarchs.
So that in case any Presbyter or Bishop or Metropolitan dares to secede or apostatize from the
communion of his own Patriarch, and fails to mention the latter’s name in accordance with custom
duly fixed and ordained, in the divine Mystagogy, but, before a conciliar verdict has been
pronounced and has passed judgment against him, creates a schism, the holy Council has decreed
that this person shall be held an alien to every priestly function if only he be convicted of having
committed this transgression of the law. Accordingly, these rules have been sealed and ordained as
respecting those persons who under the pretext of charges against their own presidents stand aloof,
and create a schism, and disrupt the union of the Church. But as for those persons, on the other
hand, who, on account of some heresy condemned by holy Councils, or Fathers, withdrawing
themselves from communion with their president, who, that is to say, is preaching the heresy
publicly, and teaching it barehead in church, such persons not only are not subject to any canonical
penalty on account of their having walled themselves off from any and all communion with the one
called a Bishop before any conciliar or synodal verdict has been rendered, but, on the contrary, they
shall be deemed worthy to enjoy the honor which befits them among Orthodox Christians. For they
have defied, not Bishops, but pseudo-bishops and pseudo-teachers; and they have not sundered the
union of the Church with any schism, but, on the contrary, have been sedulous to rescue the Church
from schisms and divisions.” etc.
and placed upon them the penalty of defrocking from the episcopal rank and every priestly rank and
returned them to the order of monks.
This decision was made known to Metropolitan Anthony of Attica and Megaris who was not
present at the synodal meeting and he expressed his total agreement with it and that he also signs
this statement.
The Holy Synod
+Archbishop Chrysostom of Athens
Gerontios of Peireus and Salamis
Kallinikos of Fthiotis and Thavmakos
Anthony of Attica and Megaris
Maximos of Dimitrias and Magnisia
Kallinikos of Achaia and all Peloponnisos
Matthew of Onoi
Kalliopios of Pentapolis
Kallinikos of Dodekanisos
Efthymios of Thessaloniki
Stephen of Chios, Psara and Oinousses
Athanasios of Acharnai and New Ionia
Justin of Evripos and Evia
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UwdtjJrAJoJJB9nszCdQvCCq1qvFfhOJ/view
Corect si adevarat text multumim Doamne ajuta, iertati.
Va multumim din suflet pentru text, info, adevarata