Filenews 28 December 2025 - by Androula Taramounta, Christakis Efstathiou
In an in-depth interview with Fileleftheros, His Beatitude Archbishop George of Cyprus is particularly revealing, mainly on issues concerning the Church and the scandals that plague it, but also more broadly on its role in the political process and especially on the national issue, for which he shows particular sensitivity. In his last interview for 2025, His Beatitude emphasizes, among other things, that:
– The biggest challenge he found himself in was a "sick zealotism", which he considers particularly dangerous.
– There was a great danger from daily "miracles", with reference to the well-known events of the Holy Monastery of Avvakum.
– Gaps are identified in the Charter, which attempts will be made to correct.
– The involvement of the people in the election of the Hierarchs is of particular concern. With the current Constitutional Charter, the intervention of extra-ecclesiastical situations is favoured and unnecessary fanaticism is triggered.
– He will submit a proposal so that the election of Metropolitans and Bishops is done by the Holy Synod and the process of involving the people should be provided for the position of Archbishop.
His Beatitude also notes that:
– The announcement of the Plan to curb the low birth rate is a great success.
– The Church will attempt to set up palliative care units for patients.
– In the thoughts and intentions of the Church is the creation of a school (Gymnasium or Elementary School).
In relation to the Cyprus issue, His Beatitude emphasizes that Erhurman cannot disengage from Ankara. On the contrary, we will find ourselves in a cycle of new pressures. He also believes that the solution plan for Ukraine, to the extent that it will provide for the maintenance of Russian control over the territories of Ukraine, cannot be considered as a model for the Cyprus problem. Such a development would weaken the validity of our basic argument in relation to the occupation of Cyprus.
– As Primate of the Church, taking stock of the year that is ending, what do you single out as important events during it? What are your expectations and estimates for 2026? Looking back specifically at 2025, what do you think was the biggest success and what was the biggest challenge you faced?
-The greatest challenge we found ourselves in was a sick zealot who sought to enter the Church of Cyprus, who does not recognize any authority in Orthodoxy but himself. That is why the Holy Synod made the painful decision and stopped this phenomenon with the deposition from the Metropolitan throne of the Metropolitan of Paphos, around which this phenomenon developed. This later entailed a trial for canonical misdeeds of the priest ordained by the former Paphos and his condemnation to deposition. There is, therefore, today, the possibility to enlighten the people about the dangers they have run.
There was another danger of disorientation of the people by daily miracles performed by some, especially the Holy Monastery of St. Avakum. There, the Church took its measures, the perpetrators were deposed and the wound is slowly healing.
It was a success for us that we announced the plan to stop the low birth rate in Cyprus and the effort to increase the birth rate. The plan has already been implemented. The first amounts have been given to the beneficiaries, according to the criteria we set. The expectations are that we will improve this plan, that all the wounds left to the Cypriot people from the mentioned deviations will be healed and that we will proceed unhindered in our effort for spiritual progress and liberation of our homeland.
– How does 2025 end in particular, a year full of trials, changes – reforms, but also critical decisions? From dealing with major internal issues, but also others that were projected as scandals and that shook the trust of the faithful (e.g. events in relation to the Abakkum Monastery, Tychicus, etc.) to the position of the Church towards modern social dilemmas (e.g. artificial intelligence, euthanasia, cremation of the dead, etc.). What is the next day for the Church?;
– I think some issues have been answered earlier. I am referring to the issues that you say we have to deal with: artificial intelligence, euthanasia and so on.
a) In euthanasia, the Church is clear. He cannot accept it because it is not She or a person who provides life to people. God gives life and He takes it. The Church will try to make palliative care units for these patients, to relieve their pain. You may know that when a person is in the last stages of the end of his life, there is a church service which we perform at his bedside, begging God to help according to his own will and foresight and to take the patient so that he will no longer be tormented. We beg him, but we do not interfere there.
b) The cremation of the dead is not a dogmatic issue, but we respect, here, tradition. The body that received the Mysteries of the Church, especially the Divine Eucharist, the Holy Chrism, must not be violently deconstructed. After all, we know that each relic, each skeleton, retains the characteristics of the individual. How are our missing persons identified? It is with the relics. The ashes are all the same. That is why we do not destroy the uniqueness of each person by burning his body. In other societies where tradition accepts this thing, we will not forbid people to follow what prevails in their society.
c) For artificial intelligence, we say that above all there must be human intelligence, the logic with which God endowed us and to judge when something becomes dangerous and to the detriment of humanity and to avoid it. Special attention is needed in this regard.
– There has been a lot of noise lately for Faneromeni as well, focusing on the descent to Cyprus of a branch of the University of Athens. How do you respond to criticisms and comments?
– Faneromeni was never asked by the University of Athens. There is a contract between the Archdiocese and the Ministry of Finance, with the Government. If the Ministry does not give the money for renovations so that the School of Architecture can be installed there, we have no problem. If another faculty comes with a capable, equal number of students to the Faculty of Architecture, then we can consider the continuation of the contract. Otherwise we will take the building and we will be able, as an Archdiocese, to build our own school, a Gymnasium or a Primary School. And I don't understand, of course, the war that took place against the Kapodistrian University. Even if he took the building of Faneromeni, which he never asked for, it would be an honour for us to reciprocate what we received as Cypriots for so many years from Greece, by studying for free, without exams, at that university.
– Entering 2026 shortly under your own guidance as Primate, what are the most important changes/reforms/innovations that you envision and plan for the internal and not only functioning of the Church (spiritual, administrative, educational, economic, synodal system, etc.). In particular, for the Charter, you see that some changes are needed that are noted along the way, provided that there were also disputes about the procedures followed;
– There are indeed gaps in the Charter, which we would like to correct. For example: there are many details and many delaying provisions for the administration of justice. That's where things need to be made simpler. Something that concerns us is the involvement of the people in the election of the Hierarchs. With the current Charter, extra-ecclesiastical situations intervene and an unnecessary fanaticism can be triggered. At the same time, we have seen in recent cases that very few believers go to the polls. In the last elections in Paphos only 14% voted and in the Archdiocesan elections previously 31% nationwide. Therefore, we are looking for a middle way.
For example, and it is my proposal, now, without having said it to the Holy Synod, the Holy Synod should elect the Metropolitans and the Bishops and the process of involving the people should be done for the Archbishop, who also has an ethnarchic role, conveying the opinion of the people to the Government.
– In closing, given that we are already on the last Sunday of the year, what messages would you like to send to the Cypriot people in view of the coming of 2026?;
– My message is to delve into the real messages of the days and especially of Christmas and not to stay on the surface. The peace that Christ brought to the world has the right infrastructure. The infrastructure of peace is based on justice. Therefore, what we are experiencing today in Cyprus is not the peace of God, it is the peace of arms imposed by the Turkish Attila.
We should seek justice in our country, even if this requires some effort, which at first will seem to be directed against peace.
Also, peace has the meaning of reconciliation with God and people. Each of us must be careful to reconcile with our fellow human beings and with God in order to have this quiet conscience. The birth of Christ also sends messages of brotherhood, because Christ took the common human nature as His body and established it. We are all brothers in the person of Christ. Therefore, nothing divides us, neither with the Turkish Cypriots, nor with the Maronites, nor with all our fellow human beings. What divides us here in Cyprus is the occupation.
Also what Christmas sends as a message is the potential of human nature. A Virgin, Mary, contained God Himself within her. By imitating the Virgin Mary in virtue and holiness, we too could contain God Himself within us.
So there are many messages that we need to look at in order to be able to actually see what Christmas is and how we will live with it throughout the year.
I wish all the Cypriot people a Merry Christmas! I wish that with the new year the Divine Infant will lead us to a free Cyprus so that we can glorify our God everywhere, even in our occupied territories today.
"Erhurman is hooked in Ankara"
Erhurman cannot be disengaged from Ankara, His Beatitude emphasizes. He further clarifies that although the Church, like every citizen, has a say in all issues that concern the country, the responsibility for governance lies with the elected President. The final plan for a solution for Ukraine, if it provides for the maintenance of Russian control, would be a development that would weaken the main argument for the occupation of Cyprus.
Do you have an opinion on the changes made to the government? Your Predecessor had an opinion and wanted to communicate it to the President of the Republic. Do you?
– The Church, like every citizen, has a say in all issues that concern the country. And for the fair acquisition and fair distribution of material goods, the administration of justice, equality, etc. No one prevents us from expressing our opinions. The responsibility for the governance of the country, however, lies with the elected President. The success or failure of a minister or a government department reflects on him. It would be unfair for us to propose and for someone else to be responsible. We express our opinion both privately and publicly, mainly on major issues concerning the country: Defense, Education, etc.
The election of Erhurman caused euphoria in the Greek Cypriot community and optimism that steps are expected to achieve a solution to the Cyprus problem. What kind of reading do you do?
– No one should expect any policy other than the one drawn up by Turkey. Turkey raises and demotes leaders in the occupied territories depending on how it wants to present its policy to the world. When the people got tired of the "intransigent" Tatar, he presented Erhurman as conciliatory. He has already shown some signs that he cannot disengage from Ankara. On the contrary, we will find ourselves in a cycle of new pressures. Due to the perceived "conciliatory" policy of the new occupying leader, they will pressure us for new concessions. Let's not be fooled. Turkey has a firm target in Cyprus. If it makes some painless manoeuvres for it, sometimes, it is to avoid international pressure.
– Something is constantly changing in the Eastern Mediterranean region. Energy is now becoming an important element in political regulations, as are Trump's plans. What do you say about that?
– The discovery of natural wealth in the maritime space of Cyprus certainly affects the course of the Cyprus problem. First of all, it strengthens the status of our state internationally, while at the same time it creates the interests of powerful states in the geopolitical space of Cyprus. This, in turn, launches multi-level collaborations with large states, something that we could not easily do in the past. On the other hand, instead of natural wealth being a factor that would facilitate a just solution to the Cyprus problem on the basis of a mutually beneficial cooperation between the two communities, we see Turkey using natural wealth as a lever of blackmail to promote its ambitions in the Eastern Mediterranean. In other words, instead of revising the stance in the direction of a just and viable solution, it is hardening and trying to cancel all the actions that derive from the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus. Our stance must be clear and non-negotiable, that is, that we do not retreat in the face of Turkish blackmail. On the contrary, we are strengthening our cooperation with other states in the region and we are demanding more EU involvement in the region in order to create a strong shield of defense against Turkish aggression.
– The solution plan for Ukraine is considered by political analysts as a model for the Cyprus problem as well. What is your counterargument?
If the final plan for resolving the war in Ukraine accepts the maintenance of Russian control over the territories of Ukraine, which it occupied during the invasion, then a bad precedent is set in international diplomacy that Turkey may exploit. After 1974, our side put forward the international argument that the occupation of territory by force should not be legalized. Such a development will weaken the strength of our argument and Turkey will now claim that since the recognition of the Russian occupation in Ukraine has been accepted, why not recognize the Turkish occupation of Cyprus as well. This will give occupying Turkey more negotiating comfort since it may have less cost to diplomatically promote its expansionist aspirations in Cyprus. We insist that the independence and territorial integrity of each state must not be violated by foreign interference. And we should make it clear that we will never hand over part of our homeland to Turkey.
– At a time when neither international law, nor human rights nor the United Nations counts, how will a small state like Cyprus claim a viable and functional solution, because it certainly could not be fair?
– No matter how much law is ignored against power, we cannot fail to promote it. Relying on the EU of which we are a member, we can pursue, without the possibility of our partners questioning our claim, what other Europeans enjoy. Can they give us an excuse that we, like them, are not entitled to free movement, free establishment and acquisition of property in Europe and therefore in our country? We must ask for it with firmness and perseverance. Otherwise we give them an alibi so that they are not interested in a solution according to their principles. If we agree to discuss discounts on our rights, will they be interested? We should then make use of our alliances with neighbouring countries whose interests align with ours. Above all, however, we must have an unbreakable unity, a policy with Greece and Hellenism everywhere. Our defensive armour, then, will give the message of our readiness for a fight. It will also strengthen the fighting spirit of our people. Conditions never remain unchanged. We will wait, working until more favourable conditions prevail. We must not rush to an unfair solution.
