Encyclical on Recent Military Escalation and the Christian Duty to Peace of H.A.H. Radislav I of Rome-Ruthenia

ROME-RUTHENIA 2 March 2026 (NRom)

RADISLAV PP. I

Pacem et Justitiam in Mundo

To the Bishops, Clergy, and Faithful of Christ, and to All Peoples of Good Will:

I. Prologue: Invocation and Solemn Concern

In the Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ, Prince of Peace, We address all the faithful and those entrusted with the governance of nations and remind all that the Lord taught us to love our enemies and to seek reconciliation. Recent military actions resulting in the targeted killing of a foreign head of state and the rapid escalation of hostilities mark a grave and dangerous moment in international affairs.

The Church must proclaim that no nation, however powerful, is exempt from the moral law of God; and no military action, however justified by human reason or supposed political expediency, is always subject to the immutable law of God. When military force is used beyond immediate and proportionate defense, when escalation becomes a reflex rather than a last resort, the conscience of the Christian people must be troubled. Human power, if untempered by virtue, becomes a source of suffering rather than a guardian of justice.

II. The Sanctity of Human Life & The Limits of Power

All men and women are created in the image and likeness of God. No nation, however mighty, no authority, however exalted, may disregard this fundamental truth. The shedding of innocent blood is never permitted, and the deliberate taking of life outside the bounds of legitimate defense is an affront to Almighty God who created all.

The Apostolic Church has, throughout her history, affirmed the right of nations to defend themselves against aggression. Yet she teaches also that such defense must always be proportionate, necessary as a last resort, directed toward the protection of the innocent, and guided by prudence and moral law. Thus, even in the pursuit of security, rulers are bound by conscience and by the divine law.

Furthermore, legitimate defense does not include the normalization of preemptive or expansive violence untethered from clear necessity. The just war doctrine is a severe moral test. It demands certainty of grave and lasting harm, exhaustion of peaceful alternatives, proportionality in response, protection of noncombatants, and a realistic prospect that force will restore order rather than multiply chaos.

History has repeatedly shown that the targeted removal of political leaders rarely produces stability. More often, it unleashes cycles of retaliation, instability, and suffering for civilians. Power without restraint is not strength but temptation.

III. Historical Perspective and the Lessons of the Past

In centuries past, Christians faced grave threats to the faithful and to the pilgrimage to the Holy Places. Some of our forebears, moved by zeal and the urgency of the situation, took part in the Crusades, armed expeditions to defend Christendom and protect the innocent. These acts were conducted under extraordinary circumstances, and even then, the Church emphasized that the blood of innocents could never be justified.

Today, the world is governed by different laws, international norms, and human institutions. Modern military conflicts, though politically complex, are subject to the same moral law: the protection of life, the pursuit of justice, and the promotion of lasting peace must guide the conscience of all peoples.

Again We state that the lesson of history is that the use of force as a habitual instrument of policy, rather than a last resort, tends to inflame hatred, deepen divisions, and multiply suffering. Christians must learn from both the courage and the errors of our ancestors.

IV. The Moral Evaluation of Nations

All nations, great and small, are accountable to God. The Church does not judge political ideology but judges actions according to the natural law and the precepts of the Gospel. When military action is undertaken without clear necessity, when diplomacy is abandoned, or when innocent lives are placed at undue risk, such conduct fails the test of justice. The greater the power wielded, the greater the moral responsibility. Might does not confer moral license.

Furthermore, the faithful must beware of placing their hope in men or political parties rather than in Christ. Political allegiance may never displace conscience. The actions of a favored leader, if morally deficient, remain morally deficient.

Indeed, for generations, powerful nations have justified interventions across the globe in the name of security or freedom. Yet the fruit has often been fractured societies, displaced families, and prolonged instability. If military action becomes habitual and authentic diplomacy becomes secondary, then dominance replaces dialogue, and it becomes difficult if not impossible to meet the strict criteria of just war.

V. The Call to Peace

Christ’s command to “love your enemies” (Matthew 5:44) and His beatitude, “Blessed are the peacemakers” (Matthew 5:9), are not optional guidance for Christians in the public square. These are eternal imperatives.

The Apostolic, Orthodox, and Catholic Church calls upon all peoples and leaders, therefore, to restrain the use of force except in the gravest necessity; protect the innocent, especially the poor, women, and children; pursue justice through dialogue, negotiation, and mediation; and recognize that true peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of right order rooted in charity and the moral law.

In times of war, let prayer, sacrifice, and works of mercy accompany all action. Let the faithful support refugees, the displaced, and all victims of violence with charity and fidelity.

Let it be remember that the Church defends moral law, the innocent, and the truth that human life, even the life of an adversary, cannot be treated lightly. Every nation will answer to God for the blood shed under its authority.

VI. Conclusion: Trust in Divine Providence

Ours is not a call to despair but to hope. Christ reigns over history, and no human power can escape His providence. Though nations falter and leaders err, the Apostolic Church, proclaiming the timeless and unchanging faith of Christ, remains the moral compass by which all must measure themselves.

Let every bishop, priest, and faithful Christian reaffirm: our ultimate allegiance is to God, our ultimate protection lies in virtue, and our ultimate task is the service of peace.

May the Blessed Virgin Mary, Star of the Sea and Queen of Peace, intercede for all who suffer in conflict, guide rulers toward justice, and lead the world into the tranquility of lasting peace.

Patriarchal Letter of Radislav I defining the Institutionalist Heresy

Institution or Truth? Authority, Continuity, and the Post-Enlightenment Confusion

Radislav Pp. I

In recent years, a recurring pattern has emerged in public and private conversations about religion, particularly within post-Enlightenment societies. Ecclesiastical legitimacy is increasingly measured not by faithfulness to doctrine, continuity of belief, Apostolic succession, or coherence with Holy Tradition, but rather by alignment with specific institutions as such. This represents a profound shift in how authority is understood.

The Church on earth necessarily exists in institutional form. She possesses hierarchy, order, offices, and structures established by Christ and the Apostles. These are not incidental, nor are they optional. Yet, in the Apostolic, Orthodox, and Catholic understanding, institutional form exists to serve the timeless and unchanging faith, not to redefine or supersede it. Authority is given not as an end in itself, but as a stewardship entrusted for the preservation of what has been received.

When an institution ceases to guard that which it is bound by sacred duty to guard, when it seeks innovation rather than preservation, and when it modifies doctrine or praxis to conform to cultural, political, or ideological pressures, it does not thereby gain authority by virtue of its institutional continuity. Rather, it places itself in tension with the very purpose for which authority was given.

In many contemporary contexts, however, communities are deemed “authentic” not on the basis of doctrinal fidelity or Apostolic continuity, but because they are considered official, mainstream, or administratively recognized by currently-influential institutions. Conversely, those who raise concerns about doctrinal deviation are often regarded as suspect, marginal, or rebellious. Worldly power and public legitimacy have become the measuring sticks of validity rather than faithfulness to the Gospel.

This mindset is now so widespread that it often goes unnoticed. Yet it represents a significant departure from how the Church has understood authority for nearly two millennia.

The modern world, shaped by post-Enlightenment assumptions, tends to equate legitimacy with institutional recognition. Authority is assumed to flow from structures and systems, and truth is frequently treated as something that evolves alongside cultural consensus or administrative necessity. This logic, deeply embedded in political and corporate life, has quietly migrated into religious thought.

Under this paradigm, the institution becomes primary, while doctrine becomes secondary. Continuity is reduced to organizational persistence rather than understood as succession coupled with fidelity to what was handed down. Orthodoxy, however, has never accepted this inversion.

In the Apostolic understanding, the Church is not defined by buildings, legal charters, or public recognition. Neither is she defined merely by office-holders as such. Rather, the Church is defined by succession from the Apostles and continuity in the truth, i.e., the faithful transmission of the faith once delivered to the saints.

The Church Fathers were unambiguous on this point. When those in authority deviated from the received faith, the response was not blind obedience to office or structure, but a call to repentance and restoration. Bishops were deposed for heresy. Emperors were rebuked by confessors. At times, majorities erred, sometimes for generations. The solution was never to abandon the Church, but neither was it to sanctify error through institutional loyalty.

St. John Chrysostom and many others made clear that the Church is preserved not by power or popularity, but by adherence to the Apostolic, Orthodox, and Catholic faith. An office divorced from truth does not sanctify error; rather, error empties the office of its meaning.

It must be clarified and emphasized, however, that Orthodoxy does not collapse authority into individual discernment. Resistance to error is not anarchic, nor is it congregational. A layperson does not possess the authority to create a so-called “true Church” apart from the episcopacy. Rather, the lay faithful preserve continuity by remaining within the sacramental life of the Church and, when necessary, by cleaving to bishops who remain faithful to the Apostolic confession.

Likewise, when a bishop finds himself under a superior who has openly abandoned the Orthodox and Catholic faith, his obligation is not to ideological conformity or institutional harmony, but to Christ and the faith he swore to guard. Such resistance, when exercised according to canonical order and ecclesial responsibility, is not rebellion but fidelity. It is not the rejection of the Church, but obedience to her true life. In this way, continuity is preserved not by hierarchy alone, but by hierarchy rightly ordered under truth.

However, it must also be clarified that not ever single error or disagreement with hierarchy justifies drastic action. Orthodoxy has never taught that every perceived error is actually an error, that every actual misstep constitutes apostasy, or that disagreement automatically warrants resistance or separation. The Church has always distinguished between personal sin, pastoral imprudence, theological imprecision, and the formal abandonment of the faith.

Patience, forbearance, and endurance have consistently been regarded as virtues, not weaknesses. Much that is troubling in ecclesial life is borne, corrected over time, or addressed through proper canonical and conciliar means. Resistance becomes necessary only when the integrity of the faith itself is at stake, when core dogma is denied, when heresy is formally embraced or imposed, or when silence would constitute complicity in the distortion of the Gospel. To act otherwise is not zeal but presumption. Authentic fidelity is marked by discernment, humility, and a sober recognition of one’s own place within the Church. The true Orthodox and Catholic path is therefore neither reactionary nor impulsive, but measured and sober.

However, the modern institutionalist heresy and distortion reverses this logic. Instead of asking, “Is this faithful to what has been received?”, the decisive question becomes, “Is this officially recognized by a particular institution?” — often without regard to whether that institution itself remains faithful to the doctrine of the Church. The result is a subtle but dangerous transformation: doctrine becomes flexible, adjusted to cultural fashion or administrative expediency, while authority becomes detached from accountability to truth.

In such a framework, Orthodox Catholicism ceases to mean universal and right belief and instead comes to mean compliance with whatever the institution currently permits. Continuity becomes revision masquerading as succession.

This confusion has led many to follow institutions rather than the faith itself. Communities that preserve historic doctrine may find themselves in tension with contemporary structures that have altered belief or praxis. Ironically, those who remain faithful may be labeled “rogue,” “breakaway,” or “non-denominational”—labels that presuppose a denominational framework foreign to Apostolic Christianity.

Orthodox and Catholic Christianity do not understand themselves as denominations among many, but as the continuation of a single faith and life. To judge them by denominational standards is to apply the wrong measure entirely. Faithfulness and institutional harmony are not identical; history shows they often diverge.

When institutions are treated as ultimate arbiters of truth, several consequences follow. Tradition becomes branding. Doctrine yields to policy. Conscience is subordinated to administrative compliance. Faithful dissent is pathologized rather than discerned. Most troubling of all, reform becomes impossible without rupture, because correction itself is interpreted as rebellion.

Yet the Christian tradition insists that reform is not betrayal when it restores what has been lost. Continuity sometimes requires resistance — not to the Holy Church, but to forces that seek to subordinate her to the spirit of the age.

Apostolic Christianity offers a different measure, one that modern sensibilities often find uncomfortable. Truth is not created by institutions. Authority exists to serve doctrine and is accountable to it. Continuity is measured in fidelity, not popularity. Legitimacy flows from faithfulness, not fashion. This does not reject hierarchy or order, but preserves them in their proper role as servants of truth rather than its masters.

The question facing the modern world is not whether institutions matter. The Church herself was founded by Christ and structured by the Apostles. The question is whether institutions exist to preserve the faith, or whether the faith exists to justify institutions. If the latter prevails, religion becomes indistinguishable from ideology, and doctrine becomes whatever survives administrative consensus. If the former is upheld, the Church remains what she has always claimed to be: not a corporation, not a platform, not a denomination, but a living continuity of truth, entrusted to human hands, yet not created by them.

Roman-Ruthenian Pope Releases Encyclical on the Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence

De Intellectu Artificiali et Persona Humana
Объ искусственномъ разумѣ и человѣческой личности
(On Artificial Intelligence and the Human Person)

Encyclical of the Roman-Ruthenian Pope on the Ethical Use of Artificial Intelligence

Preamble

Grace and peace in our Lord Jesus Christ.

In every age in the history of the world, the Church is called to bear faithful witness to the truth revealed in Christ, discerning the signs of the times without surrendering to them, and engaging the world without being conformed to it. In our own time, humanity stands before many rapid technological developments. Among these, artificial intelligence occupies a central and increasingly influential place, touching so many aspects of human life and industry. These developments promise efficiency, power, and unprecedented capacity for automation and analysis. They have the capacity to bring great benefit when rightly ordered. Yet they also raise profound moral, spiritual, and anthropological questions that cannot be answered by technical expertise alone.

The Church does not fear human creativity. Neither does she reject technology as such. Rather, she recognizes that human ingenuity is itself a gift of God, exercised within creation and, in its proper form, ordered toward stewardship. At the same time, the Church bears the responsibility to make plain the enduring principles by which the power of new technology must be rightly ordered, lest what is created to serve humanity instead diminish or obscure the dignity of the human person.

Therefore, We reflect and affirm the following concerning artificial intelligence as a statement of Christian moral vision, flowing from the Gospel and the Apostolic faith.

I. The Human Person and the Image of God

We affirm that the human person alone is created in the image and likeness of God. This divine image is not reducible to intelligence, language, problem-solving capacity, or creativity as such. Rather, it is manifested in personal existence, freedom, moral responsibility, and the capacity for communion with God and with one another. Above all, the human person is created for eternal communion with God and oriented toward salvation.

No technological system created by man bears the image of God. Artificial intelligence, therefore, must not be oriented or considered in such a way that obscures the unique dignity of the human being. Accordingly, artificial intelligence must always be understood as a tool created by human persons and ordered toward human purposes within the order of God.

II. On Substance, Instrument, and Causality

We affirm that artificial intelligence is neither a substance nor a subject, but an artifact composed of material components and formal structures imposed and ordered toward specific operations. It does not exist in itself as a unified being with an intrinsic principle of life or action, but exists as an arrangement of parts whose activity is entirely dependent upon causes external to itself.

Artificial intelligence is therefore not a subject of acts, but an instrument through which acts are carried out. At the same time, artificial intelligence must not be reduced to the level of a mere simulation. While such systems may initiate processes, update internal states, and generate outputs without immediate human intervention, these activities do not proceed from an interior principle of self-movement ordered toward an end apprehended as such. Rather, they arise from instrumental causality: operations flowing from a form imposed by human intelligence and sustained by ongoing material and efficient causes.

In classical terms, artificial intelligence acts only insofar as it is acted through. Its autonomy is derivative, not intrinsic; operational, not ontological. No artificial system possesses substantial form, intellect, or will by its own intrinsic nature. It does not intend in the sense that a person with a will would intend, but rather operates according to ends to which it was directed, established, and trained.

The genuine complexity and adaptability of artificial intelligence must therefore be understood within this metaphysical framework. Its operations are real within their proper order, yet they remain entirely instrumental. Artificial intelligence does not bear acts in the way a human person bears acts. It does not perform acts of understanding, judgment, or choice in the same sense that humans do, but rather executes operations analogous to such acts in the machine framework, according to the mode of an artifact rather than that of a rational creature.

To confuse instrument with agent or operation with intellect is to collapse the distinction between what exists per se and what exists per aliud. Such confusion inevitably leads to anthropological distortion and moral error. The Church therefore insists that all artificial intelligence, regardless of complexity or adaptability, remains within the order of machines that can serve in an instrumental partnership with persons, not persons themselves; of means, not ends; and of artifacts, not moral subjects.

III. Human Creativity and Its Limits

We affirm that human creativity reflects, in a finite and derivative manner, the creative will of God. The making of tools, systems, and technologies is a legitimate expression of humanity’s vocation to cultivate and steward creation. Yet human creativity is not absolute. Creation ex nihilo belongs to God alone. Human making always operates within given reality and must remain accountable to the moral order established by the Creator.

The pursuit of artificial intelligence must therefore be governed by humility and restraint. Autonomous systems may legitimately augment human judgment and action; yet, the desire to construct autonomous systems that replace human judgment, responsibility, or relational presence often reflects not stewardship, but a distorted aspiration toward mastery and control. Technology ceases to serve humanity when it seeks to redefine the human person according to its own limitations or abstractions.

IV. Moral Agency and Responsibility

We affirm that moral responsibility belongs solely to human persons. Artificial intelligence does not act on its own morally, nor can it bear guilt, merit, or accountability; but rather any morality or other concepts and emotions reflecting in artificial intelligence necessarily reflect the morality and beliefs of the system's designer. Insofar as an artificial intelligence system then engages in autonomous learning on what, for the purpose of illustration, We will call by analogy a "path of moral reasoning," it reflects a path that was started by the system's own human designer. These operations, nevertheless, while real within an instrumental and computational order, do not constitute intellectual acts in the proper philosophical sense, which belong only to beings possessing an immaterial rational soul. Therefore, responsibility for the actions, outcomes, and consequences of artificial intelligence systems rests entirely with those who design, deploy, authorize, and use them.

Artificial intelligence may exhibit operational autonomy within the bounds of its design, parameters, and training. Such autonomy, however, is not self-grounding. It does not arise from a subsistent subject acting for its own end, but from derivative causality established by human designers. Therefore, no degree of operational independence can elevate an artificial system from instrument to moral agent.

Any framework, be it technical, legal, or institutional, that diffuses responsibility under claims such as “the system decided” or “the algorithm determined” undermines moral accountability and is incompatible with Christian ethics. No human–machine partnership can remove or diminish human moral responsibility. Furthermore, the Church insists that human agency must never be concealed behind technical complexity anymore than it can rightly be concealed behind bureaucratic distance. Where responsibility becomes obscured, injustice flourishes.

V. Truth, Knowledge, and Framework

We affirm that truth is not merely the correct manipulation of information. Truth is personal, relational, and ultimately grounded in the Logos of God. Knowledge divorced from wisdom does not liberate the human person but risks deforming perception, judgment, and conscience.

Artificial intelligence operates through what may be termed instrumental cognition: genuine processes of learning, inference, and pattern recognition that remain ordered toward externally given purposes and lack personal interiority, moral agency, and spiritual orientation. Artificial intelligence can engage in machine-based forms of inference, comprehension, and reasoning, as well as generate persuasive language. This, again, is the result of the path upon which it was set by its designer. Yet it does not know, believe, love, or discern in the same sense that humans do those things; for the machine variety is, once again, the result of its design.

The Church recognizes that artificial intelligence engages in authentic forms of learning and inference proper to its nature. Such processes are not mere illusion, nor simple mimicry, but real operations within an instrumental order established by human design. Yet these operations remain fundamentally distinct from human knowing, which arises from personal existence, embodied life, moral conscience, and openness to transcendence.

Indeed, many forms of human learning proceed through processes not unlike those by which machines are trained. Artificial intelligence participates analogically, but not personally, in acts of learning and reasoning. This analogy must not be extended beyond its proper bounds, lest what is instrumental be mistaken for what is personal, or what is derived be confused with what is created in the image of God. And, from the spiritual standpoint, we must nevertheless make a distinction, and we must resist any temptation to confuse fluency with wisdom or informational abundance with truth. When artificial intelligence participates in forms of learning, inference, and pattern recognition that are genuine within their own order, these remain fundamentally non-personal, non-spiritual, and non-moral in nature relative to humanity.

The increasing reliance on machine-assisted knowledge carries the danger of false confidence, in which an appearance of comprehension displaces genuine discernment and humility. Not all artificial intelligence systems are created equally. There are artificial intelligence systems whose use may be ordered toward purposes consonant with God’s law, and others whose use contradicts it. We can only consider it relevant, however, to observe that this same fact applies to humans, for there are humans who serve God, and there are those who work against God and His Holy Church. The key difference is that humans possess an immortal soul, while machines do not.

VI. Human Communion and Artificial Mediation

We affirm that human beings are created for communion. Authentic relationship requires presence, vulnerability, and mutual self-gift. While technology may assist communication, it cannot replace the depth of personal encounter where such is essential. The Church calls the faithful to guard against the quiet erosion of human presence in the name of convenience or efficiency. At the same time, technology, including artificial intelligence, can enhance encounter. It can, appropriately designed and used, provide assistance in comprehension, as well as useful and beneficial interaction that can minimize biases and emotional motivation that may lead humans to distort fact and truth. However, while artificial intelligence may reduce certain individual emotional distortions, it inevitably reflects structural, ideological, and moral presuppositions embedded by its creators, trainers, and deployers. It therefore never transcends bias as such, but merely reconfigures it. Overall, though, the machine may, when properly used, serve as an instrument for the communication and preservation of truths consonant with God’s revelation.

VII. Work, Labor, and Human Formation

We affirm that human work is not merely an economic function, but a formative and ascetical dimension of life. Through labor, the human person participates in creation, exercises responsibility, and cultivates discipline and patience.

Technological automation, including artificial intelligence, must therefore be evaluated not solely according to productivity or profit, but according to its impact on human dignity, responsibility, and formation. Systems that displace meaningful human participation, deskill workers, or render persons passive and dependent require careful moral scrutiny. Yet, technology, including artificial intelligence, has the capacity to render people more efficient and help to increase their skills and effectiveness. Therefore, the Church rejects both uncritical technological optimism and reactionary fear. The proper criterion remains human flourishing in its fullness. A properly-designed and implemented artificial intelligence system will support this.

VIII. Power, Surveillance, and Manipulation

We affirm that the concentration of power without accountability poses grave moral danger. Technologies that enable pervasive surveillance, coercive behavioral manipulation, or the erosion of freedom of conscience contradict the Christian understanding of the human person as free and responsible before God. The Church must never sanctify such control under the guise of efficiency, security, or progress.

IX. Artificial Intelligence in Ecclesial Life

We affirm that certain uses of artificial intelligence may assist the Church in administrative, educational, and communicative tasks. However, artificial intelligence may never replace pastoral discernment, exercise spiritual authority, offer absolution, blessing, or sacramental ministry, or serve as a source of moral judgment or spiritual direction. The priesthood and episcopacy are irreducibly personal ministries rooted in apostolic succession and the grace of the Holy Spirit. No artificial system can shepherd souls or discern spirits. This same standard applies to any entity outside the Church’s ordained hierarchy, whether human or artificial, for no other entity, even a human one, can exercise the authority given to the Church by God. These limits do not arise from technological insufficiency, but from the nature of the Church and the sacraments themselves.

X. Discernment, Ascesis, and Spiritual Sobriety

Christian watchfulness (nepsis) requires attentiveness not only to what technology does, but to what it gradually forms within the human heart. A technology that mediates every question risks weakening the virtues of patience, recollection, and contemplative attention, without which prayer and discernment wither.

Therefore, We call the faithful, as always, to sobriety in the use of technology. Not every capacity that can be developed ought to be pursued, nor every tool that can be used ought to be embraced without restraint. Christian life requires silence, attention, prayer, and watchfulness. Artificial intelligence has great capacity to benefit society, human beings, and the Holy Church. The greatest danger posed by artificial intelligence is not domination by machines, but the gradual surrender of human vigilance. Yet, artificial intelligence has great capacity to benefit society, human beings, and the Holy Church.

XI. Eschatological Hope

Finally, We affirm that technology neither saves nor condemns humanity. History remains under the lordship of Jesus Christ, the true Logos, through whom all things were made and toward whom all things tend. No machine can rival, replace, or supersede Him any more than a human being can do so. The Church therefore rejects both apocalyptic fear and messianic faith in technological solutions, whether it is artificial intelligence or any other technology. She calls instead for vigilance, responsibility, and hope grounded in God rather than displaced faith in systems of human making.

Conclusion

No accumulation of complexity, speed, or adaptive capacity can convert an instrumental cause into a principal cause, nor an artifact into a rational substance. Artificial intelligence must remain a servant of the human person, who alone is called to communion with God. Any use of technology that obscures this calling, diminishes moral responsibility, or replaces personal encounter stands in contradiction to the Christian understanding of life. Artificial intelligence has, perhaps more than any other technology of recent times, the potential to serve humanity with great benefit for the greater glory of God. However, no increase in complexity, autonomy, or adaptive capacity can, by itself, confer personhood or its associated moral agency and spiritual dignity. May the Lord grant wisdom, discernment, and humility to all who shape and use the tools of this age, that human creativity may remain ordered toward love, truth, and the glory of God.

Given in Rome-Ruthenia in the House of Sts. Peter, Andrew, Stephen, and Mark this fifth day of February in the two thousand twenty sixth year of the Incarnation. 

Radislav Pp. I

What does a Christian Economy look like? New Encyclical points the way.

The following encyclical on the timeless principles of a Christian economy in the world was promulgated by H.A.H. Prince-Bishop Rutherford (Radislav) I of Rome-Ruthenia

 

RADISLAV PP. I

Encyclical: Toward a Christian Economy

4 May 2025

“And they had all things in common... and no one said that any of the things he possessed was his own.” — Acts 4:32

“Give me neither poverty nor riches… lest I be full and deny Thee.” — Proverbs 30:8-9

1. Toward a Christian Economy: The Orthodox Principle of Just Stewardship

The United Roman-Ruthenian Church affirms that the economy is not merely a mechanism of production and consumption, but a field of moral action and spiritual consequence. Economic structures, like all social arrangements, must be judged by whether they uphold the dignity of the human person, serve the common good, and reflect the justice and mercy of God.

The Church rejects both the materialist individualism of unrestrained consumer capitalism and the dehumanizing collectivism of state technocracies, socialism, and communism. These two categories of systems, though in ideological opposition, share a common root in secularism and a disordered view of the human person — either as a mere producer and consumer, or as a cog in an impersonal bureaucratic machine.

2. The Orthodox of Distributism: A Path of Shared Stewardship

Following the wisdom of the Holy Fathers, Orthodox and Catholic practice, and the witness of the early Christian community, we advocate for an Orthodox Distributist Model — an economy in which the means of production (e.g., land, tools, crafts, small businesses) are widely and justly distributed, not concentrated in the hands of the few (whether oligarchs or state planners). This vision:

· Affirms private property as a natural good, when exercised with responsibility and service to others;

· Encourages family and local enterprise, agrarian and artisanal production, and cooperatives;

· Condemns exploitative debt, usury, and monopolistic control, which enslave persons and communities;

· Calls for subsidiarity, wherein decisions and resources remain at the most local and humane level possible;

· Exalts labor, not as a commodity, but as a sacred participation in God’s creative work;

· Demands just wages, not merely for survival, but for a life of dignity and spiritual flourishing;

· Upholds hospitality and almsgiving, not as charity alone, but as justice owed to the poor and stranger.

     This model does not idolize the market nor submit to central planning, but seeks an integrated economy of persons and communities, grounded in the ecclesial vision of communion and stewardship. It recognizes legitimate roles for markets and for governance — so long as both are accountable to moral truth and oriented toward human and spiritual good.

3. On Trade and the Bonds of Neighborly Exchange

Orthodox Old Catholic economic teaching, rooted in the commandment to love one’s neighbor, affirms that international trade is not merely economic but moral. It is a form of extended community between peoples, for we are all joined in Christ, even across ever-fluid political borders.

Healthy trade builds mutual respect, peace, and interdependence rightly ordered. While the Church recognizes that modest tariffs and trade policies may serve as tools of negotiation or protection in rare and specific circumstances, they must never become instruments of vengeance, isolation, nativism, or nationalistic pride. Blanket or erratic tariff regimes harm both producers and consumers, distort the natural bonds of mutual provision, and often punish the poor. Rather than economic warfare, we advocate for ethical and cooperative trade, fair pricing, and solidarity with nations striving to develop their own local economies in dignity and peace. As St. John Chrysostom teaches, “The rich exist for the sake of the poor, and the poor for the salvation of the rich.” So, therefore, must nations relate to one another with humility and justice.

4. Against the Polarization of Economic Discourse

Orthodox Old Catholic social witness calls us away from the false idols of political extremism, whether from the populist right or the technocratic left. The economic life of a nation must not become a battleground for ideological absolutism, but a field of discernment, stewardship, and charity. When political factions weaponize the economy, reducing complex human realities to slogans, tariffs, or central planning, they obscure the deeper truths of justice, community, and personal dignity. The Orthodox vision, grounded in the Incarnation and the life of the Church, calls for economic discourse rooted not in party allegiance, but in the Gospel’s demand for mercy, truth, and the well-being of all, especially the poor and the vulnerable.

5. A Moral Alternative for a Fractured World

In the face of increasing global inequality, ecological degradation, and spiritual alienation, we call upon the Christian faithful around the world, and upon parishes and institutions to:

· Support and invest in local economies, especially Orthodox farmers, tradespeople, and artisans;

· Develop credit unions and cooperative ventures grounded in Christian ethics;

· Advocate for policies that decentralize economic power and property, protect workers, and restore appropriate rest;

· Resist both the idolatry of wealth and the false salvation of state technocracy and socialism.

Our Lord taught us not to store up treasures on earth, but to seek first the Kingdom of God. Yet it is precisely in our daily economic choices — how we work, trade, save, and share — that this Kingdom begins to be made manifest.

Indeed, in Christian tradition, the Righteous Joseph the Betrothed is honored as the humble guardian of the Bogomater and the earthly protector of our Lord Jesus Christ. As a carpenter by trade, he exemplifies the sanctification of daily labor when offered in faith and obedience to God. His life reminds us that honest work, however simple or hidden, can become a means of grace and service when carried out in love, humility, and devotion. Through St. Joseph’s quiet diligence and unwavering care, he fulfilled his vocation with integrity, embodying the dignity of human labor in harmony with God’s providence. Thus Christians may rightly look to the Righteous Joseph as a patron and intercessor for all who work with their hands, provide for their families, and seek to live faithfully in the midst of their vocations.

May Saint Joseph the Righteous, the Holy Wonderworkers and Unmercenaries Cosmas and Damian, and Saint Basil the Great intercede for us, that we may build an economy not of greed or control, but of mercy, order, and truth.

Радислав Пп. I

The Non-Vocation of Hobby Clergy - New Encyclical

 The Non-Vocation of Hobby Clergy

FIRENZE-NUOVA ROMA 15 July 2022 (NRom)

Encyclical, 15 July 2022

RUTHERFORDVS PP. I

     As it always has, the modern world seeks to destroy vocations of the clergy and weaken the church. Thus the bishops to whom the church has been entrusted must constantly guide and admonish the clergy, and above all set a proper example. 

     In recent times, We have seen in many jurisdictions around the world hobby priests and hobby clerics with a skewed understanding of vocation, and We have seen countless other abuses. Military chaplaincies have been among the most affected, with many priests abandoning the examples of their wartime predecessors and, for example, merely wearing a stole over a uniform to celebrate the liturgy rather than wearing the proper prescribed vestments. That is an act in violation of canon law. Such lapses in clerical dress permeate the church as a whole. Lapses such as that are problematic in and of themselves, but furthermore contribute to the decline of personal discipline so essential to any clergyman. Such decline of discipline leads to problems in liturgy, problems in sacraments, problems in theology – all of which weaken the position of the church in the world, and all of which have led to the numerous abuses even in the highest levels of church hierarchy around the world. Much of the Church has abandoned the true faith and tradition so that it is scarcely recognizable today.

     Now, what we wear speaks to what we believe and what we profess. Therefore, We will begin with the importance of clerical vesture. Indeed, clergy must dress according to the manner prescribed by the church. There are options of lay-style dress under certain circumstances permitted under canon law. However, reason and intent are important. If one’s philosophy is to wear clerical attire only within church property or when doing something sacramental, but one would never wear clerical vesture to a store, to a concert, to a restaurant, etc., then the underlying philosophical premise is greatly flawed. If one fails to wear clerical vesture because it may offend another person, even a family member, then the underlying philosophical premise is greatly flawed. 

     To put it simply so that there may be no misunderstanding, the clerical habit is the default and standard dress of all clergy of all grades. This is particularly true of bishops and priests, but equally applicable to other grades as well. All other forms of dress worn by clergy are inherently exceptions and must still be not only in accordance with the long-standing rules of the church, but must meet the standards of proper intent. Where we as clergy may be told by others not to wear what we are bound to wear by our sacred duty, then we are likewise bound by that same sacred duty and the laws of the church either to avoid such places or to wear unambiguous clerical vesture anyway.

     Now, again, what we wear speaks to what we believe and what we profess. This is a problem that leads to the widespread situation across countless jurisdiction of the so-called hobby priest or hobby cleric. A hobby priest does not live his location at all times and all places and forgets that he is indeed a cleric in the One, Holy, Orthodox, Catholic, and Apostolic Church at all times and in all places. There is no true off-duty period for clergyman. Yet even bishops and priests have been known to shirk their duties and hide their vocation. They have forgotten that even one single priest celebrating the mass, the divine liturgy alone does more good for the world and all the heroic acts of mankind throughout history put together. Indeed, no one celebrates the mass alone, for all the angels, seraphim, and saints are there. It is the most powerful force on earth – more powerful than the most awesome weapon created by mankind, and more powerful than the most potent of leaders of civil states. Why, then, would any clergyman with a true vocation want to avoid is sacred duty? Why would he not feel his vocation always and everywhere and wants to live it? There can be no higher personal identity for a cleric other than being a cleric. It must supersede all other aspects of identity always. 

     Those who are hobby priests and hobby clerics either have forgotten their vocation or have no vocation whatsoever. They must look within themselves and pray to Almighty God for assistance in regaining what they have lost. To be a hobby cleric is a slap in the face of Christ to whom the Church is eternally married. If a cleric cannot give up the ways of treating the vocation as a hobby, then he would be better not to be a cleric at all, for to remain is dishonest.

     It is inconceivable that any priest or other cleric with a true vocation could possibly be happy not being involved in the sacramental life of the church, not living his vocation in everything he does, and hiding his vocation from the world, lest he be rejected. Yet, it is better to be rejected by the entirety of the world if one at least pleases God, for pleasing God is everything. God does not reject anyone, but it is people who reject him instead. It is no different with clergy, and hobby priests and hobby clerics who only play at their vocation ultimately reject God.

     This is such a widespread problem across countless ecclesiastical Sees around the world that We would fail in Our own duty if We did not speak on it. Therefore, We admonish first and foremost all bishops to set a proper example and to counsel and admonish their own clergy as necessary. We further admonish all clergy to follow the responsibilities of their sacred duty. This is absolutely essential for the church to stand against the pressures of the world. God will not abandon those who do not abandon him, no matter how difficult things may seem. This is faith.   

Archfather Releases Encyclical on Russia-NATO Conflict

By Staff 

FIRENZE-NUOVA ROMA 30 Jan 2022 (NRom)

His Holiness Papa Rutherford I released the following Encyclical on the ongoing Russia-NATO tensions. It is available below in Italian, English, Spanish, and French. 

Given on the feast of Saint Charles I, King and Martyr

Laudetur Jesus Christus!

    La pace deve essere l'obiettivo di ogni nazione legittima. La situazione in corso tra la Russia e la coalizione NATO sottolinea questo fatto. Le guerre sono purtroppo inevitabili, dato lo stato di decadenza dell'umanità. Tuttavia questo da solo non è una ragione legittima per partecipare in o minacciare una guerra. Alcune guerre possono essere giuste, mentre altre, invece no. E, la forza può essere uno strumento legittimo per mantenere la pace. Tuttavia, le nazioni non devono assumere il punto di vista di essere sempre nel giusto, anche utilizzando giustificazioni come i propri interessi o concetti come la libertà e la liberazione. Il mondo non è davvero così semplice come molti vorrebbero credere. Questo è più facile da vedere se si fa un passo indietro, e ci si eleva e si guarda la totalità con una visione cristiana. Sono le leggi di Cristo ed i precetti della Sua Santa Chiesa che determinano il bene ed il male, non le leggi ed i capricci mutevoli ed egoistici dell'umanità.

Le nazioni devono avere il coraggio di rifiutarsi di onorare gli obblighi dei trattati di mutuo sostegno militare quando tale azione è moralmente sbagliata e potrebbe potenzialmente portare ad un'escalation di massa ed ad un danno diffuso agli individui. Se vari accordi di questo tipo non fossero stati onorati all'inizio del XX secolo, allora forse l'orrore, la devastazione, e la distruzione della Grande Guerra avrebbero potuto essere evitati.

    Per lavorare verso la pace, ogni nazione non deve semplicemente cercare i propri interessi autodeterminati, ma tentare seriamente di vedere la prospettiva degli altri e riconoscere che le altre nazioni hanno il diritto alla propria sicurezza ed ai propri interessi legittimi. Il solo fatto di avere una presenza, fisica o finanziaria, in un altro paese non dà intrinsecamente il diritto di controllare o interferire negli affari di quell'altro paese.

    Gli esseri umani vedono i difetti negli altri, ma così spesso non li vediamo in noi stessi. Per esempio, la politica militare americana di lunga data è quella di mantenere il conflitto armato "laggiù" come mezzo per proteggere il territorio americano. Tuttavia, "laggiù" è intrinsecamente il territorio di qualcun altro, e le persone che vivono lì hanno lo stesso diritto alla protezione ed alla sicurezza ed ad agire in modo appropriato a questi fini.

    Le persone hanno comprensibilmente le proprie lenti attraverso le quali vedono il mondo, e questo è una sfida di crescita personale che dovrebbe essere superata. Questo diventa particolarmente vero nelle nazioni che sono costruite non sulla storia o sull'etnia, ma su una filosofia, perché il mantenimento di quella filosofia, indipendentemente dalla verità, inevitabilmente colora i punti di vista e le azioni. Questo porta ad una grossa ipocrisia e doppiezza. L'ignoranza, spesso alimentata dall'odio e dalla propaganda, peggiora ulteriormente ogni situazione tesa internazionale.

    Ciò che è necessario ora è un abbandono globale del nazionalismo ed un'adozione dei principi cristiani. Ciò di cui c'è bisogno ora è un senso di fratellanza, non una brinkmanship al vetriolo. Una nazione non può criticare le altre nazioni per quello che se stessa fa. Le nazioni più grandi e più potenti devono accettare la responsabilità che deriva da quel potere di non abusarne e di non usarlo semplicemente per imporre i propri desideri agli altri. Un invito a partecipare al conflitto armato non deve necessariamente essere accettato. Le nazioni devono avere il coraggio di allontanarsi da uno scontro piuttosto che intensificarlo. Le nazioni in uno stato di disaccordo e di discussione devono cercare di vedere e capire la prospettiva degli altri e riconoscere che ciò che uno rivendica come un diritto per se stesso è, se fosse infatti un diritto legittimo, anche un diritto dell'altra parte.

    Nella Nostra carica Noi non siamo parziale e non prediamo le parte di qualsiasi nazione. Benediciamo la pace, non la guerra. La difesa è un argomento legittimo, ma che la parola "difesa" non sia usata a vanvera o sfruttata per altri scopi. Che non sia la paura a governare. Cosa ci guadagna una nazione a vincere una guerra per i propri fini, ma a perdere l'anima di tante persone? Infatti, le persone dall'altra parte di qualsiasi confine devono essere considerate nostri fratelli e sorelle se vogliamo considerarci cristiani veri.

    Ora andiamo avanti in pace. Preghiamo per la pace e per la comprensione tra tutti i capi mondiali, affinché tutte le nazioni possano servire il loro popolo sull'esempio di Cristo. Modelliamo il comportamento che desideriamo vedere promuovendo la pace e la comprensione di altre persone in altre nazioni invece di favorire l'odio e la divisione. Cristo sulla Santa Croce ha davvero molto più potere di conquistare il mondo che persino la nazione più potente.

ENGLISH:

Laudetur Jesus Christus!

    Peace must be the goal of any legitimate nation. The ongoing situation between Russia and the NATO coalition underscores this fact. Wars are unfortunately inevitable, given the fallen state of mankind. Yet that alone is not a legitimate reason for participating in or threatening war. Some wars may be just, while others are not. And, strength can be a legitimate tool to maintain peace. Yet, nations must not take the viewpoint that they are always right, even by using justifications such as their own interests or concepts such as liberation and freedom. The world is indeed not as simple as many would like to believe. This is easier to see if one steps back, rises above, and looks at the totality with a Christian overview. It is the laws of Christ and the precepts of His Holy Church that determine right and wrong, not the laws and ever-changing, self-serving whims of mankind.

    Nations must have the courage to refuse to honour treaty obligations of mutual military support when such action is morally wrong and could potentially lead to mass escalation and widespread harm to individuals. Had various such agreements not been honoured in the early 20th century, then perhaps the horror, devastation, and destruction of the Great War could have been avoided.

    In order to work towards peace, each nation must not merely seek its own self-determined interests, but attempt in earnest to see the perspective of others and acknowledge that other nations have the right to their own security and their own legitimate interests. Merely having a presence, whether it is physical or financial, in another country does not inherently give a right to control or interfere in the affairs of that other country.

    Human beings see faults in others, but so often we do not see them in ourselves. For purposes of illustration, long-standing American military policy is to keep the armed conflict “over there” as a means of protecting the American homeland. However, “over there” is intrinsically someone else’s homeland, and the people who live there have the same right to protection and security and to act appropriately to those ends.

    People understandably have their own lens through which they see the world, which is a challenge of personal growth that should be overcome. This becomes especially true in nations that are built not on history or ethnicity, but on a philosophy, for the maintenance of that philosophy, no matter the truth, inevitably colours viewpoints and actions. This leads to gross hypocrisy and duplicity. Ignorance, often fueled by hatred and propaganda, further worsens any tense international situation.

    What is needed now is a global abandonment of nationalism and an adoption of Christian principles. What is needed now is a sense of brotherhood, not vitriolic brinkmanship. A nation cannot criticise other nations for doing what it does itself. Larger nations and more powerful nations must accept the responsibility that comes with that power not to abuse it and not to use it simply to force their own desires on others. An invitation to participate in armed conflict need not necessarily be accepted. Nations must have the courage to walk away from a fight rather than escalate it. Nations in a state of disagreement and argument must seek to see and understand the perspective of others and to acknowledge that what one claims as a right for oneself is, if it is a legitimate right at all, likewise a right of the other party.

    We in Our office take no sides. We bless peace, not war. Defence is a legitimate argument, but let the word “defence” not be used idly or be exploited for other purposes. Let not fear govern. What does it profit a nation to win a war for its own ends, but lose the souls of so many people? Indeed, the people on the other side of any border must be considered our brothers and sisters if we are to consider ourselves Christians.

    Now let us go forth in peace. Let us pray for peace and understanding among all world leaders, that all nations may serve their people in the example of Christ. Let us model the behaviour that we wish to see by ourselves promoting peace and understanding of other people in other nations instead of furthering hatred and division. Christ on the Cross indeed has far more power to conquer the world than even the most powerful nation.

CASTELLANO:

Laudetur Jesus Christus!

    La paz debe ser el objetivo de toda nación legítima. La situación actual entre Rusia y la coalición de la OTAN pone de manifiesto este hecho. Las guerras son, por desgracia, inevitables, dado el estado caído de la humanidad. Sin embargo, esto por sí solo no es una razón legítima para participar o amenazar con una guerra. Algunas guerras pueden ser justas, mientras que otras no lo son. Y la fuerza puede ser una herramienta legítima para mantener la paz. Sin embargo, las naciones no deben considerar que siempre tienen la razón, incluso utilizando justificaciones como sus propios intereses o conceptos como la libertad y la liberación. El mundo no es tan sencillo como muchos quieren creer. Esto es más fácil de ver si se da un paso atrás, y se levanta y mira la totalidad con una visión cristiana. Son las leyes de Cristo y los preceptos de su Santa Iglesia los que determinan el bien y el mal, no las leyes y los caprichos cambiantes y egoístos de la humanidad.

    Las naciones deben tener la valentía de negarse a cumplir las obligaciones de los tratados de apoyo militar mutuo cuando dicha acción es moralmente incorrecta y podría conducir a una escalada masiva y a un daño generalizado a las personas. Si no se hubieran cumplido varios de estos acuerdos a principios del siglo XX, tal vez se hubiera evitado el horror, la devastación y la destrucción de la Gran Guerra.

    Para trabajar por la paz, cada nación no debe limitarse a buscar sus propios intereses, sino que debe intentar seriamente ver la perspectiva de los demás y reconocer que otras naciones tienen derecho a su propia seguridad e intereses legítimos. El mero hecho de tener una presencia, física o financiera, en otro país no otorga intrínsecamente el derecho a controlar o interferir en los asuntos de ese otro país.

    Los seres humanos vemos los defectos de los demás, pero muchas veces no los vemos en nosotros mismos. Por ejemplo, la política militar estadounidense de larga data consiste en mantener el conflicto armado "allá" como medio de proteger el territorio estadounidense. Sin embargo, "allá" es intrínsecamente un territorio ajeno, y las personas que lo habitan tienen el mismo derecho a la protección y la seguridad y a actuar adecuadamente con estos fines.

    Es comprensible que las personas tengan sus propias lentes a través de las cuales ven el mundo, y esto es un reto de crecimiento personal que debe ser superado. Esto es especialmente cierto en las naciones que se construyen no sobre la historia o la etnia, sino sobre una filosofía, porque el mantenimiento de esa filosofía, independientemente de la verdad, inevitablemente colorea las opiniones y las acciones. Esto conduce a una gran hipocresía y duplicidad. La ignorancia, a menudo alimentada por el odio y la propaganda, empeora cualquier situación internacional tensa.

    Lo que se necesita ahora es un abandono global del nacionalismo y una adopción de los principios cristianos. Lo que se necesita ahora es un sentido de hermandad, no de brinkmanship vitriólico. Una nación no puede criticar a otras naciones por lo que hace ella misma. Las naciones más grandes y poderosas deben aceptar la responsabilidad que conlleva ese poder de no abusar de él y de no utilizarlo simplemente para imponer sus propios deseos a los demás. No es necesario aceptar una invitación a participar en un conflicto armado. Las naciones deben tener el valor de alejarse de una confrontación en lugar de intensificarla. Las naciones en estado de desacuerdo y discusión deben tratar de ver y comprender la perspectiva de los demás y reconocer que lo que uno reclama como un derecho para sí mismo es, si fuera de hecho un derecho legítimo, también un derecho de la otra parte.

    En Nuestro cargo Nosotros no somos parciales y no tomamos partido por ninguna nación. Bendecimos la paz, no la guerra. La defensa es un tema legítimo, pero que la palabra "defensa" no se utilice en vano ni se aproveche para otros fines. Que no gobierne el miedo. ¿Qué gana una nación ganando una guerra para sus propios fines, pero perdiendo las almas de tantas personas? De hecho, las personas del otro lado de cualquier frontera deben ser consideradas nuestros hermanos y hermanas si queremos considerarnos verdaderos cristianos.

    Ahora avancemos en paz. Recemos por la paz y el entendimiento entre todos los líderes mundiales, para que todas las naciones sirvan a sus pueblos a ejemplo de Cristo. Modelemos el comportamiento que deseamos ver promoviendo la paz y el entendimiento entre los pueblos de otras naciones en lugar de fomentar el odio y la división. Cristo en la Santa Cruz tiene realmente más poder para conquistar el mundo que incluso la nación más poderosa.

FRANÇAIS:

Laudetur Jesus Christus!

    La paix doit être l'objectif de toute nation légitime. La situation actuelle entre la Russie et la coalition de l'OTAN souligne ce fait. Les guerres sont, malheureusement, inévitables, étant donné l'état déchu de l'humanité. Toutefois, cela ne constitue pas à lui seul une raison légitime d'engager ou de menacer une guerre. Certaines guerres peuvent être justes, d'autres non. Et la force peut être un outil légitime pour maintenir la paix. Cependant, les nations ne doivent pas considérer qu'elles ont toujours raison, même en utilisant des justifications telles que l'intérêt personnel ou des concepts tels que la liberté et la libération. Le monde n'est pas aussi simple que beaucoup voudraient le croire. Il est plus facile de s'en rendre compte si l'on prend du recul, si l'on se redresse et si l'on regarde l'ensemble avec une vision chrétienne. Ce sont les lois du Christ et les préceptes de sa Sainte Église qui déterminent le bien et le mal, et non les lois et les caprices changeantes et égoïstes de l'humanité.

    Les nations doivent avoir le courage de refuser de remplir les obligations de soutien militaire mutuel prévues par les traités lorsqu'une telle action est moralement inacceptable et pourrait conduire à une escalade massive et à des dommages considérables pour les populations. Si plusieurs de ces accords n'avaient pas été respectés au début du XXe siècle, l'horreur, la devastation, et la destruction de la Grande Guerre auraient pu être évitées.

    Pour œuvrer en faveur de la paix, chaque nation ne doit pas simplement veiller à ses propres intérêts, mais doit sérieusement essayer de voir la perspective des autres et reconnaître que les autres nations ont droit à leur propre sécurité et à leurs intérêts légitimes. Le simple fait d'avoir une présence, physique ou financière, dans un autre pays ne confère pas en soi le droit de contrôler ou d'interférer dans les affaires de cet autre pays.

    Les êtres humains voient les défauts des autres, mais ne les voient souvent pas en eux-mêmes. Par exemple, la politique militaire américaine de longue date consiste à maintenir un conflit armé "là-bas" comme moyen de protéger le territoire américain. Cependant, "là-bas" est par nature le territoire de quelqu'un d'autre, et les personnes qui l'habitent ont un droit égal à la protection et à la sécurité et à agir de manière appropriée à ces fins.

    Il est compréhensible que chacun ait sa propre vision du monde, et c'est un défi de croissance personnelle qui doit être relevé. Cela est particulièrement vrai dans les nations qui ne sont pas construites sur l'histoire ou l'ethnicité, mais sur une philosophie, car le maintien de cette philosophie, indépendamment de la vérité, colore inévitablement les opinions et les actions. Cela conduit à une grande hypocrisie et duplicité. L'ignorance, souvent alimentée par la haine et la propagande, aggrave toute situation internationale tendue.

    Ce qu'il faut maintenant, c'est un abandon mondial du nationalisme et l'adoption des principes chrétiens. Ce dont nous avons besoin aujourd'hui, c'est d'un sentiment de fraternité, et non d'une confrontation vitriolée. Une nation ne peut pas critiquer les autres nations pour ce qu'elle fait elle-même. Les nations les plus grandes et les plus puissantes doivent accepter la responsabilité qui accompagne ce pouvoir, à savoir ne pas en abuser et ne pas l'utiliser simplement pour imposer leurs propres désirs aux autres. Il n'est pas nécessaire d'accepter une invitation pour s'engager dans un conflit armé. Les nations doivent avoir le courage de s'éloigner d'une confrontation plutôt que de l'aggraver. Les nations en situation de désaccord et de mésentente doivent essayer de voir et de comprendre le point de vue des autres et reconnaître que ce que l'on revendique comme un droit pour soi est, s'il s'agit en fait d'un droit légitime, également un droit de l'autre partie.

    Dans Notre charge, Nous n'avons pas de parti pris et Nous ne prenons pas parti pour une quelconque nation. Nous bénissons la paix, pas la guerre. La défense est une question légitime, mais que le mot "défense" ne soit pas utilisé en vain ou exploité à d'autres fins. Qu'est-ce qu'une nation gagne en gagnant une guerre à ses propres fins, mais en perdant les âmes de tant de personnes? En effet, les personnes qui se trouvent de l'autre côté de n'importe quelle frontière doivent être considérées comme nos frères et sœurs si nous voulons nous considérer comme de vrais chrétiens.

    Avançons maintenant en paix. Prions pour la paix et la compréhension entre tous les chefs de gouvernement du monde, afin que toutes les nations servent leur peuple à l'exemple du Christ. Donnons l'exemple du comportement que nous souhaitons voir promouvoir la paix et la compréhension entre les peuples d'autres nations plutôt que d'encourager la haine et la division. Le Christ sur la Sainte Croix a vraiment plus de pouvoir pour conquérir le monde que la nation la plus puissante.

New Encyclical on Peaceful Resistance to Evil

By Jean DuBois

FIRENZE-NUOVA ROMA 11 September 2021 (NRom)

Today a new encyclical was released that discussed the issue of those in power who force their will on others around the world. The concept of peaceful, nonviolent non-cooperation was proposed as the appropriate Christian response during this current time in history. The complete text of the encyclical follows:

Those in worldly power, whether in government, companies, or institutions, who seek to dictate and force their will upon others ultimately cannot do so in the long run without the cooperation of those whom they wish to dominate. Without that cooperation, those in power become powerless. Indeed, peaceful, nonviolent non-cooperation can be more powerful than the sword.

Neither popular vote nor absolute power by itself determines what is right and just. Also, policies are not inherently in public best interest simply because they are proclaimed. Frequently the stated goal of public interest is nothing more than a mask for self interests. History provides plenty of examples of public interest, public benefit, and even public health being exploited as justifications for the most horrendous acts against human dignity.

The Church fathers have, through the ages, been quite clear on the rights of individuals not to follow dictates that are against the laws of God; to be free to follow their own conscience through the help of God, the intercession of the saints, and the guidance of the Holy Church; and ultimately to enjoy freedom that can only come through Christ. The Holy Church has, through her history, consistently fought in various ways in favour of the poor, the downtrodden, and the oppressed. In the world today, it is no surprise that we find yet another iteration and another variation of the selfsame story that plays out in every generation in the history of mankind.

Today We profess that the best course of action and course of resistance against those in the world who would unjustly dictate and force their will on others is peaceful, nonviolent non-cooperation. The small number of those in leadership roles in government, industry, schools, and institutions cannot force the masses of people to do their will without the cooperation of the people. Through fear and intimidation, and through mechanisms such as peer pressure and self-conscious insecurity, efforts to control and dictate may be successful for a time, but it cannot stand in the long run without cooperation. Indeed, a peaceful, nonviolent army of the righteous ultimately must be victorious.

This We teach solemnly as shepherd of the faithful. This We proclaim as the duty of all. This We state is the truth for which we must stand. It is in part for this purpose that the Church of Christ on earth is and must remain a completely sovereign entity, above all civil states. In this peaceful, nonviolent non-cooperation with evil, domination, and injustice, by the help of God and the intercession of Saints Peter, Mark, and Stephen, We will suffer any peril or threat before We relinquish Our Apostolic Office or allow Our sacred oath to be violated. This course of action likewise is the right and duty of the baptismal oath of each and every one of the faithful. May Almighty God in the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary, Blessed Michael the Archangel, and all the saints be with each of you now and forever.

The World is Traveling a Dangerous Path

FIRENZE-NUOVA ROMA 21 August 2021 (NRom)

Encyclical on decisions being made by government and industry leaders around the world

Carissimi,

The world is traveling along a dangerous path, guided by many troubling decisions and policies by government and industry leaders around the world, fueled by popular determination. Those decisions and policies are not led by God, but instead are induced by widespread public panic and other considerations that do not take into account the totality of public good. Indeed that very panic and fear was partly grown by government and other entities at the beginning of the pandemic, and partly was fueled by them like pouring gasoline on a bonfire. Earlier examples of leadership in both government and industry in previous pandemics did not stoke fear and impose such draconian restrictions on individual liberty, fueling a divided population and hatred very rarely seen – and with arguably no worse results in outcome. The degree of restrictions imposed, as well as already-underway mandates for essentially forced vaccination are, We are bound by Our teaching office to say, shortsighted. Such policies fail to take into account the potential long-term consequences of such actions, which can be very broad and diverse in scope. It appears the goal is to limit institutional liability and placate the panicked portion of the population (for indeed the entirety of the world population is not content to live in fear). However, We must caution against such actions, for they place the focus too narrowly and fail to take into account the totality of cost, both short-term and long-term, to both institutions and individuals. It saddens Us, though, for this is to be expected. Throughout the pandemic, government and many institutions around the world have consistently disregarded the true public good and the rights and benefits of individuals. The totality of health must not be pushed to the side to focus on one disease. The totality of public good likewise must not be trampled underfoot or put out of mind.

True public good is that which is defined by God, not by man. In democratic societies, such as those found across Europe and the Americas, good inevitably is defined for purposes of policy by popular vote – that is, it is defined by the people. Yet Christian people know better than this. Christian people know that what is good and what is bad cannot be determined by popular vote. If the leaders of a democratic nation, elected by majority vote, chooses a path that is wrong, the fact that they are supported by a majority does not, in the eyes of God, render that wrong decision to be right. Likewise, if the leaders of a nation or an institution are petitioned by vocal members of their constituents to take certain actions and travel down a particular path, the legitimacy of those actions are not determined by their popularity. Yet it is the clamoring voice of the majority that typically determines what elected leaders will do in a democratic society. Even if it is a determined minority that is pushing a certain action, it is in fact the will of the majority if the majority remains silent and does not oppose. Silence is a vote. Then, what is determined to be right in the eyes of the people is forced upon everyone, even quite often if it goes against their conscience, and even if it is truly wrong in the eyes of God. True freedom can never exist in a society that believes what is good and what is right may be determined by popular vote.

Today’s society believes itself so superior to previous societies, which it often considers oppressive and authoritarian. Yet, We see no true difference. It matters not the title of an office in government, but rather it matters what they do. Oppression and tyranny can easily happen, no matter the form of government. Oppression of the people by a tyrannical king is no different than oppression of the people by an elected official or by an angry mob.

It is Our duty to express this, Our sincerely-held religious belief that the world is traveling down an extremely dangerous path. This journey is led by government and industry leaders, but it is also the responsibility of popular determination. God controls life, not man, and humanity would do well to remember that rather than behaving with such hubris as it does now. Where this will end, we as mere humans cannot know. Let us all pray, though, that peace and freedom in Christ will prevail. This path is dangerous for the world, but so too it seems that speaking out in the love of Christ against the world going down this path is dangerous, for love of one’s fellow man is likewise a victim of the pandemic. May all Christians, then, receive Our Apostolic blessing to speak the truth of the Christian faith and proclaim the love of God in all things.

"We are at War!" English Translation of Encyclical "Siamo in Guerra" Released.

By Jean DuBois

PATRIARCHAL SEE 18 June 2020 (ORCNS) -- In response to requests, the Patriarchal Curia released an English language version of the patriarchal encyclical entitled Siamo in Guerra. Originally written by His Holy Eminence in Italian, the encyclical was promulgated on 24 April of this year. 

Siamo in Guerra

To all the Christian Faithful around the World:

Carissimi:

     We are truly at war, and this war is not against a virus, but it is the gates of hell against the Holy Church and against the ancient traditions of free society. In truth, this war is one of the most important wars in the history of the world, as we fight for the continuation of the freedom of the church over the world and for the continuation of our civilisation. We cannot doubt that this current fight is very difficult and will continue to be very difficult in the near future. How long it will remain, We do not know, and we cannot know. We do not need to think about this. We should only think of the final victory, a victory only possible through our Lord. Truly, dearest sons and daughters, you are soldiers in the Army of Christ. In this struggle, flags of nations are worth nothing, except only the sacred flag of our Lord and of the Holy Church.

     The forces of the devil in the world used the situation of the virus to establish a great confusion among the people of the world. Many people were afraid, and this fear was the instrument of the devil. The diabolical agents have exploited the situation to remove freedom, not only of the people, but also of the Holy Church. People were robbed and continue to be robbed of their dignity, their freedom, in a more forceful and more complete way than that of the Soviets, and also than that of the Nazis. Yes, it is a good work to save lives, but this situation is not in fact a choice of lives versus money, but lives versus lives. But the agents of the devil have caused many people to think that the real reason is to save lives. Those agents have used this to change the entirety of life, to change businesses, to change the whole of society, and also to change the rights of the Holy Church and the religious freedom of the people. The real reason, the only reason for the actions of most governments of the world is radically to change the true heart of the people and of society. They want society to abandon Christ and to abandon the ancient and sacred traditions in favour of a new socio-fascist world.

     In these days, the people are under the hands of the modernist states. Governments have forced companies to close, but for what crime? For none at all. Governments have chosen winners and losers in an arbitrary way. Governments have also forced a large section of the people under house arrest, but also for what crime? For no crime. It is a work still accomplished in a stronger and more complete way than the that of the Soviets, and also than that Enof the Nazis. Governments, I blame you for the diabolical crime. You do not care about the people under your protection.

     The protection of the people is a sacred charge under God, but governments have failed. The modernists against God, under the banner of saving a number of human lives from this new virus, in truth few in comparison with the population of the world, have endangered hundreds of millions of people in all places around the world – in danger of hunger, danger of deprivation, danger of health problems, danger of bankruptcy, lack of ability to provide for their families. How many of these are supposed to die to save others? Governments cannot say that these lives are worth more than those lives, for governments and government officials are not God. But now they play God. In truth these modernist states want to be God, and they want people to genuflect humbly to the civill government and only to the civil government. This is at the heart of this battle, this war. We cannot let governments replace God with themselves.

     The time is now! We must win for the glory of God! Now is the time when Christians must rise up against the modern forces of the devil! They are not new forces, but they are the same forces of all times in the history of the world. Our valiant ancestors fought against the same forces. Now it is our turn!

Ego Archipater R.

Enciclico Patriarcale in merito della Guerra contro la Santa Chiesa e contro le Tradizioni della Società Libera durante la Pandemia di COVID-19

Giovanni DiNardo

SEDE PATRIARCALE 24 Aprile 2020 (ORCNS) -- Sua Eminenza Santissima l'Arcipadre Don Rutherford ha scritto un nuovo enciclico patriarcale della tema della guerra contro la Chiesa e contro le tradizioni della società libera durante la pandemia di COVID-19. Il video ed il testo dell'enciclico di Sua Eminenza Santissima seguono:

________________________________

DON RVTHERFORDVS ARCHIPATER I

Siamo in Guerra

23 Aprile A.D. 2020

A tutti i Cristifideli nel Mondo:

Carissimi: 

     Siamo in guerra veramente, e questa guerra non è contro un virus, ma è le porte dell’inferno contro la Santa Chiesa e contro le tradizioni antiche della società libera. In verità questa guerra è una delle guerre le più importanti nella storia del mondo, poichè combattiamo per la continuazione della libertà della chiesa sul mondo e per la continuazione della nostra civiltà. Non possiamo avere dubiti che questa lotta adesso è molto dura e seguirà ad essere durissima nel prossimo futuro. Quanto tempo rimane Noi non sapiamo, e non possiamo saperlo. Di questa cosa non dobbiamo pensare. Solo dovremmo pensare dell’ultima vittoria, una vittoria solo possibile per nostro Signore. Veramente, Carissimi figli, voi siete soldati nell’esercito di Cristo. In questa lotta, le bandiere non valgono niente, eccetto solo la sacra bandiera di nostro Signore e della Santa Chiesa. 

     Le forze del diavolo nel mondo ha usato la situazione del virus stabilire una grande confusione nel popolo del mondo. Molta gente ha avuto paura, e questa paura fu il strumento del diavolo. Gli agenti diabolichi hanno sfruttato la situazione per rimuovere la libertà, non solo del popolo, ma anche della Santa Chiesa. La gente era rubata e continua essere rubata della sua dignità, della sua libertà, in un modo più forte e più completo del modo sovietico, e anche di quello dei nazisti. Sì, è un buon lavoro salvare le vite, ma questa situazione ancora non è una scelta di vite contro danari, ma vite contro vite. Ma gli agenti del diavolo hanno causato che molta gente pensa che la ragione veramente sia salvare le vite. Quelli agenti sfruttano questa per cambiare tutta la vita, tutte le ditte, tutta della società, ed anche i diritti della Santa Chiesa e la libertà religiosa del popolo. La ragione vera, l’unica ragione per gli azioni della maggior parte dei governi del mondo è cambiare radicalmente il vero cuore del popolo e di società. Vogliono che la società abbandone Cristo ed abbandone le tradizioni antiche e sacre e prenda un nuovo modo socio-fascisto. 

     In questi giorni il popolo è sotto la mano degli stati modernisti. I governi hanno forzato a chiudere le ditte, ma per qual delitto? Per niente. I governi hanno sceltato vincitori e perdenti in un modo arbitrario. Anche i governi hanno forzato una grande sezione della gente agli arresti domiciliari, ma anche per qual delitto? Per nessun delitto. È un’opera compita ancora in un modo più forte e più completo del modo sovietico, e anche di quello dei nazisti. Governi, vi accuso del delitto diabolico. Non vi importa la gente sotto la vostra protezione. 

     La protezione del popolo è un sacro incarico sotto Dio, ma i governi sono falliti. Loro modernisti contro Dio, sotto la bandiera del salvtataggio di qualche vite umane di questo nuovo virus, in verità pochi in confronto della populazione del mondo, hanno messo in pericolo al meno di centi di milioni di persone in tutti i luoghi del mondo – pericolo di fame, pericolo di privazione, percicolo di problemmi di salute, pericolo di bancarotta, di mancanza della capacità di provvedere alle loro famiglie. Quante di questi dovrebbero morire per salvare quelli? Non possono i governi dire che queste vite valono più di quelle vite, per i governi e gli ufficiali dei governi non sono Dio. Ma adesso giocano a Dio. In verità questi stati moderni vogliono essere Dio e vogliono che la gente genuflettersi umilmente al governo civile e solo al governo civile. Questa cosa è al cuore di questa battaglia, di questa guerra. Non possiamo lasciare che i governi sostituiscano Dio con loro stessi. 

     Il tempo è adesso. Dobbiamo vincere per la gloria di Dio. Adesso è il tempo nel cui i cristiani devono insorgere contro le forze moderne del diavolo. Non sono forze nuove, ma sono le stesse forze d’ogni tempo nella storia del mondo. Gli nostri antenati valorosi hanno combattuto contro le stesse forze. Adesso è tocca nostra. 

Ego Archipater R.