By Markos*
As the days progress, new media reports are emerging surrounding the real reasons for the “demotion” of Metropolitan Tychikos to “bishop on the shelf” of the Church of Cyprus…
The article below is quite explanatory, but the details are also troubling. We have known for a long time that the Church of Cyprus ignores the “vote of the people” when it comes to voting for the Archbishop (the last two votes were bypassed by the Synod). We also know that the former Archbishop Chrysostomos expanded the voting seats in the Synod, placing “his own” in those seats, thus solidifying a majority control on decision-making…but control over the decision-making on behalf of whom? Constantinople, perhaps?
We know that the former archbishop of Cyprus, Chrysostomos, was in favor of commemorating Epiphanios of Kiev. We also know that Georgios (new Archbishop) was not the selection of the people, but his choice made Constantinople and a lot of foreign diplomats who swarmed during the early days after Chrysostomos’ funeral happy. Was it time to call in a favor now that Tychikos decided to apply a more conservative approach to determining who is eligible to be married in his metropolis? Clearly, a more conservative approach is not tolerated by Chicago or Constantinople. It leaves them in the embarrassing situation of explaining why their application of “economy” was not accepted by all bishops in the absence of an Ecumenical Synod decision on the matter.
But then again, that’s not real news, and we’ve known that for many years now, when compared to practice in other “conservative” Orthodox jurisdictions. However, in theory, the Church of Cyprus is autocephalous. Ceasing Communion with a single bishop because Constantinople doesn’t like him “messing up their narrative” is certainly Constantinople’s prerogative, and would have been their only recourse if the Church of Cyprus had any willingness to support one of their own vs. supporting Bartholomew. Nevertheless, sending a letter to ask a primate of an Autocephalous Church to discipline someone you don’t like, as if that Autocephalous Church belongs to you, is both arrogant and constitutes “ecclesiastical meddling”. That’s not how ecclesiastical disputes should be resolved. And even worse, watching the majority of the Synod of Cyprus “jump” when Bartholomew said “jump” is a total embarrassment and a betrayal of the concept of “Autocephaly”.
Ultimately, Tychikos isn’t the root cause of the problem, but local synod decisions and variance of practice among Orthodox Jurisdictions on this subject since the late 1800s certainly is. Besides, the letters are clear… Constantinople indirectly admits its position is “modern/innovative” because it accused Tychikos of being “anachronistic” with the “old conservative approach”, and not a “heretic”.
And if Constantinople wants to play “Global Orthodox Police”, then
1.Why didn’t Constantinople send a similar letter to Alexandria, to “discipline” that Metropolitan in Zimbabwe who decided he can unilaterally tonsure a female as a “deaconess”?
2.Why didn’t Constantinople depose Elpidophoros after the Metropolitan of Glyfada complained that he did not receive permission to perform the high-profile baptism he did?
3.Why did Constantinople ignore Archbishop Anastasios’s caution not to elevate Theophan to a bishop, and when they did, Theophan recited the Filioque at the Phanar, and they STILL made him a bishop even after confessing heresy? Is that perhaps the “new spirit of Constantinople” and the reason why they didn’t like Tychikos’ “older position”.
4.etc, etc, etc. (too much to list…)
The level of hypocrisy here is blatant, but the lack of spine in the Synod of Cyprus is even more alarming, because this “subservience” to Constantinople is one step closer to making a “Papacy of the East” a de facto truth… this is exactly how it happened in the West, where now the bishops actually believe there is a single, infallible “super-bishop”.
*Helleniscope’s Theological Commentator
Source: helleniscope.com
.png)
