A

TheSacredSynodofthe
ChurchoftheGenuineOrthodoxChristiansofGreece
ENCYCLICAL
ProtocolNo.3280/28112007
Publishedin
ATHENS
FEBRUARY,2008
TotheSacredClergy,theMonasticOrdersandthePiousLaity
Children,belovedintheLord!
TherighthandoftheLordhathwroughtpower
Intheselatterdaysoftheworld,wherethereisapostasyandrebellion
of the many against the principles of Faith and Orthodox Confession, there
are,accordingtothepropheticwordsoftheApostlePaulterribletimes.For
men will be, he writes, lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud,
blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection,
truce breakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; having a
formofgodlinessbutdenyingthepowerthereof.Andconcluding,hecounselsall
ofussaying,Fromsuch,turnaway.(IITimothy3:15)

Livinginourtimes,weareallwitnessesoftheemboldeningofthedevil
against therighteous God.Ona dailybasis, we observe, becauseofour own
sins and the permission of God, the continually spreading authority of the
enemy over the nobility of human nature and over all our natural
environment.
All around us,weseeshamelesslymanifestedandpraised:alienation,
corruption,degeneration,andtheimpositionofthatwhichisunnaturalasifit
werenatural.Beginningwiththeopeningofthewaybydesensitization,there
follows the total overturning of every principle and every moral order and
justice.Andallthisinthenameofprogressandhumanfreedom.
But our Lord God doth live unto the ages! And His Church, which is
thepillarandfoundationoftruth,astheApostleofthenationsdeclares,lives
unto the ages founded upon the Lords words: and the gates of Hell shall not
prevailagainstit.
She walks humbly and piously upon her martyric path in the world
fromthetimeoftheholyApostlesevenuntiltoday,whileherchildren,inthe
words of Holy Scripture, are destitute, afflicted, tormented, but being
witnessed to by faith, they subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness and
obtainedpromises.
FromtheverydayofPentecostwhenthe HolySpiritdescendedupon
thedisciplesofChrist,leadingthemuntoalltheTruth,theChurchhasnever
ceasedfacingtheattacksandassaultsofthedevil,theenemyofTruth,whoas
theprinceofthisworld,desperatelyattemptstotakerevengeuponourGod
inTrinity,theFormerandCreatorofall,byabusingalloftheDivinecreation,
butespeciallyman,whowasformedintheimageofGod.
Schisms, heresies, and rebellions have throughout the ages troubled,
andeven nowtrouble,theChurchand are alltheworksoftheprinceof this
world, having as their source his continual maniacal warring against the
CreatorGod.
ChildrenbelovedintheLord!
The first schism in the New Testament, the rebellion and betrayal of
Judas, is the pattern and example of every schism or apostasy that followed
throughout the ages. Similar movements and behaviors are manifested and
realizedfromthenevenuntiltoday.
The Seven Ecumenical Synods; Pan Orthodox Synods held in various
places; and the Local Synods; faced, with the Grace of the holy Spirit, the
imitators of Judas throughout the ages, that is, the leaders of heresies, and
showedthemtobeinerror,andtheirhereticalteachingstobekakodoxies.
Gnostics, Cathars, Nikolaites, Arians, Nestorians, Monophysites,
Patropaschites, Monothelites and others, (in our days, the Ecumenists and
whatever other deniers of the Orthodox Faith and Confession), are all
examplesofthosewhotroubledthepeopleoftheChurch,tearingasunderthe
unsewnRobeofChristasimitatorsofJudas.
ButtheChurchofChristlivesuntotheages!
However, it is natural and understandable that every heresy, every
ecclesiasticalschismorseparationthatsproutedforth,broughtdifficulttimes
tothepeace,likemindedness,andunityofthemembersoftheChurch.
The harmony, concerning God, of those who are sincere in their
relationship to God, that is, the Orthodox Confession of the members of the
Church, is threatened by the disagreement and the battling evoked by those
who do not have an Orthodox Confession, that is, by those members of the
Church who act insincerely toward God, in opposition to the Orthodox
Confession which they held up to now. And, as we are informed by St.
Gregory the Theologian: Nothing is mightier for the harmony of those who are
sincere toward God as their agreement in Godly matters. And nothing creates
antagonismlikedisagreementinthismatter.(SermonVIEirenicalI).
But while the Church receives attacks and wounds from those who
denytheTruth,andevenwhilemanyofherchildrendistancethemselvesand
fallfromtheTruth,she,herself,astheBodyofChrist,remainsuntotheages.
AccordingtoSt.JohnChrysostomos,beingwarredagainst,sheisvictorious;
plotted against, she prevails; being cursed, she is made even more brilliant; she
receiveswounds,butdoesnotsuccumbtotheulcers;sheisbatteredbywavesbutdoes
not sink; she is tempest tossed, but suffers not shipwreck; she wrestles, but is not
beaten;strickenbyfists,butisnotcrushed.(SecondHomilyToEutropios)Yet,
all the while, she struggles and uses every means, and tries in every way to
return to her all who have been beguiled into error from the Truth and
TraditionofOrthodoxy.
All of this is true, because the work of the Church in the world is the
revelationofthewillofGoduntomankindanditsparticipationintheeternal
life and the Kingdom. In addition, she works for the gathering of those who
arescatteredandthereturnofthosewhohavestrayedfromthepathofTruth.
AswereadintheprayeroftheAnaphoraoftheDivineLiturgyofSt.Basilthe
Great: gather up those who are scattered, restore those who have strayed and
unitethemtotheHolyandApostolicChurch
The Holy Church experienced a tempest in our times when, in 1924,
theEcumenicalPatriarchate;thelocalChurchofGreece;and,inconsequence,
otherPatriarchatesandlocalOrthodoxChurches,acceptedtheintroductionof
the New Papal Calendar and its imposition upon the Ecclesiastical Festal
CalendarasthefirststeptothepanheresyofEcumenism.
Havingcometothisdifficultsituation,theOrthodoxChurchinGreece
remained, as is known, until 1935, without Orthodox Bishops, even while
manyofherclergy,alongwithmanymonastics,mainlyfromHolyMountain,
labored to fortify the people in the struggle for piety and the defense of the
TraditionoftheFathers.
Thus, In 1935, the Orthodox Church in Greece (having found her
canonical,Orthodox,ecclesiasticalleadershipbymeansofthereturnofthree
Bishops from the New Calendarist Innovation and their rejection of the
Innovation) struggled to accomplish her purpose: the healing of the New
Calendaristschismandthereturningtoher(duetotherejection,bythethree
Bishops,ofNewCalendaristEcumenism)ofthosewhohadbeenledastray.
In 1937, however, a new schism troubled the Church when
Metropolitan Chrysostomos, formerly of Florina, rejected his original
Orthodox Confession and put forward his kakodox teaching of the potential
butnotactualschismaticnatureoftheNewCalendaristschism,whichmade,
bythismeans,theNewCalendaristChurchsimplysubjecttotrial,butnot
in actual schism from the beginning (as she had been considered by all the
faithfulmembersoftheChurch)withalltheconsequencesofthiscondition,
In 1948, by condescension, the evermemorable Bishop of Vresthena
and afterwards Archbishop of Athens, Matthew I, after many fruitless
attemptstoreunitealltheBishopswhofollowedthetraditionalEcclesiastical
Festal Calendar in the Orthodox Confession of Faith, consecrated Bishops
alone, thus passing along Apostolic Succession to those Bishops he
consecrated and thus preserving unchanged and pure the traditional
OrthodoxFaithandEcclesiasticalteaching.
The unjust attacks and the theologically unfounded assaults by those
who strayed from and who were torn from the Body of the Church (the
clericalandlayfollowersofMetropolitanChrysostomos,formerlyofFlorina)
underthepretextoftheconsecrationsbyonebishop(consecrationsofBishops
by MatthewofVresthena) once again threatenedthe struggling Church with
atempest.
Under the Episcopal leadership of the successors of Archbishop
Matthew, the Church continues her work. In addition, she continues to
struggleforthehealingoftheNewCalendaristschismalongwiththereturn
of those who were, and are today, torn away: Metropolitan Chrysostomos,
formerly of Florina, who refused, and now his followers, citing uncanonical
statusbecauseoftheconsecrationofBishopsbyoneBishop.
In this continuous attempt of the Church, that is, the return to her of
thosewhohadstrayedaccordingtoSt.Basil,thereoccurredbythepermission
of God inapt deeds and actions on the part of the Ecclesiastical Leadership,
and human errors, among which were the cheirothesias of the year 1971.
When,inthatyear,aSynodicalrepresentationofBishopstraveledtoAmerica,
andcomingintocontactwiththeBishopsoftheRussianChurchAbroad,and
placingbeforetheirSynodtherequestthattheyexamineandjudgethematter
of the Episcopal consecrations by one bishop of 1948, so that the excuses
relating to this matter by the followers of Metropolitan Chrysostomos,
formerlyofFlorina,mightcease,acceptedtherelevantDecisionoftheSynod
oftheRussianChurchAbroad.
Wherefore, because of the lack, to date, of a consistent, single, stable,
and correct (from an Orthodox standpoint) position concerning the
cheirothesias of 1971, and because of this lack, many and various questions
concerningthismatterwhichareexpressedviaavarietyofopinionswhichof
late became the cause of things concerning the cheirothesias of 1971 (being
said by persons who war against the Church in various ways) the Sacred
Synod of the Bishops of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church of
ChristoftheTrueOrthodoxChristiansofGreece,movedbypastoralconcerns
andresponsibility,neededtoactaccordingly.
And so it was that the Holy and Sacred Synod, the time having come
and the circumstances insuring (and the impediments for the ecclesiastical
confrontationin its fullness havingdisappeared)inthefearofGodandwith
full understanding and sure knowledge of our Episcopal responsibility, met
andconsideredtogetherthismatter(ofthecheirothesias)duringtheMeeting
of the Holy Synod of the Hierarchy of the Church of the T.O.C. of Greece,
which took place on the 27
th
of December, 2007, under the presidency of His
Beatitude Archbishop Nikolaos of Athens and All Greece,, and with the
participation of all the Membersof the Holy Synod: that is, the Metropolitan
of Argolis k.k. Pachomios, the Metropolitan of Peristerion k.k. Galaction, the
MetropolitanofVerroiaandNaousak.k.Tarasios,theMetropolitanofThevae
and Levadeia k.k. Andreas, the Bishop of Phillipi k.k. Chrysostomos, who
was represented by the Very Rev. Abbot Archimandrite Stephanos
Tsakiroglou,andtheChiefSecretary,theVeryRev.ProtopresbyterDemetrios
Tsarkatzoglou. It is concerning this work (matter), and of the unanimous
Decisiontakeninthisregard,thatwe,ascanonicalShepherdsandleadersof
the rational Flock of the Church of Christ, now humbly inform you by these
presents.
Theambitionandthegreedydispositionofburdensomemen,andthe
generalspiritofourtimes,inspiredbyWesternphilosophyandshapedonthe
anvil of impiety and the denial of our God, were the motivational power
behind those who attacked ecclesiastical piety; who by many and various
excuses acted and succeeded in the imposition of New Calendarism as the
firststepofthealreadyplanneduponandsinceapplied(asisprovidedforby
the (Ecumenical) Patriarchal Encyclical of 1920)) panheresy of Ecumenism,
which, for reasons God alone knows, was followed by all the Bishops of the
ChurchofGreece.
Thus, the Church of Greece which was left orphaned of Orthodox
Bishops in 1924, after 11 years, in 1935 acquires once again canonical
ecclesiastical leadership in the persons of the three Bishops who returned
from the Innovation and confessed Orthodoxy; that is, Metropolitan
Chrysostomos Demetriou of Zakynthos, Metropolitan Chrysostomos
Kavouridis formerly of Florina, and Metropolitan Germanos Mavromatis of
Demetrias, who also consecrated four Bishops to form a canonical Holy
Synod, among whom was the Athonite Hieromonk Matthew Karpathakis,
whowascanonicallyconsecratedBishopofVresthena.
Therefore, his consecration, as well as those he performed in 1948,
proceeds in succession from the Holy Apostles and their successors, the
OrthodoxcanonicalBishopsoftheOne,Holy,CatholicandApostolicChurch.
AndalltheEpiscopalconsecrationsofBishopsoftheChurchofChrist(which
iscalledinthesetimestheChurchoftheT.O.C.orTrueOrthodoxChurchto
distinguish her from the Innovating Church) in Greece, up until now (given
indeed that no other Bishop, not of those who returned in 1935, nor of those
four who were consecrated in that same year, performed consecrations in
Greece) draw their succession in these latter times from the aforementioned
Consecrationsof1935andthoseperformedintheyear1948bytheConfessor
ofOrthodoxy,theevermemorableArchbishopofAthens,Matthew(+1950).
And without question, the Episcopal consecrations which were
performed in 1948 by the then Bishop of Vresthena and later Archbishop of
Athens,Matthew(thefirstofwhichheperformedalone)areconsideredtobe
(andare,indeed,fromadogmaticandecclesiologicalpointofview)complete
and genuine, in so far as the grace and authority of the episcopate was
transmitted.
We say this despite the noted transgression, or rather deviation, from
theorderprovidedforbythesacredcanonsconcerningtheparticipationofat
leasttwoorthreebishopsattheconsecrationofabishop,takingintoaccount
the ecclesiastical situation then: that is, on the one hand the refusal of the
bishops in Greece, who followed the traditional calendar, (Metropolitans
ChrysostomosformerlyofFlorinaandGermanosoftheCycladesIslands),to
act together with him (under the condition that they would have previously
been in harmony as regards Orthodox Confession) in the Consecration of
Bishops.BishopMatthewresponsiblyurgedtheseordinationsforthegoodof
the Church and the salvation of the faithful, even though and despite his
advancedagehecontinuedtostrugglemightilyfortheOrthodoxConfession;
and on the other hand the stubborn clinging of the aforementioned two
bishopsinsupportingkakodoxpositionsandtheoriesandtheunquestionable
ecclesiastical need, in the midst of this situation, of the assurance of the
Apostolicsuccessionoftheepiscopate.
This, in retrospect, has been clearly certified by the consequences (of
theconsecrations)tothepointthat,today,thoseconsecrationsareconsidered
of the greatest importance for the Church of Greece and even beyond,
relevant to the Struggle of True Orthodox against the Innovation of New
CalendarismandthePanHeresyofEcumenism.
The cheirothesias which occurred in 1971, under whatever form and
meaning they took place, and under whatever interpretation they might be
viewed, according to the faith of the True Orthodox Church of Greece and
indeed in the conscience of her ecclesiastical flock, neither added to, nor
completed, anything to the validity, to the fullness, to the grace, or to the
poweroftheEpiscopateoftheBishopsoftheChurchoftheT.O.C.ofGreece;
andfurther,fromastrictlycanonicalpointofview,itshouldneverhaveeven
occurred, because Bishops consecrated by one Bishop according to the
canonical order of the Church are either recognized by her, or they are
condemnedandpunished;sincetheyareconsidered,inonewayortheother,
asBishopshavingthefullnessoftheEpiscopatefromtheirveryconsecration.
Cheirothesia performed upon Orthodox clergy is not provided for at
all,norisitpermittedunderanyinterpretationwhatsoever.Inthepracticeof
theChurch,cheirothesiawasimplementedonlyuponschismaticstovalidate
the invalidly performed mystery of their ordination. Even if understood as a
blessing or a simple prayer, cheirothesia means a vitalization and validation
ofthosethingsperformedinvalidlybyhereticsorschismatics.(SeeCanonVIII
oftheFirstEcumenicalSynod,theLetteroftheFirstEcumenicalSynodtoAlexander
of Alexandria, Act I of the Seventh Ecumenical Synod, and the relevant
commentaryofSt.NikodemosintheRudder.)
Consequently, in order for the relevant Decision of the Synod of the
RussianChurchAbroad(Prot.No.16II/15)2891971)concerningtheBishops
consecrated by the Bishop of Vresthena in 1948 (by which the cheirothesia
upontheBishopsofCorinthCallistosandKitionEpiphanioswasdecided)to
bewithinthelimitsofcanonicity,itwasnecessaryforit(theROCORSynod,
trans. note) to choose theoretically between only two choices, either of which
required indispensable canonical foundation for either choice. Either there is
the simple recognition, as consecrations performed by oikonomia because of
real and unquestionable necessity, or condemnation and punishment as
inexcusably (the consecrations) performed, together with the appropriate
ecclesiasticalpenalty,andnothingfurther.
Inthiscase,theSynodoftheRussianOrthodoxChurchAbroadshould
have,ifitwastojudgejustlyonthebasisofthedivineandsacredCanons(the
practiceoftheChurch,andthehistoricalconditionsandcircumstancesofthat
particular ecclesiastical period) recognized these consecrations as
dogmatically complete, and as certainly neither wanting nor needing
anything further. Instead, as it is known, the aforementioned Synod,
acceptingandreceivingsuggestionsandpressuresofthirdparties,especially
from the Auxentian party (as is obvious from the very text of the Decision),
made its choices and decided upon this altogether anticanonical and
unfounded decision concerning the cheirothesias of the aforementioned
Bishops.
Therefore, as canonical Shepherds of the Church of Christ, with
understanding of our responsibility, and humbly accepting the paternal
adviceofthatAtlasofOrthodoxy,St.MarkofEphesus,accordingtowhom:
No ecclesiastical matter was ever set aright by compromise, for between
truth and falsehood there is nothing, we unanimously declare that: The
actionsanddeedsofthatperiod,(whichoccurredinthecontextoftheeffort
of the Church for union within the Church and the healing of schisms,
[especially that of the followers of Metropolitan Chrysostomos formerly of
Florina,theleadersofwhom,onthepretextoftheconsecrationbyonebishop,
gave this (consecration) as the excuse against union, and among which
actionsisthecheirothesiawhichwasbaseduponanunacceptableandmost
condemnable (from an ecclesiastical and canonical point of view) Synodal
Decision;aswellastheprevioustothishastyenteringintocommunionwith
the Russian Church Abroad without the required canonical presuppositions
and guarantees, and the acceptance of her as Judge in our ecclesiastical
matters, but especially the subsequent acceptance in Greece of the
aforementionedSynodalDecision oftheRussian ChurchAbroad
1
,andthe
application subsequently of this Decisions requirement of cheirothesia
of the rest of the Members of the Holy Synod) were, and are, adjudged
ERRONEOUS,andassucharecondemnedandrejected.
TheHolySynod,withtheverysameFaithandConfessionwhichshehad
from the beginning concerning the Episcopal Consecrations of 1948, (by
which Apostolic Succession was assured) has even, up until today,
consecrated her Bishops; and again,whenevershejudgesit needful,she will
proceedtoelectandconsecratenewBishopsforthefurtherstrengtheningand
progress of the work of the Church of Greece, which, by Divine Grace, she
preserves unchanged the sacred Deposit and especially the Apostolic
Succession unsullied, these two characteristics of the Church of Christ, are
indeedthenecessarypresuppositionsofthesalvationinChristofthefaithful
withintheChurch.
Concerning the Decision of the Bishops to refer the matter of the
ordination by one Bishop of the evermemorable Hierarch and Confessor of
Orthodoxy Matthew, to the Synod of the Bishops of the Russian Church
Abroad,itmustbeclarifiedthattherewasneveranydoubtorambivalenceon
theirpartconcerningthevalidityandfullnessoftheseordinations,butonlyof
the theoretical recognition, and this as the result of a healthy ecclesiastical
mentality of an ecclesiastical being subject to trial before the appropriate
ecclesiastical body for judgmentand investigation if, and to what extent (the
ordinations by one Bishop) were, or were not, justified. And even this, not
because there was any ambivalence on our part, but chiefly as an expression
of the concern of the Church for those outside of Her who followed the
traditional Calendar, but who used, as reasons, such things as excuses and
justifications for the continuation of schisms and divisions among them, in
order precisely to heal these very schisms. This desire was not expressed
willynilly,fromtimetotime,butformallyandSynodically.Itwasexpressed
clearly and in documents (among other times) by the Pastoral Encyclical of
theHolySynodonMarch1,1957,which,itmustbenoted,wassigned(along
with the other signatory member Bishops) by the four Bishops who were
consecrated in 1948 by the evermemorable Archbishop Matthew, where,
amongothermatters,thefollowingismentioned:
Andtheportionofthosewhodisagree,beingledastrayandleadingothers
to stray, causes division by preaching that the Bishops not be recognized because of
the taking place of the supposedly anticanonical consecration of a Bishop by one
Bishop.
ChildrenbelovedintheLord,
Thisrefusaltorecognizeisanerror;itisanexcusefordivision.Ithasbeen
witnessed scientifically and historically that dogmatically the consecration is valid.
Dogmatically, the Bishops are in order. They are Bishops having the fullness of
Episcopalauthority.Thematterissolved.Forthesakeofecclesiasticalorderfromthe
standpoint of administration in this matter the question is judgeable before the
appropriateSynodforinvestigationiftheconsecrationwasjustified,andifitwasnot,
then the application of the appropriate penalties. Therefore there might be some
justification to contend that there is here a matter yet to be judged, which neither
invalidates,norimpedes,norsuspendsthefullexerciseoftheEpiscopalauthority.All
ofourEpiscopalactivitiesanddeedsareabsolutelyvalidcanonicallyanddogmatically
until the callingtogether of an Orthodox Synod in which circumstancewe might be
condemned administratively. Therefore it is an excuse which is put forward as an
unjustifiedreasontojustifytheworkofdivision.
Even though this canonical and NOT DOGMATIC pretext is offered, it is
not generally accepted, yet,for thesakeof unity, for the sake of the Struggle, for the
sake of love, for the sake of peace, we accept being administratively subject to trial,
eager to come before a Canonical Orthodox Synod, whenever it might come together
to render an account and to be judged for the administrative rationale of the
consecration of a Bishop by one Bishop, which took place in a time of circumstantial
needforthesakeofthefaithful

YourFerventintercessorsbeforetheLord,
TheHolySynod,
+DemetriosofThessalonika,President
+SpyridonofTrimythus,+AndreasofPatras
+KallistosofCorinth,+BessarionofTrikkiandStagae
+IoannisofThevaeandLevadeia,MeletiosofAtticaandMegaris
+MatthewofVresthena,+AnthimosofPiraieus

Concerningtheproblematicalreceptionfromthebeginning,atleastin
Greece,ofwhetherornottoacceptthecheirothesiasthathadoccurred,there
must be a reference to the reluctance of certain Bishops to accept it upon
themselves, their total refusal, as that of the rest of the clergy to act and to
receivedituponthemselves,despitewhatevertheSynodalDecisionrequired
inthisrelevantmatter.
As for the clear rejection of the cheirothesias under the meaning of
completionorofactivationoftheEpiscopateoftheHierarchswhodrewtheir
EpiscopatefromtheBishopsconsecratedbyMatthewofVresthena,therewas
the characteristic canonical confrontation of the then Metropolitan Callistos
who believed such things (the canonical need for cheirothesia) who was
finallydeposedbytheHolySynodinSeptemberof1977,andwhothenjoined
theAuxentianparty.
It is important that it be noted, that all the bishops of the True
Orthodox Church and successors of the Bishops consecrated by the ever
memorableHierarchMatthew(despitewhatevertheymightbeaccusedofas
appropriate and certainly responsible for ecclesiastical matters from the
standpoint of human frailties, omissions and mistakes) they, nevertheless,
neveracceptedthecheirothesiasthatoccurredasacompletionoractivationor
establishment of their Episcopate, but as a means of lifting the subjection to
trialbecauseoftheinfringementofthecanonicalorderintheconsecrationof
a bishop by one bishop, and even this, by fear of God and respect for
canonical order, being ignorant or having unclear knowledge of it, and by
extensionaclearpositionofitinthismeaning,it(thecheirothesia,trans.note)
was permissible or acceptable. Unfortunately, instead of the Bishops of that
time being helped by their theological advisors, who were better educated,
they were given by them unfortunate advice. So, because of weak support
from these advisors of strong and correct ecclesiological positions, and
receiving instead confused, ignorant or otherwise poor positions, they
dependeduponweakfoundations.Consequently,byadoptingandaccepting
these positions, the ecclesiastical and canonical confrontation of this matter
was alienated, and was replaced by positions and declarations or Decisions
which could be challenged as to the consistency and canonicity of their
foundationsandcriteria.
Concerning the admixture or the participation in the dealing with the
matter of the cheirothesias of those who have only recently comeforward as
critics of the Holy Synod, that is, the former Metropolitan of Mesogaea and
Lavreotiki k.k. Kirikos
2
and those with him, who have chosen this matter to
distract their followers from the shipwreck they have suffered in matters of
the Faith which has been accomplished by their support, even unto warring
against the Church, of the ecclesiological and Trinitarian innovation
concerning the communion of the three Divine Persons as the first beginningless
Church,wemustrefertothePatristicsayingofSaintBasiltheGreat:Wewill
instruct the ignorant, but we will not tolerate evil doers, that during the thirty
years that have passed, their position and contribution in this matter (the
cheirothesia) has been, in the final analysis, negative. They have been
unsuccessful, in any case, in hiding behind their supposed confessional zeal
and their merciless condemnation and judgment of everyone as diminishers
and deniers of an Orthodox confession; they are greatly responsible for the
obvious dearth of theological and Patristic criteria in their positions and
activities, and for their unprecedented immoderation in their positions,
opinionsandsuggestionsrelevanttothismatter.
It is especially indicative and revelatory concerning them that they
(while in 1977, by their Report/Accusation of 9101977 to the Holy Synod
of the T.O.C., among other things) accept that the cheriothesias took place,
whichindeedtheycharacterizeasanticanonicalandblasphemous;andwhile
yet a lay theologian, the former Metropolitan of Mesogaea, already from the
year 1972, supported in his relative Opinion that the cheriothesias that had
occurred were an attack on the consecrations of 1948, and that we must,
having confessed the error of accepting it, reject it
3
. They have, therefore,
become their own deniers: on the one hand, denying the historical truth and
realitysayingthatthecheirothesiadidnotevenoccurasanevent,orthat,of
late,theyhavesupposedlybeeninformedofwhatreallyhappened,playing,
essentially, in things that should not be played with; and on the other hand,
contending that whoever should imagine and declare that mistakes were
made on the matter of the cheirothesias of 1971, attacks and does away
withtheEpiscopalConsecrationsof1948!(ConfessionofOrthodoxFaith,Holy
MetropolisofMesogaeaandLavreotiki,692006.)
We pray, however, 1) that the grace of God will help them to take up
their responsibilities in coming to an understanding of their great and
burdensome activities against the Truth of the Church; 2) they will repent;
beinghelpedinthiseffortbytheexhortationofoneofthegreatfathersofthe
Churchwho,verymuchtothepoint,comments,saying:Weshallseeallthese
thingstogetherasifpresentedbeforeus:allofourworksshownbeforeourfacesinour
minds in their individual forms, each thing as it was pronounced and as it was
enacted.(St.BasiltheGreat,SermononRepentance)
However,asisourresponsibility,accordingtothePsalms:Inclinenot
my heart unto words of evil to make excuse with excuses in sins (Psalm 140).
We reject the cheriothesias that took place under whatever form in which it
mayhavetakenplace,becauseaccordingtothedivineScripturesthereis
shame which brings about sin and there is shame of glory in Grace. Take not into
accountpersonsagainstyoursoulandbenotashamedinyourfall.Impedenotword
intimeofsalvation;forinthewordshallbeknownwisdomandtrialinthewordsof
thetongue.UntodeathstruggleforthesakeoftruthandtheLordGodshallfightfor
you. (Wisdom of Sirach) At this point, it is required that we refer to the
agreeing opinion concerning the ecclesiastical and canonical confrontation of
this matter according to God of our ever memorable Archbishop of Athens
andourSpiritualFatherKyrosAndreas,who(accordingtohistextwhichhe
readbeforethemeetingoftheHolySynodofBishopsof5/2/2003)ontheone
hand,spokeofthemistakesthathadbeenmadeinthehandlingofthismatter
because of human weakness, and on the other hand, he emphasized that in
theconsciencesofthebishops,therehadneverbeenanydoubtorquestionof
the fullness and completeness of the Episcopal consecrations of the ever
memorableBishopMatthewin1948.Weknowandwebearwitnessthatour
evermemorableFirstHierarchhadaferventdesirethattheHolySynodactso
astobringaboutthefinalorderingofthismatter.Thistimehascome.
Wherefore, the Holy Synod of the True Orthodox Church of Greece
byHerunanimousdecisionofalltheholyBishopsofwhichItiscomposed
(showingcarefortheTruthandonlyfortheTruth,foraccordingtothesacred
Scriptures, the Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth. (1 Timothy
3:15),andaccordingtothevoiceofthefathers,thosewhoareoftheChurch
areoftheTruth;andthosewhoarenotoftheTrutharenotoftheChurchofChrist.
(St.GregoryPalamas),andhavingresponsibilitybeforeGodandmen,bythe
Grace and the help of our Lord and God Jesus Christ, Who is the Eternal
Head of the Church, shepherding the flock of the Church unto pastures of
salvation) recognizes and confesses, as it should, that those human errors
which happened in this matter because of ignorance, and carelessness, and
erroneous understanding of Her representative and ministers for which she
begs the mercy of the manbefriending God according to the Wisdom of
Sirach:weshallfallinthehandsoftheLordandnotintothehandsofmen,foras
HismajestyisgreatsoisHismercy,arerejected(ashasalreadybeensaid,not
onlythecheirothesiasthatoccurredintheUnitedStatesofAmerica,butalso
that which occurred in Greece) as actions incompatible with the Canonical
order and the Orthodox Tradition relevant to the validity and fullness of
Episcopal Consecrationsby onecanonicaland totallyOrthodox Bishop, even
if alone, especially when this action was required by a truly unquestionable
ecclesiasticalneedtotransmittheEpiscopateandtocontinuetheworkofthe
Church ofChrist, embattled as Sheisbyheresiesand schismsandespecially
bythePanHeresyofEcumenism..
Thisbeingthecase,wecallupontheLordourGodasourhelper,and
takingtoheartthefearofHim,andhavinginmindthefuturejudgment,we
gird the loins of our intellect in truth and being vigilant in everything in an
apostolic manner, we judge a balanced judgment: so that every innovation,
subtractionoradditionweweedoutwithoutfurtherdelayasbeingasweeds
admixed with pure wheat and as being antagonistic to truth and warring
upontheChurch.ForthosethingspassedontotheChurcharenotsimplyyes
andno,butareyesinTruthandremainimpregnableandunshakenuntothe
ages.
Wherefore, together with the authentic recapitulation of the Orthodox
Teaching of the Holy Fathers and of him who has been shown forth as the
Greatest Theologian nearest to our time, our GodBearing Father of the
Church,SaintGregoryPalamasArchbishopofThessalonica,weconfess:
+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+
One God before all, over all, in all, and above everything do we
worship and believe in, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He is Unity in Trinity
and Trinity in Unity, unconfusedly united and indivisibly divided, the same
UnityandTrinity,beingallpowerful.
The Father is without beginning, not only as being outside time, but
also as being in every way without cause. He alone is the cause, root and
sourceoftheGodheadbeheldintheSonandtheHolySpirit;Healoneisthe
primary cause of what has come into being; He is not the Creator alone, but
thesole FatheroftheoneSon andthesoleOriginatorofthe oneHolySpirit.
He always is, and is always the Father and always the sole Father and
Originator,greaterthantheSonandtheSpirit,butonlyascause;inallother
respectsHeisthesameasThemandequalinhonor.
OfHimthereisoneSon,withoutbeginning,asbeingoutsidetime,but
not without origin, as having the Father for origin, root and source, from
Whom alone He came forth before all ages incorporeally, immutably,
impassibly,andbygeneration,butHewasnotdividedfromtheFather,being
GodfromGod;notonethinginsofarasHeisGod,butanotherinsofarasHe
is the Son, He always is, and is always the Son and always the sole Son.
Always being unconfusedly with God (St. John 1:1), He is not the cause and
origin of the Godhead apprehended in the Trinity, since He exists from the
causeandoriginoftheFather,butHeisthecauseandoriginofallthatcame
into being, since an things came into being through Him {St. John 1:3}, Who,
being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God
(Philppians2:6),butattheendoftheagesemptiedHimself,takingtheformof
a servant for our sake. (Philippians 2:7), and was by the law of nature both
conceivedandbornoftheEvervirginMarybythegoodwilloftheFatherand
the cooperation of the Holy Spirit, God and Man at the same time; having
becometrulyincarnate,Hewasmadelikeusinallthingsexceptsin(Hebrews
4:15),remainingwhatHewas,trueGod,unitingwithoutconfusionorchange
the two natures, wills and energies, and remaining one Son in a single
hypostasis even after the Incarnation, performing all the Divine actions as
GodandallthehumanactionsasMan,beingsubjecttotheblamelesshuman
passions. Being and remaining impassible and immortal as God, but
voluntarily suffering in the flesh as Man, He was crucified, died, and was
buried,androseagainonthethirdday.HeappearedtoHisdisciplesafterthe
Resurrection,andwhenHehadpromisedthemthepowerfromonhighand
exhorted them to make disciples of all the nations, to baptize them in the
nameoftheFather,andoftheSonandoftheHolySpiritandtoteachthemto
observe all that He had commanded (St. Matthew 28:20), He was taken up
into Heaven and sat at the right hand of the Father (St. Mark 16:19), making
our mixture equal in honor, enthronement and divinity, the mixture with
which He is going to come in glory to judge the living and the dead, and to
rewardeachmanaccordingtohisdeeds(St.Matthew16:27).
It was then that after ascending to the Father, He sent upon His holy
disciples and Apostles the Holy Spirit Who proceeds from the Father. He is
cobeginningless with the Father and the Son as being outside time, but not
without beginning as Himself also having the Father for root, source and
cause, not as generated, but as proceeding; for He also came forth from the
Father before all ages immutably and impassibly, not by generation, but by
processionbeingindivisiblefromtheFatherandtheSon.asproceedingfrom
the Father and resting in the Son, having union without confusion and
distinction without division. He is God and is Himself from God, not one
thinginsofaras Heis God,butanotherinsofarasHeis theComforter;He is
the selfsubsistent Spirit, proceeding from the Father and sent, that is
manifested,throughtheSon,thecauseofallthatcameintobeing,sincethey
wereperfectedinHim;thesameequalinhonorwithboththeFatherandthe
Sonwithoutingeneratenessandgeneration.HewassentfromtheSontoHis
owndiscip1es,thatis,Hewasmanifested.ForhowotherwisewouldHeWho
isnotseparatedfromHimbesentbyHim?Howotherwise,praytell,would
He come Who is everywhere? Wherefore, He is sent not only from the Son,
but also from the Father and through the Son; and He comes from Himself
whenHeisbeingmanifested.Forthesending.thatisthemanifestation,ofthe
Spirit is a common work. He is manifested. not according to essence, for no
one hath ever either seen or declared the nature of God, but according to
grace, power and energy which are common to the Father, the Son and the
Spirit. For the hypostasis of each, and whatever belongs to it, is peculiar to
each of these. Not only is the superessential essence, which is entirely
nameless,inexpressibleandincapableofparticipation.sinceitisaboveevery
name, expression and participation, common to Them all, but also the grace,
thepower,theenergy,theradiance,thekingdomandtheincorruption.andin
general everything according to which God communicates and is united by
grace with both holy angels and holy men. Departing from His simplicity
neitheronaccountofthedivisibilityanddifferenceofthehypostases,noron
account of the divisibility and variety of powers and energies, we thus have
one allpowerful God in one Godhead.. For neither from perfect hypostases
couId there ever come about any composition, nor could what is potential,
because ithas power, or powers,evertrulybe called compositebyreasonof
potentialityitse1f.
Inaddition,weaccordrelativevenerationtotheholyiconoftheSonof
God, Who was circumscribed as having become incarnate for us, ascribing
veneration in a relative manner to the prototype. We venerate the precious
woodoftheCross,andallthesymbolsofHissufferings,asbeingtruedivine
trophiesoverthecommonenemyofourrace.Inadditiontothesavingimage
ofthepreciousCross,weveneratethedivinechurchesandplaces,aswellas
thesacredvesselsandthedivinelytransmittedScriptures,becauseoftheGod
Whodwellsinthem.Likewise,weveneratetheiconsofalItheSaints.because
ofourloveforthemandforGod,Whomtheytrulylovedandserved,inour
veneration lifting our minds up to the figures depicted in the icons. We also
veneratetherelicsoftheSaints,sincethesanctifyinggraceofthesamehasnot
departed their most sacred bones, just as the Godhead was not separated
fromtheMastersbodyinHisthreedaydeath.
We know of nothing that is essentially evil; nor is there any other
origin of evil than the perversion of rationaI men, who abuse the free will
given them by God. We cherish all the ecclesiastical Traditions, both written
and unwritten, and above all the mystical and allsacred Rite, Communion
and Assembly, the source of perfection for all the other rites, at which, in
recollection of Him Who emptied Himself without emptying and took flesh
and suffered on our behalf, according to the divine command which He
Himself fulfills: the most Divine Consecration of the bread and the cup is
celebrated,inwhichthesebecomethelifegivingBodyandBlood.Hebestows
ineffablecommunionandparticipationonthosewhoapproachinpurity.We
cast aside and subject to anathema al1 those who do not confess and believe
as the Holy Spirit foretold through the prophets, as the Lord decreed when
Heappearedtousthroughtheflesh,astheApostlespreachedafterbeingsent
by Him; as our Fathers and their successors taught us, but who have either
startedtheirownheresyorfollowedtotheendthosewhohavemadeanevil
start

We accept and salute the Holy Ecumenical Synods: the one in Nicaea of
the318GodbearingFathers,againsttheGodfightingArians,whoimpiously
degraded the Son of God down to the level of a creature and sundered the
Godhead that is worshipped in Father, Son and Holy Spirit into created and
uncreated.; the one after it in Constantinople of the 150 holy Fathers, against
Macedonios of Constantinople, who impiously degraded the Holy Spirit
downtothelevelofacreatureandnolessthantheformersunderedtheone
Godhead into created and uncreated; the one after it in Ephesus of the 200
Fathers, against Patriarch Nestorios of Constantinople, who rejected the
hypostatic unionof divinity and humanity in Christ, and completely refused
to call Theotokos the Virgin who truly gave birth to God; and the fourth in
Chalcedon of the 630 Fathers, against Eutyches and Dioscoros, who
propounded the evil doctrine of one Nature in Christ; and the one after it in
Constantinople of the 165 Fathers, against Theodore and Diodoros, who
entertained the same ideas as Nestorios and commended his ideas in their
writings,andagainstOrigen,DidymosandEvagrios,whowerefromanolder
period,buthadattemptedtoinfiltratetheChurchofGodwithcertainfables;
and the one after it in the same city, of the 170 Fathers against Sergios,
Pyrrhos and Paul of Constantinople, who rejected the two energies and two
wills appropriate to the two natures of Christ; and the one in Nicaea of the
367 Fathers against the Iconoclasts

Inadditiontoalltheseaffirmations,weawaittheresurrectionofthedead
andtheunendinglifeoftheagetocome.Amen.
+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+~+
Inadditiontothese,weacceptandembracealltheHolySynodswhich
according, to the grace of God, were called together in various times and
places to certify matters of piety and evangelical behavior, among which are
those called together against the Innovation of the New Calendar and
Paschalionintheyears1583,1587,1593and1848,andingeneralagainstallthe
innovations by which the Faith and Order of the Church is upset, and by
which those things which we have received from our Holy Fathers are
rejected,whichforthisreasonarecondemnedaccordingtothewordsofGod
WhodeclaredaforetimethroughHisprophetJeremiahconcerningthemwho
would introduce innovations into the Church of Christ: Two evil things have
theydone:theyhaveabandonedMeWhoamthesourceofthewateroflife,andthey
havedugforthemselvescrushedpitswhichcannotholdwater.Thesecrushedpits
are the words of heretics, from which these introducers of this Christianity
condemning heresy (as is every heresy and innovation) have brought forth
andirrigatedtheirsimplefollowerswiththismuddypotion,anduntowhom
thewoeisdirectedbythepropheticvoice.
If, therefore, there are some who quarrel with those things which are
commandedbytheirdisobedience,theykickagainstthethornsandareunjust
to their own souls and clash with Christ. They slander the Church of Christ
and fight with manic warfare against piety, and, in this manner, they are
communicants with the ancient heretics, being in conformity and of one
nature with them according to their impiety, so that even as our Fathers so
regardedthem,inlikemannerdoweviewthese.
We tread the straight and most unerring and most secure path of
salvation which was laid for us by the Holy Fathers before us through their
decisions: the path of total separation from the New Calendarist innovation,
which in its implementation caused the creation of the New Calendarist
schism. This is the path our evermemorable Father and Hierarch Matthew,
trod,andthisselfsamepath,wetreadandconfessfollowinginhisfootsteps
whichheverifiedbytheEpiscopalconsecrationswhichheperformedin1948,
bywhichhegaveuntoustheApostolicSuccession,whichweholdalongwith
the Apostolic Faith, and by which we have until now trodden, and by the
graceofGodwewillcontinuetotread.
Regarding the cheirothesia which took place in 1971, we regard it
(whetherinitspartsorwhetherinitsentirety)asadecisionorasanaction(or
procedure, or a deed, or as a movement or an attempt by whomsoever,
whensoeverandunderwhatsoeverformormeaningittookplace,oritissaid
tohavetakenplace,)andisputforthashavingoccurred.Andbywhatsoever
interpretation the events around it may be viewed, in part or in whole, we
remove far away the causes of the unhealthy doubts and whatsoever
questions which lead to confusion and error, granting unto the Church her
mighty health, and to her members by being in agreement of heart, tongue
andhandswiththeunerringandmostsecureConfessionoftheHolyFathers
who preceded us, and of him who followed them in these latter times our
evermemorableFatherandConfessorHierarchMatthew,beingasShepherds
leading the Flock, and we judge that this cheirothesia, in whatever way it
might be viewed, according to the above mentioned, as being adjudged and
understood as ecclesiastically erroneous, and it is therefore rejected and
denied,asbeingwithoutbasisandasthoughneverhavingoccurred.
In addition to all of this, as being of the Body of which our Lord and
GodandSaviorJesusChrististheHead,andasfollowingtheexhortationof
the holy Father of our Church St. John of Damascos, who wrote: We stand
upon the rock of Faith, and upon the Tradition of the Church, not moving the
boundaries which were placed by our Fathers; giving no place to those who would
wishtoinnovateanddemolishtheedificeofthecatholicandapostolicChurchofGod.
For if such license were to be given to anyone who wished it, bit by bit the entire
edifice of the Church would be demolished; we condemn and reject the
ecclesiological andTrinitarian Innovationconcerningthecommunionamong
thedivinePersonsasbeingthefirst,uncreatedChurchascomingfromthe
heresy filled West, indeed from atheist and antiChrist Papism, and widely
disseminated among the New Calendarist/ecumenists being used as a basis
forthetheoriesofthepanheresyofEcumenism,asapositionnotwitnessed
tobytheFathers, asnotbeingtransmittedto theChurch,andtherefore an
innovation, and those who defend it and use it as a crutch to theologize as
totally excommunicated from the Church until such time as they reconsider
and confess the traditional Faith according to the Godinspired theology of
theSaintsandthereverentpietyoftheChurch.
Thusdoweunderstand,thusdowebelieveandthusdowepreach.
This Encyclical, having been read during the regularlyscheduled
Meeting of the Sacred Synod on the 28
th
of November of this year, with the
participation of all of her members as well as of the hierarchs of the
AutocephalousChurchofCyprus,and havingbeenapproved,itissignedas
follows:
IntheYear2007,the28
th
ofthemonthofNovember.
TheSacredSynod

+[Archbishop]NicholasofAthens,President
+[RulingBishop]PachomiusofArgolis
+[RulingBishop]GalactionofPeristerion
+[RulingBishop]TarasiosofBerreaandNausa
+[RulingBishop]AndrewofThebesandLebadia
+[SuffraganBishop]ChrysostomofPhilippi
+[RulingBishop]PanteleimonofPiraeusandtheIslands
+[RulingBishop]IgnatiusofLarisaandTirnavo
FortheG.O.C.ofCyprus

+[RulingBishop]SebastianofCitium
+[SuffraganBishop]LazarusofAmathus
TheChiefSecretary

+ProtopresbyterDemetriosTsarkatzoglou
1BrokenoffbytheDecisionoftheSacredSynodNo.1097of2/5/1975.Seethe
relative document Prot. No. 1158/201976 formal document of the Sacred
Synod of the Church of the T.O.C. to the Hierarchy of the Russian Church
Abroad.
2WhoisalreadydeposedforkakodoxyandschismbyDecisionNo.3282/28
112007 of the Sacred Synod of the Hierarchy of the Church of the T.O.C. of
Greece.
3Characteristicallyamongotherthingsitreferstothefollowing:Wherefore
let the holy Bishops study this matter and let them seek its remedy. The
Churchcanremedyeverything.LetthemrejectthisdeedLetthemrejectthe
cheirothesia,whileconfessingthatthemadeamistake(MenasKontogiannis:
TheCheirothesia,Athens,1972)