doubtingthomas
Jr. Member
 Offline
Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 73
|
 |
« on: December 09, 2011, 09:38:36 PM » |
|
Reading more about Orthodoxy and its history, I can see how the Empire of Russia became very important in preserving Orthodoxy after the fall of the Byzantine Empire. I am unclear still however why/how the Tsar of Russia became a religious figure and sort of controlled churches' affairs throughout the empire and why Nicholas and his family in particular are saints when they seemed to meddle so much in the affairs of bishops and monasteries before their murder.
Why were/are the Tsars important in Orthodoxy (especially Russian)?
Why are Nicholas Romanov and his family saints?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 09, 2011, 09:39:47 PM by doubtingthomas »
|
Logged
|
Theotokos and St. John Forerunner:
Continually pray for us to the Pantocrator that he may show mercy
|
|
|
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
Offline
Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,711
Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου
|
|
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2011, 10:53:29 PM » |
|
I think part of the reason they are regarded as saints is that they were executed by the atheist Communists- in other words, the royal family died for their faith, or were martyred.
As for meddling in others' affairs, it can also be argued that the Tsar was doing his job... the country could have done worse, as it found out when the Communists finally did take over.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be? Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied. http://spcasuncoast.org/ |
|
|
Antonis
Prodigal
OC.net guru
Offline
Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 1,045
You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.
|
|
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2011, 12:22:40 AM » |
|
The Russian Monarchy took things to a level, though, that I wouldn't be comfortable with, even disregarding the blatant Caesaropapism. The fact that the Tsar was allowed to go through the royal doors to recieve the eucharist, for example, is something that makes me twitch. I could be confused though, as the doors separating the Narthex from the Nave are also called the "royal doors." Issues with translation and misnomers between Greek and Russian.
And I'm a monarchist.
I would, of course, be willing to hear further arguments in favor or against it.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 12:26:30 AM by Antonis »
|
Logged
|
For peace in the whole world,
for the stability of the holy churches of God,
and for the unity of all,
let us pray to the Lord.
|
|
|
|
HandmaidenofGod
|
|
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2011, 12:28:28 AM » |
|
Why are Nicholas Romanov and his family saints?
The Romanovs were devout Orthodox Christians who were murdered in part, for their faith. Remember, just because a person is a saint doesn't mean he/she is a "perfect" or "sinless" human being. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope." Jer 29:11
|
|
|
|
Αριστοκλής
|
|
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2011, 12:31:54 AM » |
|
The Russian Monarchy took things to a level, though, that I wouldn't be comfortable with, even disregarding the blatant Caesaropapism. The fact that the Tsar was allowed to go through the royal doors to recieve the eucharist, for example, is something that makes me twitch. I could be confused though, as the doors separating the Narthex from the Nave are also called the "royal doors." Issues with translation and misnomers between Greek and Russian.
And I'm a monarchist.
I would, of course, be willing to hear further arguments in favor or against it.
The Tsar had taken the place (with the blessing of the Patriarch of Constantinople) of the Emperor after Constantinople fell to the Muslims - from whence Moscow became the "Third Rome". The Tsar was doing nothing different that the Emperor had done as the defender of Orthodoxy (including using the "Royal Doors" - that's where the adjective "royal" came from to start with). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
|
|
|
doubtingthomas
Jr. Member
Offline
Faith: Roman Catholic
Posts: 73
|
|
« Reply #5 on: December 10, 2011, 12:43:46 AM » |
|
The Russian Monarchy took things to a level, though, that I wouldn't be comfortable with, even disregarding the blatant Caesaropapism. The fact that the Tsar was allowed to go through the royal doors to recieve the eucharist, for example, is something that makes me twitch. I could be confused though, as the doors separating the Narthex from the Nave are also called the "royal doors." Issues with translation and misnomers between Greek and Russian.
And I'm a monarchist.
I would, of course, be willing to hear further arguments in favor or against it.
The Tsar had taken the place (with the blessing of the Patriarch of Constantinople) of the Emperor after Constantinople fell to the Muslims - from whence Moscow became the "Third Rome". The Tsar was doing nothing different that the Emperor had done as the defender of Orthodoxy (including using the "Royal Doors" - that's where the adjective "royal" came from to start with). Oh! This must be why their heraldry involved the Byzantine eagle?  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Theotokos and St. John Forerunner:
Continually pray for us to the Pantocrator that he may show mercy
|
|
|
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
Offline
Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,711
Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου
|
|
« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2011, 01:22:07 AM » |
|
I thought the name 'Royal' for the central doorway of the altar was a reference to Christ, Who comes to us in the Eucharist, since the Eucharist is consecrated and then brought out through the central doors by the priest.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be? Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied. http://spcasuncoast.org/ |
|
|
|
Αριστοκλής
|
|
« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2011, 01:50:38 AM » |
|
The Russian Monarchy took things to a level, though, that I wouldn't be comfortable with, even disregarding the blatant Caesaropapism. The fact that the Tsar was allowed to go through the royal doors to recieve the eucharist, for example, is something that makes me twitch. I could be confused though, as the doors separating the Narthex from the Nave are also called the "royal doors." Issues with translation and misnomers between Greek and Russian.
And I'm a monarchist.
I would, of course, be willing to hear further arguments in favor or against it.
The Tsar had taken the place (with the blessing of the Patriarch of Constantinople) of the Emperor after Constantinople fell to the Muslims - from whence Moscow became the "Third Rome". The Tsar was doing nothing different that the Emperor had done as the defender of Orthodoxy (including using the "Royal Doors" - that's where the adjective "royal" came from to start with). Oh! This must be why their heraldry involved the Byzantine eagle? Yes, exactly so. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
|
|
|
|
jckstraw72
|
|
« Reply #8 on: December 10, 2011, 02:24:17 AM » |
|
the emperor of Byzantium also communed in the altar. heck, even the empress sometimes -- Nestorius got himself in trouble for refusing to commune the empress Pulcheria in the altar.
and the Romanovs are martyrs!
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 02:24:38 AM by jckstraw72 »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
NicholasMyra
|
|
« Reply #9 on: December 10, 2011, 02:50:57 AM » |
|
the Romanovs are martyrs!
Passion-bearers, not martyrs, according to the ROC. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever |
|
|
Antonis
Prodigal
OC.net guru
Offline
Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 1,045
You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.
|
|
« Reply #10 on: December 10, 2011, 03:02:59 PM » |
|
the emperor of Byzantium also communed in the altar. heck, even the empress sometimes -- Nestorius got himself in trouble for refusing to commune the empress Pulcheria in the altar.
Really now? Huh, I'd never heard of it. Just goes to show how ignorant I am, more reading! Thank you very much. Not sure if this has been posted before, for anyone interested: http://www.orthodoxchristianbooks.com/articles/273/must-an-orthodox-christian-be-a-monarchist/ |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 10, 2011, 03:10:32 PM by Antonis »
|
Logged
|
For peace in the whole world,
for the stability of the holy churches of God,
and for the unity of all,
let us pray to the Lord.
|
|
|
|
mike
|
|
« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2011, 04:31:04 PM » |
|
the Romanovs are martyrs!
Passion-bearers, not martyrs, according to the ROC. According to the ROCOR they are Martyrs. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jckstraw72
|
|
« Reply #12 on: December 10, 2011, 09:42:59 PM » |
|
the Romanovs are martyrs!
Passion-bearers, not martyrs, according to the ROC. According to the ROCOR they are Martyrs. and in my experience, the two terms are often used interchangably in the hymns anyways ... martyrs called passion-bearers, and vice versa. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Cognomen
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
Offline
Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Phyletism Rules, OK
Posts: 1,968
Ungrateful Biped
|
|
« Reply #13 on: December 10, 2011, 10:48:56 PM » |
|
I'll admit that I struggle to understand certain decisions, but on matters such as this, I must defer to the wisdom of the Church; It (She/we?) knows better than I do.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
North American Eastern Orthodox Parish Council Delegate for the Canonization of Saints Twin Towers and Pentagon, as well as the Propagation of the Doctrine of the Assumption of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 (NAEOPCDCSTTPPDAMAFM®).
|
|
|
|
|
|
jckstraw72
|
|
« Reply #15 on: December 10, 2011, 11:16:44 PM » |
|
i think its pretty clear that the Communists were just as much enemies of the Church as they were of the Royal government, and at that time in Russia the Tsar was the secular head of the Church. The Tsar was crowned by the Church and understood as a Church position. I think its pretty hard to make an argument that the Romanovs were killed only because of government.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Volnutt
|
|
« Reply #16 on: December 10, 2011, 11:22:33 PM » |
|
i think its pretty clear that the Communists were just as much enemies of the Church as they were of the Royal government, and at that time in Russia the Tsar was the secular head of the Church. The Tsar was crowned by the Church and understood as a Church position. I think its pretty hard to make an argument that the Romanovs were killed only because of government.
Makes sense to me. They didn't offer to become atheists in a last ditch effort to save their skins. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Cognomen
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
Offline
Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: Phyletism Rules, OK
Posts: 1,968
Ungrateful Biped
|
|
« Reply #17 on: December 10, 2011, 11:39:28 PM » |
|
i think its pretty clear that the Communists were just as much enemies of the Church as they were of the Royal government, and at that time in Russia the Tsar was the secular head of the Church. The Tsar was crowned by the Church and understood as a Church position. I think its pretty hard to make an argument that the Romanovs were killed only because of government.
Makes sense to me. They didn't offer to become atheists in a last ditch effort to save their skins. Sure, but I don't think it was exactly posed in that manner. If they were murdered primarily for their association with the Church, why wouldn't they have been murdered immediately as part of severing this? The political side, in the context of an increasingly serious civil war, makes more sense in this case. I'm not saying their faith definitely wasn't a factor, but I'm not aware of anything indicating that it was part of the calculations. I could be wrong though; it's happened 7 times before. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
North American Eastern Orthodox Parish Council Delegate for the Canonization of Saints Twin Towers and Pentagon, as well as the Propagation of the Doctrine of the Assumption of Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370 (NAEOPCDCSTTPPDAMAFM®).
|
|
|
|
Volnutt
|
|
« Reply #18 on: December 10, 2011, 11:54:41 PM » |
|
i think its pretty clear that the Communists were just as much enemies of the Church as they were of the Royal government, and at that time in Russia the Tsar was the secular head of the Church. The Tsar was crowned by the Church and understood as a Church position. I think its pretty hard to make an argument that the Romanovs were killed only because of government.
Makes sense to me. They didn't offer to become atheists in a last ditch effort to save their skins. Sure, but I don't think it was exactly posed in that manner. If they were murdered primarily for their association with the Church, why wouldn't they have been murdered immediately as part of severing this? The political side, in the context of an increasingly serious civil war, makes more sense in this case. I'm not saying their faith definitely wasn't a factor, but I'm not aware of anything indicating that it was part of the calculations. I could be wrong though; it's happened 7 times before. True, but given the character of Revolutionary rhetoric, it was probably always kind of hovering in the background. If Nicholas had offered to give up all title and privilege, I have a feeling the Bolsheviks would not have accepted that apart from a renunciation of the Church as well. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
