The Second Vatican Council and the Crisis of Continuity: How a Pastoral Council Reshaped Roman Catholicism and Why Its Effects Reached Far Beyond the Vatican

Radislav Pp. I Romano-Ruthenicus

Introduction: Why Vatican II Still Matters

From the standpoint of the Apostolic Churches that retained continuity of doctrine and worship without rupture, the Roman Catholic Church’s Second Vatican Council nevertheless is an event of both concern and far-reaching effect and influence. Few events in modern Christianity have had consequences as wide-ranging as the Second Vatican Council (1962–1965). For Roman Catholics, it marked the most dramatic transformation of ecclesial life in centuries. And, for the Orthodox and the Old Catholics, as well as Protestant Christians, it altered Rome’s posture toward doctrine, worship, and authority in ways that reshaped ecumenical relations and even influenced broader Christian practice.

Supporters of Vatican II often describe it as a “new Pentecost,” intended to breathe new life into the Church. Critics, especially from a traditional Roman Catholic perspective, argue that while the Council did not formally overturn doctrine, it initiated a practical and cultural rupture whose effects have been devastating: collapsing vocations, doctrinal confusion, liturgical disintegration, and a loss of confidence in the Church’s own identity.

Thus, considering the ongoing application of Vatican II and its far-reaching effects, we in the United Roman-Ruthenian Church cannot ignore it. We must answer a simple but serious question: How could a council that officially changed little in doctrine nonetheless change almost everything in practice?

1. What Vatican II Was and Was Not

Vatican II differed from earlier ecumenical councils in a fundamental way. Earlier councils, such as Trent or Vatican I, were convened for purposes such as condemning specific heresies, defining doctrine precisely, and restoring discipline. Vatican II, by contrast, explicitly defined itself as pastoral, not dogmatic. It aimed not to settle doctrinal disputes but to present Roman Catholic teaching in a way that, as it claimed, could be more intelligible to the modern world. This distinction is crucial.

While Vatican II issued no new dogmatic definitions, it nevertheless changed emphases, introduced new theological language, and encouraged adaptation, dialogue, and reform to fit the style of the modern world.

The Council’s documents were often deliberately broad, leaving room for interpretation. That openness, initially seen by some as a strength, became the mechanism by which profound changes followed.

2. The Foundational yet Flawed Assumption: That the Church Needed “Updating”

The idea of aggiornamento (“updating”) presupposed that the Roman Catholic Church, as she existed before the 1960s, was in some sense out of step with the modern world. But this is a flawed premise at the core, for the Church is never supposed to seek to be in sync with the world, but rather is supposed to follow always and everywhere the timeless faith.

Furthermore, their diagnosis is historically questionable. On the eve of Vatican II, seminaries were full, religious orders were flourishing, Roman Catholic schools and parishes were strong, and belief and practice were coherent and unified. This is not to claim that all was perfect, but rather that the Roman Catholic Church’s internal coherence had not yet collapsed.

While the Church faced external pressures from secularism, communism, and egalitarian democracy, internally she was effectively stable. To “update” such a body required more than superficial adjustment. It required rethinking how the Church related to history, culture, and authority itself. This shift in self-understanding would prove decisive.

3. Vocations and the Collapse of Religious Life

Perhaps the most measurable post-conciliar effect was the dramatic collapse in priestly and religious vocations. This was not merely a demographic trend. It followed several concrete changes.

One critical change was that the priesthood was fundamentally reimagined. Traditionally, the Catholic priest, like those of the Apostolic Church in general, was understood primarily as one who offers sacrifice, a mediator between God and man, and a figure set apart, visibly and ritually. Yet, after Vatican II, the priest increasingly came to be described as a “presider” over the community, a facilitator of participation, and a pastoral companion.

The shift may sound subtle, but it altered the fundamental meaning of the vocation at a very profound level. Men do not give their lives for functional roles. They do so for mystery, sacrifice, and transcendence. When the priesthood became less visibly sacrificial and more managerial, vocations declined.

Another related and critical change was that religious life was effectively “renewed” out of existence. Religious orders were urged to reevaluate their charisms, adapt to modern culture, as well as modify habits, enclosure, and asceticism. The result was predictable. Distinctive identities dissolved, contemplative life was marginalized, and community discipline weakened. As religious life became indistinguishable from secular life, its rationale disappeared.

4. Doctrine: Unchanged on Paper, Altered in Practice

Defenders of Vatican II often respond: “But the Church’s teachings did not change.” Formally, this is substantially true. Substantively, it is incomplete.

It must be acknowledged that many bishops and theologians involved in the Council acted with sincere pastoral concern. Yet, the Council moved from Doctrine to “pastoral discernment.” Before Vatican II, doctrine determined pastoral practice, as it historically has throughout the Apostolic Church. Yet, after Vatican II, pastoral concerns increasingly reshaped how doctrine was applied, emphasized, or even explained. This reversal had enormous consequences. Moral absolutes became “ideals,” sin was reframed as psychological brokenness, and judgment, hell, and conversion receded from preaching.

Now, no dogma was denied, for to do so would have created an internal crisis. But the hierarchy of truths was reordered. What the Church stopped emphasizing, the faithful largely stopped believing. One need not formally deny or modify dogma or doctrine to render it effectively removed or modified through example and practice.

5. Liturgy: The Engine of Change

Nothing shaped post-conciliar Roman Catholicism more than the transformation of the liturgy. The traditional Tridentine Rite (often simply referred to as “the Latin Mass”) emphasized sacrifice, was oriented toward God (literally and symbolically), and formed belief through reverence, silence, and continuity. On the other hand, the so-called “reformed” liturgy emphasized comprehensibility, participation, and community expression. While these goals were not necessarily illegitimate, the execution led to the loss of sacred language, an horizontal focus, and a dramatic break from inherited worship.

And indeed there was no need, for the traditional liturgy itself involved participation and community expression, and it was made comprehensible through education and practice. The issue was that this participation, community expression, and comprehensibility was not in line with the modernist ideals that the reformers sought.

Most importantly, because worship forms belief (lex orandi, lex credendi), the liturgical rupture catechized generations into a different understanding of Christianity. That new understanding was less sacrificial, less transcendent, more immanent.

6. Broad Impact

Many things changed as the result of Vatican II. For example, a necessary result was a reduction in doctrinal clarity. Truth was reframed as something approached together rather than possessed and proclaimed. This shift in epistemology arguably converged with Anglican liturgical reforms and mainline Protestant theology, as well as a broader Christian move toward inclusivity over doctrinal clarity. Ironically, the Vatican adopted patterns already weakening other Christian bodies, and those patterns had already proven corrosive. When modernist concepts such as theological subjectivism, relativized truth, and historicism over revelation came to the Vatican, it was like pouring petrol on a bonfire.

7. Vatican II as an Ideological Boundary

Today, Vatican II functions less as an ecumenical council among others and more as a litmus test. To question its fruits is often treated as disobedience, fear of modernity, and rejection of the Spirit. This result is often seen even within the broader Apostolic Church and some Protestant communities. To question Vatican II’s principles, even among non-Roman Catholics, is often to be viewed as being stuck in the past, a nostalgic antiquarian, or focused on the wrong things rather than whatever they define as the common good.

This is why, in the Vatican Church, ancient liturgical forms are highly restricted, pre-conciliar theology and those professing it are viewed with suspicion, and tradition is tolerated only as an aesthetic preference (and then only to a point). Vatican II has become a meta-principle: not simply something to be interpreted, but something that interprets everything else.

8. Why the Vatican Hierarchy Appears “Trapped”

Many Roman Catholic leaders sincerely believe in Vatican II, not merely as a historical council, but as the foundation of the modern Church’s legitimacy. To admit that its implementation failed would feel like admitting pastoral error or even undermining authority, calling decades of governance into question.

Thus, the response to crisis is often “More Vatican II.” It is proclaimed that the council was not flawed, but they merely need “better implementation” or “greater openness.” Such a paradigm cannot be questioned because it defines the system itself.

9. Conclusion: Continuity or Rupture?

From the perspective of the Apostolic, Orthodox, and Catholic Church, and indeed also from a traditional Catholic perspective, the problem is not Vatican II’s texts alone, but the spirit of rupture they enabled. Christianity is not sustained by relevance, adaptation, or dialogue, but by continuity, sacrifice, and fidelity to what has been handed down. This is what the United Roman-Ruthenian Church was given in unbroken succession to maintain. We would sincerely hope our brethren in the Roman Communion would do likewise, for when inheritance gives way to experimentation, institutions may survive, but they lose their soul.

The ongoing debate over Vatican II is therefore not about nostalgia versus progress. It is about whether Christianity understands itself as something received or something reconstructed. That question affects not only the Roman Catholics directly impacted by Vatican II, but all Christians facing modernity’s pressure to change in order to survive. Yet, history suggests the opposite is true.

On Power, Law, and Moral Accountability: Patriarchal Letter of HAH the Roman-Ruthenian Pope

RADISLAV PP. I 

Patriarchal Letter: On Power, Law, and Moral Accountability

In every age, nations are tempted to clothe power in the language of righteousness. When a state claims the right to act beyond natural law, beyond treaty, and beyond the limits it demands others observe, it does not reveal moral clarity but moral disorder. The Christian tradition has never taught that might alone makes right. On the contrary, the greater a nation’s power, the greater its obligation to restraint, justice, and fidelity to law. Power is not self-justifying; it is accountable before history, before humanity, and before God. 

The Church has long taught that law among nations, treaties, and recognized norms exist not as mere constructs to observe when convenient, but as moral instruments intended to restrain violence and preserve order, insofar as they reflect authentic justice and the natural law. When states honor these norms selectively, invoking them when useful and discarding them when obstructive, they corrode the very moral framework they claim to defend. Such behavior erodes trust, destabilizes regions, and invites retaliation under the same logic. Indeed, no nation may declare itself inherently righteous, appealing to a self-defined conception of the good, in order to legitimize whatever actions it chooses. That constitutes arrogance. When a nation proceeds further, denying that other nations may claim the same moral license, such reasoning also becomes hypocrisy. What one power claims for itself today, others will claim tomorrow. 

From a Christian perspective, the use of force beyond one’s borders, including the seizure of persons or the exercise of coercive authority over another nation, must be judged not by slogans, political alignment, or claimed outcomes, but by objective moral principles. The Gospel grants no nation a messianic role. No state, however powerful, is the Kingdom of God. When governments presume moral exemption for themselves while condemning identical actions by rivals, they fall into hypocrisy, which Our Lord condemned with particular severity.

The Church’s tradition of just governance and just war is exacting, not permissive. It requires legitimate authority exercised within moral and legal bounds; a just cause involving actual and grave injustice; right intention ordered to justice rather than dominance; true necessity, exercised as a last resort; proportionality in means and consequences; and respect for the innocent and for sovereignty rightly understood. These criteria are not rhetorical ideals but binding moral conditions. They are cumulative, not optional.

Claims of a generalized, speculative, or remote “threat” do not meet the Christian standard for just cause. Likewise, criminal activity in and of itself does not rise to the level of a cause for military action. Furthermore, fear, strategic advantage, or anticipated future risk, however sincerely asserted, do not justify coercive force in Orthodox and Catholic moral theology. While preemptive action can be legitimate under just war doctrine, preemptive action based simply on conjecture belongs to modern security doctrine, not to the Christian tradition. Likewise, merely preventative action is never doctrinally permissible. Where necessity is absent, force becomes expedience; where expedience governs, justice under God is already compromised.

Equally grave is the corruption of moral judgment that arises from double standards. When a state excuses for itself what it condemns in others, it implicitly declares that law binds only the weak, while practical legitimacy devolves into a question of "who can" rather than "who may." Such reasoning does not merely weaken credibility; it dissolves the very concept of justice. In Christian moral reasoning, hypocrisy is not a secondary flaw but a decisive one, because it replaces principled judgment with tribal loyalty and power with permission.

The Church, therefore, must speak clearly even when her voice is unwelcome. She is aligned with no empire, bloc, political party, or ideology. She stands with law over lawlessness, with restraint over domination, and with repentance over self-congratulation. The faithful must resist the temptation to excuse immoral actions simply because they are committed by those we favor or fear to criticize. Before God, there is no double standard.

Finally, we must remember that nations, like individuals, will be judged not only by the evils they oppose, but by the means they employ. History is unkind to those who imagine themselves exempt from the rules they impose on others. The Church prays for the conversion of rulers, that humility, justice, and the fear of God may not only dwell in their hearts reflected in their policies. For when law is trampled and power is unchecked, it is always the poor, the voiceless, and the innocent who suffer first.

May we have the courage to name injustice wherever it appears, the wisdom to distinguish authority from domination, and the faith to believe that obedience to God’s law is never weakness, but the only path to true peace.

2025: A Year of Visible Growth and Quiet Service

 

Throughout 2025, the clergy and faithful of the United Roman-Ruthenian Church served communities across cultures, languages, and nations — often quietly, and often far from public view. What follows is a brief selection of developments and programs from the past year, a snapshot of just some of the key events of the Church’s life and work.

2025 at a Glance

• Strengthened global presence across six continents

• Advanced historic institutions into a new phase of public life and service

• Continued the Church’s mission of faith, charity, and cultural stewardship worldwide

Highlights from the Life and Work of the Church in 2025: 

1. We welcomed new church jurisdictions in both historic heartlands and emerging regions, strengthening the Church’s presence and pastoral service across six continents.

2. Broadened the celebration and use of the Church’s distinctive Gallo-Russo-Byzantine liturgy, deepening a shared spiritual language that unites East and West.

3. Expanded the Church’s diplomatic and institutional relationships, strengthening dialogue with religious, cultural, and civic partners worldwide.

4. Witnessed the Roman-Ruthenian Papacy come fully into visible and public life, marking a mature stage in the Church’s long-standing historic development.

5. Took part in international initiatives and events dedicated to history, charity, and humanitarian service, representing the Church’s values in diverse global settings.

6. Through the work of its clergy and faithful, the Church provided practical care, offering shelter, food, healthcare, education, and spiritual guidance to people in need.

7. Established a new curial office dedicated to the spiritual guidance and pastoral care of pilgrims to the Holy Land.

8. Pontifical Georgian College, founded by St. Edwin Caudill as St. George's School of Theology, entered the final phase of its transition to a modern competency-based seminary model, strengthening clergy formation for the future.

9. Established a historic concordat between the Russian and Yugoslavian branches of the Order of St. John, uniting them under a shared Royal Protector and reaffirming the Order’s mission of service to the poor and the sick.

Roman-Ruthenian Pope Urges Christians to Put Christ First in Christmas Allocution

H.A.H. Radislav I placed Gesu Bambino
at the beginning of the Nativity liturgy.

By Staff

ROME-RUTHENIAN 25 December 2025 (NRom)

Full video available below.

In a wide-ranging Christmas allocution delivered on the Latin Feast of the Nativity, His Apostolic Highness the Most Holy Prince-Bishop Radislav I, Roman-Ruthenian Pope, head of the United Roman-Ruthenian Church, called on Christians to place allegiance to Christ above all other loyalties, warning that compassion and mercy are being eroded in contemporary public life.

Speaking at the opening of the Church’s extended Nativity cycle, which spans nearly a month and includes Western and Eastern Christian feasts, Radislav I framed Christmas not as a cultural tradition but as what he described as “the most radical event in human history.”

“The Nativity of Christ is not a sentimental story, nor a seasonal ornament,” the Pope declared. “God does not save the world by force, nor by decree, nor by the wisdom of rulers, but by humility, obedience, and love.”

A Christmas That Challenges Power

Drawing on the Gospel imagery of the manger, Radislav emphasized that Christ’s birth took place not in security or comfort, but “upon the margins,” in poverty and danger. He contrasted the vulnerability of the infant Christ with the fear of King Herod, noting that merely worldly power reacts with anxiety rather than reverence to divine humility.

This theme became the foundation for a pointed reflection on modern culture, with concern about what the Pontiff described as growing demands for total loyalty from nations, parties, and ideologies. “Our first allegiance is not to any party, platform, or flag, but to Christ,” he said. While affirming that Christians have responsibilities as citizens and neighbors, he warned that when the Church allows itself to be claimed by partisan causes, it “ceases to be a light and becomes merely another voice in the noise.” 

“The Child in the manger belongs to no faction,” he added.

Compassion as a Measure of Justice

A significant portion of the allocution focused on compassion, particularly toward those on society’s margins. Radislav argued that a loss of mercy leads inevitably to moral and civic decay.

“A society that loses compassion loses its soul,” he said, adding that governments that forget mercy also forget justice. He cited Christ’s words from the Gospel of Matthew: “I was a stranger, and you welcomed Me,” describing them not as poetic language but as a form of judgment.

While acknowledging the reality of evil and the necessity of order, the Pope cautioned against fear-driven responses to social challenges, especially those involving the poor, the sick, foreigners, and the displaced.  “Christ teaches us to love,” he said, “while the world teaches us to shout.”

The Role of the Church

Radislav also outlined what he sees as the Church’s mission in an age marked by anger, division, and ideological rigidity. Rejecting the idea that the Church should mirror prevailing cultural trends, he described its role as fundamentally therapeutic and transformative. “The Church does not exist to mirror the world, but to heal it,” he said. “She does not adopt the spirit of the age, but baptizes men and women into Christ.”

He urged Christians to respond to hostility with mercy, confusion with calm, and division with steadfast commitment to truth, arguing that holiness, rather than volume or influence, is the true means by which the world is changed. “We do not save the world by shouting louder than others,” he said. “We save it by becoming holy.”

A Call to Renewal

Concluding the allocution, Radislav invited the faithful around the world to see the Nativity not only as a historical event but as a present reality that demands personal transformation. He called on Christians to reject what he termed “the false gods of power, wealth, and pride” and to recommit themselves to what he described as “the hard, joyful work of being Christians.”

The Pope ended with a message of hope, invoking the Gospel of John: “The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.”

With a final blessing, he extended prayers for families and communities across the world, wishing them “a holy and blessed Nativity” as the Church enters its season of Christmas celebrations.

A Tradition of Honor: The Pontifical Walsingham Guard in Italy’s 4 November Commemorations

H.E. Major General Count
Giancarlo Martini, Senior
officer of the PWG in Italy

By A. DiNardo

ROMA 4 December 2025 (NRom)

Every year on 4 November, Italy pauses in collective remembrance. The Day of National Unity and the Armed Forces, born from the armistice that ended Italy’s involvement in the First World War in 1918, remains one of the country’s most solemn civic observances. It is a day when silence returns to the fields once torn by artillery, and when the nation honors the sacrifice of millions. Among the ceremonial presences who help give form to this annual act of memory is the Pontifical Walsingham Guard, the ceremonial guard unit of the United Roman-Ruthenian Church, represented in Italy by His Excellency Major General Count Giancarlo Martini as senior officer.

An Annual Commitment to Memory

For years, the Pontifical Walsingham Guard has taken part in the national commemorations, standing alongside military units, veterans’ associations, civic leaders, and clergy. Their participation honors not only the fallen, but also the deep spiritual and cultural bonds that link memory, identity, and sacrifice. Count Martini and the Italian members of the Guard have become a familiar and respected component of the day’s rites, an expression of solemnity rooted in faith, discipline, and historical consciousness.

In cities and towns across Italy, and especially at the national ceremonies in Rome and Vittorio Veneto, the Guard joins the long line of those who safeguard remembrance. Their role underscores an essential truth: that memory, to survive, must be renewed through ceremonial acts, visible symbols, and intergenerational witness.

The Weight of History: From the “Ragazzi del ’99” to the Silence of the Armistice

The 4 November commemoration marks the final cessation of hostilities between Italy and the Austro-Hungarian Empire. On the night between 3 and 4 November 1918, the guns fell silent. Pope Benedict XV had called the Great War an “inutile strage” (a useless slaughter) and indeed the cost was almost incomprehensible: 17 million dead worldwide, including over 1.2 million Italians.

Among the most tragic figures were the “Ragazzi del ’99”, boys not yet eighteen, conscripted before reaching the age of majority. More than two million young Italians were mobilized, many of them perishing on the Grappa, the Piave, and the Montello. Today their memory endures in the annual ceremonies, where the Guard participates when possible, representing continuity with the ideals of service and fidelity that transcended the horror of trench warfare.

Vittorio Veneto: A City of Victory and Mourning

The final Italian victory at Vittorio Veneto, achieved between 24 October and 3 November 1918, cemented the significance of 4 November in national consciousness. With 57 Italian divisions supported by allied British, French, Czechoslovak, and American units facing 73 Austro-Hungarian divisions, the battle sealed the fate of the collapsing empire. The city, now decorated with the Gold Medal of Military Valor and the Golden Cross of Army Merit, remains a shrine of remembrance for 23,000 Italian and foreign soldiers who now rest in eternal peace on the slopes of Monte Grappa, the “mountain-cemetery.”

The 2025 National Ceremony

The 2025 national ceremony, held as always on 4 November at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier at Rome’s Altare della Patria, will once again gathered Italy’s highest authorities: President Sergio Mattarella, Minister of Defense Guido Crosetto, military leaders, and delegations from across the Republic. As in previous years, the Pontifical Walsingham Guard, under its senior officer in Italy, Major General Count Martini, took part, continuing its tradition of dignified representation.

A Century Since the “Battle for Grain”

The year 2025 also marks the centenary of the “Battaglia del Grano,” launched on 14 June 1925. It was a massive national campaign to achieve cereal self-sufficiency in a post-war Italy devastated by hunger and financial crisis. The initiative, driven by agronomists like Nazareno Strampelli, transformed Italian agriculture through new seed varieties, land reclamation projects, and unprecedented mobilization of institutions, schools, clergy, and rural communities.

Though not without contradictions, unsuitable lands were converted at great economic cost, and traditional crops were sometimes sacrificed, the campaign left a lasting legacy in the modernization of Italy’s rural landscape. As the nation reflects on this centenary, the Guard’s participation in commemorations again underscores how memory is interwoven with national renewal and identity.

Maria Bergamas and the Eternal Flame

No 4 November commemoration is complete without recalling the Unknown Soldier, chosen in 1921 by Maria Bergamas, a mother from Trieste whose son Antonio died in the war. Her choice, placing a white chrysanthemum and her black veil on one of eleven anonymous coffins in the Basilica of Aquileia (Metropolitan seat of the Prince-Bishop of Rome-Ruthenia), became a gesture of immeasurable symbolic power.

On 4 November 1921, the chosen remains were brought to Rome, where they now lie beneath the perpetual flame of the Altare della Patria. The Unknown Soldier is “the Hero of every Hero,” representing all who died without a name, a rank, or a grave of their own.

When the Pontifical Walsingham Guard participated during the annual homage to the Unknown Soldier, it embodies a bridge between faith, national memory, and the moral imperative never to forget the cost of freedom.

A Guard of Faith and Remembrance

The Pontifical Walsingham Guard continues to affirm that remembrance is not simply an honor or obligation, it is a mission of service to others. The participation of the Guard's Italian-based membership is an act of devotion to the fallen, a tribute to Italy’s enduring unity, and a reminder to younger generations that peace is built upon the sacrifices of the past.

As 4 November returns each year, Italy renews its pledge to remember. And standing among the guardians of that memory, at the Altare della Patria, on the slopes of Monte Grappa, and in towns across the peninsula, the Pontifical Walsingham Guard remains a steadfast witness to honor, duty, and the eternal flame of national gratitude.

Looking Back: The 2010 Trinity School for Ministry Pathway Initiative of Pontifical Georgian College (formerly St. George Theological Seminary and St. George's School of Theology)

Photograph of stained glass window
bearing the seal of St. George
Theological Seminary, formerly
St. George's School of Theology.
 Photograph Copyright URRC 2018. 

By Staff

ROME-RUTHENIA 1 December 2025 (NRom)

In 2010, during a period of renewed growth and academic restructuring, the then-Archdiocese of the Southwest (which later became the Diocese of Rome-Ruthenia) explored an external academic pathway for clergy formation through Trinity School for Ministry in Ambridge, Pennsylvania (now known as Trinity Anglican Seminary). Trinity, an internationally respected Anglican seminary known for its rigorous academics, was firmly evangelical in identity, yet included a strong and active Anglo-Catholic presence. At the time, it represented one of the few accredited North American seminaries willing to engage constructively with smaller traditional jurisdictions.

The pathway was opened through formal correspondence between the Metropolitan of the Southwest (now H.A.H. Pope Radislav I of Rome-Ruthenia) and the Very Rev. Dr. Justyn Terry, then Dean and President of Trinity. In his reply, Dean Terry warmly welcomed seminarians from the Archdiocese's seminary, St. George Theological Seminary (now Pontifical Georgian College). He also affirmed the academic compatibility of the program and noted that Trinity could provide “appropriate field-education placement for these students” in explicitly Anglo-Catholic settings.

While no seminarians ultimately enrolled through this avenue, the arrangement and correspondence reflected the Archdiocese’s ongoing commitment to high academic standards in clergy formation and demonstrated recognition and support by respected external institutions for its evolving clergy-training program.

In retrospect, the 2010 Trinity initiative stands as a small but meaningful chapter in the ongoing development of the Pontifical Georgian College and its predecessors. It also highlights an important historical point: although the Diocese of the Southwest originated within the broader “continuing Anglican” milieu, it had ceased meaningful participation in that movement well before its full canonical restoration in 2008. Under the path established by St. Edwin, the Archdiocese had already moved decisively toward its present Orthodox-Catholic identity long before the later emergence of the United Roman-Ruthenian Church.

Today, the Seminary’s lineage continues through uninterrupted ecclesiastical authority, lived tradition, and spiritual mission entrusted to it. The Trinity correspondence remains a reminder that, even in transitional moments, the Church consistently sought excellence, legitimacy, and faithful formation for her clergy—a commitment that continues unchanged.

United Roman-Ruthenian Church Announces Historic Concordat Between the Russian and Yugoslavian Branches of the Order of St. John

H.R.H. Sire Rubén, Royal Protector
of the Order of St. John

By A. DiNardo 

ROME-RUTHENIA 17 November 2025 (NRom)

The United Roman-Ruthenian Church today formally announced the signing of a historic concordat between the Russian branch of the Hospitaller Order of St. John, led by His Highness Don Basilio Calì, Prince of Rhodes, Grand Master, and the Russian-Yugoslavian branch of the Order of St. John, maintained under the ecclesiastical protection of the Church. 

The concordat was solemnly signed earlier this month by His Apostolic Highness Prince-Bishop Radislav I, Roman-Ruthenian Pope, Sovereign of the Russian-Yugoslavian Order of St. John, and His Royal Highness Sire Rubén (Esteve IV), Chief of the Merovingian Dynasty, Royal Protector of both historic branches of the Order.

Church officials described the agreement as “a reaffirmation of historical legitimacy, fraternity, and continuity” within the ancient chivalric tradition rooted in the Crusader Knights of St. John.

H.I.M. Tsar Pavel I of Russia as Grand Master of the Knights of Malta

A Renewal of a Shared Heritage

The cooperation between the Russian obedience and the Yugoslavian obedience (also known as Russian-Yugoslavian) represents a reunion of two lines that share a common origin in the upheavals following the fall of Malta in 1798. When Tsar Pavel I gave sanctuary to the displaced Knights of St. John, he established the order under his sovereign authority, becoming the first Orthodox Grand Master in the Order’s history. That tradition endured within the Romanov dynasty (the order later being known as a Grand Priory in Russia) until the early twentieth century, when Tsar Nikolai II placed the care and continuity of the Order under the Royal House of Yugoslavia. King Peter II later renewed the statutes of the Yugoslavian continuation in 1964 while in exile.

H.M. King Peter II of Yugoslavia

In the complex history of the Russian–Yugoslavian succession of the Order of St. John, the United Roman-Ruthenian Church ultimately became the principal steward of the line descending from King Peter II. His Apostolic Highness Pope Radislav I had long held the rank of Bailiff Grand Cross under the authority derived from King Peter II’s statutes, and had also been admitted to a Russian successor branch recognized by Prince Trubetskoi, who served as Lieutenant Grand Master in the time of Peter II. While various modern bodies claim heritage from the original Knights Hospitaller of St. John, including from the Russian and Yugoslavian traditions, what can be clearly affirmed is that the branch maintained within the United Roman-Ruthenian Church is the only continuation that unites both the Peter II succession and the Trubetskoi connection under a single, traceable line of authority supported by the ecclesiastical endorsement of the Orthodox Old Catholic Roman-Ruthenian Pope. In this sense, the Church’s custodianship represents not exclusivity, but the responsible preservation of the specific lineage entrusted to it.

H.R.H. Sire Rubén, Royal Protector, at the Magistral
Palace of the Russian obedience of the
Order of St. John located in Malta

The related Russian branch, under Grand Master Don Basilio Calì, preserves the active charitable and chivalric dimension of the legacy. The new concordat formally links the two living continuations of the same historic institution, recognizing shared roots, mutual legitimacy, and a commitment to safeguarding the Order’s heritage for future generations.

Also, the United Roman-Ruthenian Church recognizes that the centuries-long history of the Knights of St. John has resulted in several successor bodies around the world, each preserving aspects of the Order’s charitable and chivalric mission. While the Church maintains its own historic Russian-Yugoslavian continuation, it affirms respect and Christian fraternity toward all legitimate traditions descending from the ancient Hospitaller heritage. The concordat announced today is thus not exclusive in spirit, but stands as a testament to unity, mutual goodwill, and shared devotion to the timeless ideals of the Order.

First page of the concordat document

Details of the Concordat

The concordat establishes mutual recognition between the two branches as continuations of the historic Russian and Yugoslavian tradition of the Order of St. John. It also appoints H.R.H. Sire Rubén (Esteve IV) as the Royal Protector of both obediences.

Church officials emphasized that, while the Russian-Yugoslavian branch remains primarily custodial and honorary in nature, the concordat allows deeper cooperation with the active charitable works of the Russian branch.

Significance of the Agreement

The concordat marks one of the most meaningful developments in the Order’s modern history. For the first time in decades, the two obediences that stem from the same Russian and Yugoslavian inheritance have formally affirmed a shared mission of Fides, Caritas, et Servitium (Faith, Charity, and Service).

Its significance includes a restoration of unity in a divided legacy. The Order’s survival through political turmoil—from Napoleon’s conquest to the Bolshevik Revolution and the fall of Yugoslavia—left multiple lines of succession. The new agreement strengthens unity among the legitimate continuations of the Russian tradition. And, the concordat ensures that this distinctive heritage is preserved both spiritually (through the Church) and actively (through the Russian branch).

With both branches under the Royal Merovingian Dynasty’s patronage and, for the Yugoslavian branch, the sovereignty of the Roman-Ruthenian Pope, the Order gains renewed stability. 

Statements from Church Leadership

In remarks following the signing, Pope Radislav I stated that the agreement “honors the memory of Tsar Pavel I and King Peter II, and solidifies the shared vocation of the Order across its historic branches.” He noted that the Church remains committed to preserving the Order’s legacy with dignity and fidelity.

H.R.H. Sire Rubén, Royal Protector of both branches, praised the concordat and stated that for him “it will be a great honor to accept this responsibility.”

An Enduring Mission

The Order of St. John, from its origins in the medieval Hospitaller tradition to its Russian and Yugoslavian chapters, has remained steadfast in its dedication to Christian charity and chivalric service. The 2025 concordat reaffirms that legacy, ensuring that both the active and custodial aspects of the Order continue to work in harmony, preserving a tradition that has endured for nearly a thousand years.