Canonization of the royal family- glorification in the guise of Orthodox saints of the last Russian emperor Nicholas II, his wife and five children, who were shot in the basement of the Ipatiev house in Yekaterinburg on the night of July 16-17, 1918.

In 1981, they were canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad, and in 2000, after lengthy disputes that caused a significant resonance in Russia, they were canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church, and are currently revered by it as "Royal Passion-bearers".

Main dates

• 1918 - the execution of the royal family.
• In 1928 they were canonized by the Catacomb Church.
• In 1938 they were canonized by the Serbian Orthodox Church (this fact is disputed by Professor A. I. Osipov). The first news about the appeals of believers to the Synod of the Serbian Church with a petition for the canonization of Nicholas II dates back to 1930.
• In 1981 they were glorified by the Russian Church Abroad.
• October 1996 - The ROC Commission on the glorification of the Royal Martyrs presented its report
• On August 20, 2000, the Russian Orthodox Church was canonized as the Holy New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, both revealed and unrevealed.

Day of Remembrance: July 4 (17) (the day of the execution), as well as among the Cathedral of the New Martyrs - January 25 (February 7), if this day coincides with Sunday, and if it does not coincide, then on the next Sunday after January 25 (February 7).

background

Execution

On the night of July 16-17, 1918, the Romanovs and their attendants were shot in the basement of the Ipatiev House by order of the "Ural Soviet of Workers', Peasants' and Soldiers' Deputies", headed by the Bolsheviks.

Almost immediately after the announcement of the execution of the tsar and his family, moods began to arise in the believing layers of Russian society, which eventually led to canonization.

Three days after the execution, on July 8 (21), 1918, during a divine service in the Kazan Cathedral in Moscow, Patriarch Tikhon delivered a sermon in which he outlined the "essence of the spiritual feat" of the tsar and the church's attitude to the issue of execution: “The other day, a terrible thing happened: the former Sovereign Nikolai Alexandrovich was shot ... We must, in obedience to the teaching of the word of God, condemn this deed, otherwise the blood of the person who was shot will fall on us, and not only on those who committed it. We know that when he abdicated, he did this with the good of Russia in mind and out of love for her. After his renunciation, he could have found security and a relatively quiet life abroad, but he did not do this, wanting to suffer along with Russia. He did nothing to improve his position, meekly resigned himself to fate. In addition, Patriarch Tikhon blessed the archpastors and pastors to perform memorial services for the Romanovs.

The almost mystical respect for the anointed one, characteristic of the people, the tragic circumstances of his death at the hands of enemies, and the pity caused by the death of innocent children - all this became components from which the attitude towards the royal family gradually grew not as victims of political struggle, but as to Christian martyrs. As the Russian Orthodox Church notes, “the veneration of the Royal Family, begun by Tikhon, continued - despite the prevailing ideology - throughout several decades of the Soviet period of our history. The clergy and laity offered up prayers to God for the repose of the slain sufferers, members of the Royal Family. In the houses in the red corner one could see photographs of the Royal Family. There are no statistics on how widespread this veneration was.

In the émigré circle these sentiments were even more evident. For example, in the emigrant press there were reports of miracles performed by royal martyrs (1947, see below: Declared miracles of royal martyrs). Metropolitan Anthony of Surozh, in his 1991 interview characterizing the situation among Russian emigrants, points out that “many abroad venerate them as saints. Those who belong to the patriarchal church or other churches perform memorial services in their memory, and even prayers. And in private they consider themselves free to pray to them, ”which, in his opinion, is already a local veneration. In 1981, the royal family was glorified by the Church Abroad.

In the 1980s, even in Russia, voices began to be heard about the official canonization of at least the executed children (unlike Nicholas and Alexandra, their innocence is beyond doubt). Icons painted without church blessing are mentioned, in which only they were depicted alone, without parents. In 1992, the sister of the Empress Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna, another victim of the Bolsheviks, was canonized. However, there were also many opponents of canonization.

Arguments against canonization

• The death of Emperor Nicholas II and members of his family was not a martyr's death for Christ, but only political repression.
• The unsuccessful state and church policy of the emperor, including such events as Khodynka, Bloody Sunday and the Lena massacre, and the extremely controversial activities of Grigory Rasputin.
• The abdication of the anointed king from the throne should be regarded as an ecclesiastical canonical crime, similar to the refusal of a representative of the church hierarchy from the priesthood.
• "The religiosity of the royal couple, for all their outwardly traditional Orthodoxy, had a distinct character of inter-confessional mysticism"
• The active movement for the canonization of the royal family in the 1990s was not of a spiritual, but of a political nature.
• “neither the holy Patriarch Tikhon, nor the holy Metropolitan Veniamin of Petrograd, nor the holy Metropolitan Peter of Krutitsy, nor the holy Metropolitan Seraphim (Chichagov), nor the holy Archbishop Thaddeus, nor Archbishop Hilarion (Troitsky), who, no doubt, will soon be canonized as saints, nor the other hierarchs now glorified by our Church, the new martyrs, who knew much more and better than we now, the personality of the former Tsar - none of them ever expressed the thought of him as a holy martyr (and at that time it was still possible to declare this in whole voice)
• Causes deep bewilderment and promoted by supporters of canonization of responsibility for "the gravest sin of regicide, which weighs on all the peoples of Russia."

Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia

The Russian Orthodox Church Abroad canonized Nicholas and the entire royal family in 1981. At the same time, the Russian New Martyrs and ascetics of that time were canonized, including Patriarch Tikhon (Bellavin) of Moscow and All Russia.

ROC

The official church of the latter raised the issue of the canonization of the executed monarchs (which, of course, was connected with the political situation in the country). In considering this issue, she faced the example of other Orthodox churches, the reputation that the dead had long begun to enjoy in the eyes of believers, as well as the fact that they had already been glorified as locally venerated saints in the Yekaterinburg, Lugansk, Bryansk, Odessa and Tulchinsk dioceses of the Russian Orthodox Church .

In 1992, by the decision of the Council of Bishops of March 31 - April 4, the Synodal Commission for the canonization of saints was instructed “when studying the exploits of the New Martyrs of Russia, begin researching materials related to the martyrdom of the Royal Family”. From 1992 to 1997, the Commission, headed by Metropolitan Yuvenaly, devoted 19 meetings to this topic, in between which the members of the commission carried out in-depth research work to study various aspects of the life of the Royal Family. At the Council of Bishops in 1994, the report of the chairman of the commission outlined the position on a number of studies completed by that time.

The results of the work of the Commission were reported to the Holy Synod at a meeting on October 10, 1996. A report was published in which the position of the Russian Orthodox Church on this issue was announced. Based on this positive report, further steps were possible.

The main theses of the report:

• Canonization should not give reasons and arguments in the political struggle or worldly confrontations. Its purpose, on the contrary, is to promote the unification of the people of God in faith and piety.
• In connection with the particularly active activity of modern monarchists, the Commission emphasized its position: “the canonization of the Monarch is in no way connected with the monarchist ideology and, moreover, does not mean the “canonization” of the monarchical form of government ... While glorifying the saint, the Church does not pursue political goals ... but testifies before already honoring the righteous by the people of God, that the ascetic canonized by her really pleased God and intercedes for us before the Throne of God, regardless of what position he occupied in his earthly life.
• The commission notes that in the life of Nicholas II there were two periods of unequal duration and spiritual significance - the time of the reign and the time of being in prison. In the first period (staying in power), the Commission did not find sufficient grounds for canonization, the second period (spiritual and physical suffering) is more important for the Church, and therefore she focused her attention on it.

Based on the arguments taken into account by the ROC (see below), as well as thanks to petitions and miracles, the Commission announced the following conclusion:

“Behind the many sufferings endured by the Royal Family over the last 17 months of their lives, which ended in execution in the basement of the Yekaterinburg Ipatiev House on the night of July 17, 1918, we see people who sincerely strived to embody the commandments of the Gospel in their lives. In the suffering endured by the Royal Family in captivity with meekness, patience and humility, in their martyrdom, the light of Christ's faith that overcomes evil was revealed, just as it shone in the life and death of millions of Orthodox Christians who suffered persecution for Christ in the 20th century. It is in understanding this feat of the Royal Family that the Commission, in complete unanimity and with the approval of the Holy Synod, finds it possible to glorify in the Cathedral of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in the face of the Passion-Bearers Emperor Nicholas II, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatyana, Maria and Anastasia.

In 2000, at the Council of Bishops of the Russian Church, the royal family was canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church as a saint as part of the Council of New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, revealed and unmanifested (in total, including 860 people). The final decision was made on August 14 at a meeting in the hall of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, and until the very last moment it was not known whether the canonization would take place or not. They voted by standing up, and the decision was taken unanimously. The only church hierarch who spoke out against the canonization of the royal family was Metropolitan Nikolai (Kutepov) of Nizhny Novgorod: “ when all the bishops signed the act of canonization, I marked next to my mural that I signed everything except the third paragraph. In the third paragraph, the tsar-father was walking, and I did not sign under his canonization. ... he is a traitor. ... he, one might say, sanctioned the collapse of the country. And no one will convince me otherwise.» The rite of canonization was performed on August 20, 2000.

From the “Acts on the Cathedral Glorification of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in the 20th Century”:

“Glorify as passion-bearers in the host of new martyrs and confessors of Russia the Royal Family: Emperor Nicholas II, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana, Maria and Anastasia. In the last Orthodox Russian monarch and members of his Family, we see people who sincerely strived to embody the commandments of the Gospel in their lives. In the suffering endured by the Imperial family in captivity with meekness, patience and humility, in their martyrdom in Yekaterinburg on the night of July 4 (17), 1918, the light of Christ's faith that conquers evil was revealed, just as it shone in life and death. millions of Orthodox Christians who endured persecution for Christ in the 20th century... Report the names of the newly-glorified saints to the Primates of the fraternal Local Orthodox Churches for their inclusion in the holy calendar.”

Arguments for canonization, taken into account by the ROC

• Circumstances of death- physical, moral suffering and death at the hands of political opponents.
• Wide popular veneration royal passion-bearers served as one of the main grounds for their glorification as saints.
• “conversions of individual clerics and laity, as well as groups of believers from different dioceses, with support for the canonization of the Royal Family. Some of them bear the signatures of several thousand people. Among the authors of such appeals are Russian emigrants, as well as clerics and laity of the fraternal Orthodox Churches. Many of those who applied to the Commission spoke in favor of the speedy, immediate canonization of the Royal Martyrs. The idea of ​​the need for the speedy glorification of the Sovereign and the Royal Martyrs was expressed by a number of church and public organizations. In three years, 22,873 appeals for the glorification of the royal family were received, according to Metropolitan Yuvenaly.
• « Testimonies of miracles and grace-filled help through prayers to the Royal Martyrs. They are about healings, uniting separated families, protecting church property from schismatics. Particularly abundant is evidence of the myrrh-streaming of icons with images of Emperor Nicholas II and the Royal Martyrs, of the fragrance and miraculous appearance of blood-colored spots on the icons of the Royal Martyrs.
• Personal piety of the Sovereign: the emperor paid great attention to the needs of the Orthodox Church, generously donated to the construction of new churches, including those outside Russia. Deep religiosity singled out the Imperial couple among the representatives of the then aristocracy. All its members lived in accordance with the traditions of Orthodox piety. During the years of his reign, more saints were canonized than in the previous two centuries (in particular, Theodosius of Chernigov, Seraphim of Sarov, Anna Kashinskaya, Joasaph of Belgorod, Hermogenes of Moscow, Pitirim of Tambov, John of Tobolsk).
• “The Church policy of the Emperor did not go beyond the traditional synodal system of governing the Church. However, it was during the reign of Emperor Nicholas II that until then for two centuries the church hierarchy, which had been officially silent on the issue of convening a Council, had the opportunity not only to widely discuss, but also to practically prepare the convening of the Local Council.
• The activities of the empress and led. princes as sisters of mercy during the war.
• “Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich often likened his life to the trials of the sufferer Job, on the day of whose church memory he was born. Having accepted his cross in the same way as the biblical righteous man, he endured all the trials sent down to him firmly, meekly and without a shadow of grumbling. It is this long-suffering that is revealed with particular clarity in the last days of the Emperor's life. From the moment of renunciation, it is not so much external events as the internal spiritual state of the Sovereign that draws our attention to itself. Most witnesses of the last period of the life of the Royal Martyrs speak of the prisoners of the Tobolsk governor's and Yekaterinburg Ipatiev houses as people who suffered and, despite all the mockery and insults, led a pious life. "Their true greatness did not stem from their royal dignity, but from that amazing moral height to which they gradually rose."

Refutation of the arguments of opponents of canonization

• The emperor cannot be blamed for the events of Bloody Sunday: “The order to the troops to open fire was given not by the Emperor, but by the Commander of the St. Petersburg Military District. Historical data do not allow us to detect in the actions of the Sovereign in the January days of 1905 a conscious evil will directed against the people and embodied in specific sinful decisions and actions.
• The guilt of Nicholas as an unsuccessful statesman should not be considered: “we must evaluate not this or that form of government, but the place that a particular person occupies in the state mechanism. The extent to which this or that person has managed to embody Christian ideals in his activity is subject to assessment. It should be noted that Nicholas II treated the duties of the monarch as his sacred duty.
• Renunciation of the royal dignity is not a crime against the church: “The desire, typical for some opponents of the canonization of Emperor Nicholas II, to present his abdication of the Throne as an ecclesiastical canonical crime, similar to the refusal of a representative of the church hierarchy from the holy dignity, cannot be recognized as having any serious grounds . The canonical status of the Orthodox sovereign anointed for the Kingdom was not defined in church canons. Therefore, attempts to discover the composition of some ecclesiastical canonical crime in the abdication of Emperor Nicholas II from power seem to be untenable. On the contrary, “The spiritual motives for which the last Russian Sovereign, who did not want to shed the blood of his subjects, decided to abdicate the Throne in the name of inner peace in Russia, gives his act a truly moral character.”
• "There is no reason to see in the relations of the Royal Family with Rasputin signs of spiritual delusion, and even more so of insufficient churching - there is no reason."

Aspects of canonization

Question about the face of holiness

In Orthodoxy, there is a very developed and carefully worked out hierarchy of faces of holiness - categories into which it is customary to divide saints depending on their work during their lifetime. The question of what kind of saints the royal family should be included in causes a lot of controversy among various currents of the Orthodox Church, which evaluate the life and death of the family in different ways.

• Passion-bearers- an option chosen by the Russian Orthodox Church, which did not find grounds for canonization in the face of martyrs. In the tradition (hagiographic and liturgical) of the Russian Church, the term “passion-bearer” is used in relation to those Russian saints who, “imitating Christ, patiently endured physical, moral suffering and death at the hands of political opponents. In the history of the Russian Church, such martyrs were the holy noble princes Boris and Gleb (+1015), Igor Chernigov (+1147), Andrei Bogolyubsky (+1174), Mikhail of Tverskoy (+1319), Tsarevich Dimitri (+1591). All of them, with their feat of passion-bearers, showed a high example of Christian morality and patience.
• Martyrs- despite the assignment of the death of the royal family to the category of martyrdom (see above the definition of the Council of Bishops), in order to be included in this face of holiness, it is necessary to suffer precisely for witnessing one's faith in Christ. Despite this, ROCOR in 1981 glorified the royal family in this very image of holiness. The reason for this was the reworking of the traditional principles of canonization in the face of martyrs by Archpriest Mikhail Polsky, who fled the USSR, who, based on the recognition of “Soviet power” in the USSR as essentially anti-Christian, considered all Orthodox Christians killed by representatives of state power in Soviet Russia to be “new Russian martyrs”. Moreover, in his interpretation, Christian martyrdom washes away all previously former sins from a person.

• the faithful- the most common face of holiness for monarchs. In Russia, this epithet even acted as part of the official title of the Grand Dukes and the first tsars. However, traditionally it is not used for saints canonized as martyrs or martyrs. Another important detail is that persons who had the status of a monarch at the time of death are glorified in the face of the faithful. Nicholas II, having abdicated the throne, at the direction of the professor of the Moscow Theological Academy A. I. Osipov, created a temptation for believers, without enduring, according to the word of the Gospel, to the end (Matt. 10:22). Osipov also believes that during the abdication of the throne, there was a renunciation of the grace received, according to the teachings of the church, during the worldview at the time of the crowning of the kingdom. Despite this, in radical monarchical circles, Nicholas II is also revered among the faithful.
• Also, in radical monarchical and pseudo-Orthodox circles, the epithet " redeemer". This is manifested both in written appeals sent to the Moscow Patriarchate when considering the issue of canonization of the royal family, and in non-canonical akathists and prayers: “ Oh wonderful and glorious Tsar-redeemer Nicholas". However, at a meeting of the Moscow clergy, Patriarch Alexy II spoke unequivocally about the inadmissibility of such a thing, stating that “ if he sees books in some church in which Nicholas II is called the Redeemer, he will consider the rector of this church as a preacher of heresy. We have one Redeemer - Christ».

Metropolitan Sergius (Fomin) in 2006 spoke disapprovingly about the action of a nationwide conciliar repentance for the sin of regicide, carried out by a number of near-Orthodox circles: “ The canonization of Nicholas II and his family as martyrs does not satisfy the newly-minted zealots of the monarchy", and called such monarchical predilections " the heresy of kings". (The reason is that the face of the martyrs seems to be not “solid” enough for the monarchists.)

Canonization of servants

Together with the Romanovs, four of their servants, who followed their masters into exile, were also shot. ROCOR canonized them jointly with the royal family. And the ROC points to a formal mistake made by the Church Abroad during the canonization against custom: “It should be noted that the decision, which has no historical analogies in the Orthodox Church, to include among the canonized, who, together with the Royal Family, were martyred, was the royal servant of the Roman Catholic Aloysius Egorovich Trupp and the Lutheran Goflektress Ekaterina Adolfovna Schneider”.

The position of the Russian Orthodox Church itself regarding the canonization of servants is as follows: “Due to the fact that they voluntarily remained with the Royal Family and were martyred, it would be legitimate to raise the question of their canonization”. In addition to the four who were shot in the basement, the Commission mentions that this list should have included those “killed” in various places and in different months of 1918, Adjutant General I. L. Tatishchev, Marshal Prince V. A. Dolgorukov, the “uncle” of the Heir K. G. Nagorny, children's footman I. D. Sednev, maid of honor of the Empress A. V. Gendrikov and goflektriss E. A. Schneider. Nevertheless, the Commission concluded that it “does not seem possible to it to make a final decision on the existence of grounds for the canonization of this group of laity, who accompanied the Royal Family on duty in their court service,” since there is no information about a wide nominal prayer commemoration of these servants by believers, in addition , there is no information about their religious life and personal piety. The final conclusion was: “The commission came to the conclusion that the most appropriate form of honoring the Christian feat of the faithful servants of the Royal Family, who shared its tragic fate, today may be to perpetuate this feat in the lives of the Royal Martyrs”.

Besides, there is one more problem. While the royal family has been canonized as martyrs, it is not possible to rank the suffered servants in the same category, because, as one of the members of the Commission stated in an interview, “since ancient times, the rank of martyrs has been applied only to representatives of grand ducal and royal families” .

Society's reaction to canonization

Positive

• The canonization of the royal family eliminated one of the contradictions between the Russian and Russian Churches Abroad (which canonized them 20 years earlier), noted in 2000 the chairman of the department for external church relations, Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad. The same point of view was expressed by Prince Nikolai Romanovich Romanov (Chairman of the Association of the House of Romanov), who, however, refused to participate in the act of canonization in Moscow, citing that he was present at the canonization ceremony, which was held in 1981 in New York by ROCOR.
• Andrei Kuraev: “It was not the form of reign of Nicholas II that was canonized, but the form of his death… The 20th century was a terrible one for Russian Christianity. And you can not leave it without summing up some results. Since this was the age of martyrs, one could go in two ways in canonization: try to glorify all the new martyrs (...) Or canonize a certain Unknown Soldier, honor one innocently shot Cossack family, and with it millions of others. But this way for the church consciousness would probably be too radical. Moreover, in Russia there has always been a kind of identity “tsar-people.”

Modern veneration of the royal family by believers

Churches

• The chapel-monument to the deceased Russian emigrants, Nicholas II and his august family was erected at the cemetery in Zagreb (1935)
• Chapel in memory of Emperor Nicholas II and Serbian King Alexander I in Harbin (1936)
• Church of St. martyr king and sv. New Martyrs and Confessors in Villemoisson, France (1980s)
• Temple of the Sovereign Icon of the Mother of God, Zhukovsky
• Church of St. Tsar Martyr Nicholas in Nikolskoye
• Church of the Holy Royal Passion-Bearers Nicholas and Alexandra, pos. Sertolovo
• Monastery in honor of the Holy Royal Passion-Bearers near Yekaterinburg.

Icons

• Myrrh-streaming icons
• Myrrh-streaming icon in Butovo
• Myrrh-streaming icon in the church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker in Biryulyovo
• The myrrh-streaming icon of Oleg Belchenko (the first report of myrrh-streaming in the house of the writer A. V. Dyakova on November 7, 1998, that is, before the canonization of the royal family), is located in the church of St. Nicholas in Pyzhi
• Bleeding Icon
• fragrant icon

Iconography

There is both a collective image of the whole family, and each of the members individually. In the icons of the “foreign” model, canonized servants join the Romanovs. Passion-bearers can be depicted both in their contemporary clothes of the early twentieth century, and in robes stylized as Ancient Rus', reminiscent of royal robes with parsun in style.

The figures of the Saint Romanovs are also found in the multi-figured icons "Cathedral of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia" and "Cathedral of the Saint Patrons of Hunters and Fishermen".

relics

Patriarch Alexy, on the eve of the classes of the Bishops' Council in 2000, which performed an act of glorification of the royal family, spoke about the remains found near Yekaterinburg: “We have doubts about the authenticity of the remains, and we cannot encourage believers to worship false relics if they are recognized as such in the future.” Metropolitan Yuvenaly (Poyarkov), referring to the judgment of the Holy Synod of February 26, 1998 (“The assessment of the reliability of scientific and investigative conclusions, as well as evidence of their inviolability or irrefutability, is not within the competence of the Church. Scientific and historical responsibility for the decisions taken during the investigation and studying the conclusions regarding the "Yekaterinburg remains" falls entirely on the Republican Center for Forensic Research and the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation. The decision of the State Commission to identify the remains found near Yekaterinburg as belonging to the Family of Emperor Nicholas II caused serious doubts and even opposition in the Church and society. " ), reported to the Council of Bishops in August 2000: “The “Ekaterinburg remains” buried on July 17, 1998 in St. Petersburg today cannot be recognized by us as belonging to the Royal Family.”

In view of this position of the Moscow Patriarchate, which has not changed since then, the remains identified by the government commission as belonging to members of the royal family and buried in July 1998 in the Peter and Paul Cathedral are not revered by the church as holy relics.

Revered as the relics of relics with a clearer origin, for example, the hair of Nicholas, cut off at the age of three.

Declared miracles of royal martyrs

Miraculous deliverance of hundreds of Cossacks. The story about this event appeared in 1947 in the Russian émigré press. The story set forth in it dates back to the time of the civil war, when a detachment of White Cossacks, surrounded and driven by the Reds into impenetrable swamps, appealed for help to the not yet officially glorified Tsarevich Alexei, since, according to the regimental priest, Fr. Elijah, in trouble, one should have prayed to the prince, as to the ataman of the Cossack troops. To the objection of the soldiers that the royal family was not officially glorified, the priest allegedly replied that the glorification takes place by the will of "God's people", and swore he assured the others that their prayer would not go unanswered, and indeed, the Cossacks managed to get out through the swamps that were considered impassable. The numbers of those saved by the intercession of the prince are called - “ 43 women, 14 children, 7 wounded, 11 elderly and disabled, 1 priest, 22 Cossacks, total 98 men and 31 horses».

The miracle of dry branches. One of the latest miracles recognized by the official church authorities occurred on January 7, 2007 in the Church of the Transfiguration of the Savvino-Storozhevsky Monastery in Zvenigorod, which was once a place of worship for the last tsar and his family. The boys from the monastery shelter, who came to the temple to rehearse the traditional Christmas performance, allegedly noticed that the long-withered branches lying under the glass of the icon of the royal martyrs gave seven shoots (according to the number of faces depicted on the icon) and released green flowers, 1-2 in diameter. see resembling roses, and the flowers and the mother branch belonged to different plant species. According to the publications referring to this event, the service, during which the branches were placed on the icon, was held in Pokrov, that is, three months earlier.

Miraculously grown flowers, four in number, were placed in an icon case, where by the time of Easter they “have not changed at all”, but by the beginning of the Holy Week of Great Lent, green shoots up to 3 cm long were unexpectedly thrown out. Another flower broke off and was planted in the ground , where it turned into a small plant. What happened to the other two is unknown.

With the blessing of Savva, the icon was transferred to the Cathedral of the Nativity of the Virgin, to Savvin's chapel, where, apparently, it is found to this day.

Descent of the miraculous fire. As stated, this miracle happened in the Cathedral of the Holy Iberian Monastery in Odessa, when during the divine service on February 15, 2000, a tongue of snow-white flame appeared on the throne of the temple. According to Hieromonk Peter (Golubenkov):

When I finished communing people and entered the altar with the Holy Gifts, after the words: “Save, O Lord, Thy people and bless Thy inheritance,” a flash of fire appeared on the throne (on the diskos). At first I did not understand what it was, but then, when I saw this fire, it was impossible to describe the joy that seized my heart. At first I thought it was a piece of coal from a censer. But this little petal of fire was the size of a poplar leaf and all white and white. Then I compared the white color of the snow - and it is impossible even to compare - the snow seems to be grayish. I thought that this is a demonic temptation that happens. And when he took the cup with the Holy Gifts to the altar, there was no one near the altar, and many parishioners saw how the petals of the Holy Fire scattered over the antimension, then gathered together and entered the altar lamp. The evidence of that miracle of the descent of the Holy Fire continued throughout the day...

A miraculous image. In July 2001, in the monastery cathedral of the village of Bogolyubskoye, in the upper hemisphere of the ceiling, an image with a crown on his head gradually began to appear, in which they recognized the last tsar of the Romanov dynasty. According to witnesses, it is not possible to create something like this artificially, since the village is relatively small in size, and everyone here knows each other, moreover, it would be impossible to conceal such work by building scaffolding up to the ceiling at night, and at the same time it would be impossible to leave unnoticed . It is also added that the image did not appear instantly, but appeared constantly, as if on photographic film. According to the testimony of the parishioners of the Holy Bogolyubsky Church, the process did not end there, but on the right side of the iconostasis, the image of Empress Alexandra Feodorovna with her son gradually began to appear.

Skepticism about miracles

Professor of the MDA A. I. Osipov writes that when evaluating reports of miracles associated with the royal family, one should take into account that such “ facts in themselves do not at all confirm the holiness of those (a person, denomination, religion), through whom and where they are performed, and that such phenomena can also occur by virtue of faith - “according to your faith, let it be done to you” (Matthew 9:29 ), and by the action of another spirit (Acts 16:16-18), “to deceive, if possible, even the elect” (Matt. 24:24), and, perhaps, for other reasons, as yet unknown to us».

Osipov also notes the following aspects of canonical norms regarding miracles:

• Church recognition of a miracle requires the testimony of the ruling bishop. Only after it can we talk about the nature of this phenomenon - whether it is a divine miracle or a phenomenon of a different order. With regard to most of the described miracles associated with the royal martyrs, there is no such evidence.
• Declaring someone a saint without the blessing of the ruling bishop and a conciliar decision is a non-canonical act, and therefore all references to the miracles of the royal martyrs before their canonization should be taken with skepticism.
• The icon is an image of an ascetic canonized by the church, so the miracles from the icons painted to the official canonization are doubtful.

"The rite of repentance for the sins of the Russian people" and more

Since the end of the 1990s, annually, on the days dedicated to the anniversaries of the birth of the "Martyr Tsar Nicholas" by some representatives of the clergy (in particular, Archimandrite Peter (Kucher)), in Taininsky (Moscow Region), at the monument to Nicholas II by the sculptor Vyacheslav Klykov, a special "Order of repentance for the sins of the Russian people" is performed; the holding of the event was condemned by the hierarchy of the Russian Orthodox Church (Patriarch Alexy II in 2007).

Among some Orthodox, the concept of the "Tsar-redeemer" is in circulation, according to which Nicholas II is revered as "the redeemer of the sin of unfaithfulness of his people"; the concept is referred to by some as the "royal heresy"

Professor Sergei Mironenko on the personality and fatal mistakes of the last Russian emperor

In the year of the 100th anniversary of the revolution, talk about Nicholas II and his role in the tragedy of 1917 does not stop: the truth and myths in these conversations are often mixed. Scientific director of the State Archive of the Russian Federation Sergey Mironenko- about Nicholas II as a man, ruler, family man, martyr.

"Nicky, you're just some kind of Muslim!"

Sergei Vladimirovich, in one of your interviews you called Nicholas II "frozen". What did you mean? What was the emperor like as a person, as a person?

Nicholas II loved the theatre, opera and ballet, he loved physical exercise. He had unassuming tastes. He liked to drink a glass or two of vodka. Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich recalled that when they were young, he and Nicky once sat on a sofa and pushed with their feet, who would knock someone off the sofa. Or another example - a diary entry during a visit to relatives in Greece about how nicely they left oranges with cousin Georgie. He was already quite an adult young man, but something childish remained in him: leaving oranges, kicking his feet. Absolutely alive person! But still, it seems to me, he was so kind of ... not a daredevil, not “eh!”. You know, sometimes meat is fresh, and sometimes when it was first frozen, and then thawed, you know? In this sense - "frostbitten".

Sergei Mironenko
Photo: DP28

Restrained? Many noted that he very dryly described the terrible events in his diary: next to him was the shooting of the demonstration, and the lunch menu. Or that the emperor remained absolutely calm when receiving heavy news from the front of the Japanese war. What does this indicate?

In the imperial family, keeping a diary was one of the elements of education. A person was taught to write down what happened to him at the end of the day, and in this way to give an account of how you lived this day. If the diaries of Nicholas II are used for the history of the weather, then this would be a wonderful source. “Morning, so many degrees of frost, got up at so much.” Always! Plus or minus: "sunny, windy" - he always wrote it down.

Similar diaries were kept by his grandfather Emperor Alexander II. The Ministry of War published small commemorative books: each sheet was divided into three days, and so Alexander II managed all day, from the moment he got up to the moment he went to bed, to paint his whole day on such a small sheet. Of course, this was only a record of the formal side of life. Basically, Alexander II wrote down who he received, with whom he dined, with whom he dined, where he was, at a review or somewhere else, etc. Rarely-rarely something emotional breaks through. In 1855, when his father, Emperor Nicholas I, was dying, he wrote: “Such an hour. Last terrible torment. This is a different type of diary! And Nikolai's emotional assessments are extremely rare. In general, he seemed to be an introvert by nature.

- Today you can often see in the press a certain average image of Tsar Nicholas II: a man of noble aspirations, an exemplary family man, but a weak politician. How true is this image?

As for the fact that one image was established - this is wrong. There are diametrically opposed points of view. For example, academician Yuri Sergeevich Pivovarov claims that Nicholas II was a major, successful statesman. Well, you yourself know that there are many monarchists who bow before Nicholas II.

I think that this is just the right image: he really was a very good person, a wonderful family man and, of course, a deeply religious person. But as a politician, he was absolutely out of place, I would say so.

Coronation of Nicholas II

When Nicholas II ascended the throne, he was 26 years old. Why, despite a brilliant education, he was not ready to be king? And there is such evidence that he did not want accession to the throne, was he burdened by this?

Behind me are the diaries of Nicholas II, which we published: if you read them, everything becomes clear. He was actually a very responsible person, he understood all the burden of responsibility that fell on his shoulders. But, of course, he did not think that his father, Emperor Alexander III, would die at 49, he thought that he still had some time to spare. Nicholas was weighed down by the ministers' reports. Although one can treat Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich differently, I think he was absolutely right when he wrote about the features characteristic of Nicholas II. For example, he said that Nikolai was right in the one who came to him last. Various issues are being discussed, and Nikolai takes the point of view of the one who came into his office last. Maybe it was not always like this, but this is a certain vector that Alexander Mikhailovich speaks about.

Another trait of his is fatalism. Nicholas believed that since he was born on May 6, the day of Job the Long-suffering, he was destined to suffer. Grand Duke Alexander Mikhailovich told him about this: “Niki (that was the name of Nicholas in the family) you're just some kind of muslim! We have the Orthodox faith, it gives free will, and your life depends on you, there is no such fatalistic destiny in our faith.” But Nicholas was sure that he was destined to suffer.

In one of your lectures, you said that he really had a lot of suffering. Do you think that this was somehow connected with his warehouse, mood?

You see, each person makes his own destiny. If you think from the very beginning that you are created to suffer, in the end, so it will be in life!

The most important misfortune, of course, is that they had a terminally ill child. This cannot be discounted. And it turned out literally immediately after birth: the umbilical cord of the Tsarevich was bleeding ... This, of course, frightened the family, they hid for a very long time that their child was sick with hemophilia. For example, the sister of Nicholas II, Grand Duchess Xenia, found out about this almost 8 years after the birth of the heir!

Then, difficult situations in politics - Nicholas was not ready to manage the vast Russian Empire in such a difficult period of time.

On the birth of Tsarevich Alexei

The summer of 1904 was marked by a joyful event, the birth of the unfortunate crown prince. Russia has been waiting for an heir for so long, and how many times has this hope turned into disappointment that his birth was greeted with enthusiasm, but the joy did not last long. Even in our house there was despondency. Uncle and aunt no doubt knew that the child was born with hemophilia, a disease that bleeds due to the inability of the blood to clot quickly. Of course, the parents quickly learned about the nature of their son's illness. One can imagine what a terrible blow this was to them; from that moment on, the character of the empress began to change, from painful experiences and constant anxiety, her health, both physical and mental, was shaken.

- But after all, he was prepared for this from childhood, like any heir!

You see, cook - don't cook, and you can't discount a person's personal qualities. If you read his correspondence with his bride, who later became Empress Alexandra Feodorovna, you will see that he writes to her how he rode twenty miles and feels good, and she told him about how she was in church, how she prayed. Their correspondence shows everything from the very beginning! Do you know what he called her? He called her "owl", and she called him "calf". Even this detail gives a clear idea of ​​their relationship.

Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna

Initially, the family was against his marriage to the princess of Hesse. Can we say that Nicholas II showed character here, some strong-willed qualities, insisting on his own?

They didn't really mind. They wanted to marry him to a French princess - because of the turn in the foreign policy of the Russian Empire from an alliance with Germany, Austria-Hungary to an alliance with France, which was outlined in the early 90s of the XIX century. Alexander III also wanted to strengthen family ties with the French, but Nicholas categorically refused. A little-known fact - Alexander III and his wife Maria Feodorovna, when Alexander was still only the heir to the throne, became the godparents of Alice of Hesse - the future Empress Alexandra Feodorovna: they were the godmother and father of the young! So there were still connections. Yes, and Nikolai wanted to marry at all costs.

- But he was still a follower?

Of course there was. You see, it is necessary to distinguish between stubbornness and will. Very often, weak-willed people are stubborn. I think that in a certain sense Nikolai was like that too. There are wonderful moments in their correspondence with Alexandra Fedorovna. Especially during the war, when she writes to him: “Be Peter the Great, be Ivan the Terrible!”, and then adds: “I see how you smile.” She writes to him “be”, but she herself perfectly understands that he cannot be, according to his temperament, the way his father was.

For Nikolai, his father has always been an example. He wanted, of course, to be like him, but he could not.

Dependence on Rasputin led Russia to destruction

- And how strong was the influence of Alexandra Feodorovna on the emperor?

Alexandra Fedorovna had a huge influence on him. And through Alexandra Fedorovna - Rasputin. And, by the way, relations with Rasputin became one of the rather strong catalysts for the revolutionary movement, general dissatisfaction with Nicholas. Even not so much the figure of Rasputin caused discontent, but the image of a dissolute old man created by the press, which influences political decision-making. Add to this the suspicion that Rasputin is a German agent, which was fueled by the fact that he was against the war with Germany. Rumors spread that Alexandra Feodorovna was also a German spy. In general, everything rolled along the well-known road, which led, in the end, to renunciation ...

Caricature of Rasputin

Pyotr Stolypin

- What other political mistakes have become fatal?

There were many. One of them is distrust of prominent statesmen. Nicholas could not save them, could not! The example of Stolypin is very indicative in this sense. Stolypin is truly an outstanding person. Outstanding not only and not so much because he uttered in the Duma those words that everyone is now repeating: "You need great upheavals, but we need a great Russia."

That's not why! But because he understood: the main brake in a peasant country is the community. And he firmly pursued a line of destruction of the community, and this was contrary to the interests of a fairly wide range of people. After all, when Stolypin arrived in Kyiv in 1911 as prime minister, he was already a lame duck. The issue of his resignation was resolved. He was killed, but the end of his political career came earlier.

There is no subjunctive mood in history, as you know. But I really want to dream. But what if Stolypin had been at the head of the government longer, if he had not been killed, if the situation had turned out differently, what would have happened? Would Russia have entered the war with Germany so recklessly, was the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand worth getting involved in this world war? ..

1908 Royal Village. Rasputin with the Empress, five children and a governess

However, I really want to use the subjunctive mood. The events taking place in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century seem so spontaneous, irreversible - the absolute monarchy has outlived its usefulness, and sooner or later what happened would happen, the personality of the tsar did not play a decisive role. This is wrong?

You know, this question, from my point of view, is useless, because the task of history is not to guess what would have happened if, but to explain why it happened this way and not otherwise. It has already happened. But why did it happen? After all, history has many paths, but for some reason it chooses one out of many, why?

Why did it happen that the previously very friendly, close-knit Romanov family (the ruling house of the Romanovs) turned out to be completely split by 1916? Nikolai and his wife were alone, and the whole family - I emphasize, the whole family - was against it! Yes, Rasputin played a role - the family split largely because of him. Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna, sister of Empress Alexandra Feodorovna, tried to talk to her about Rasputin, it was useless to dissuade her! Nicholas's mother, Empress Dowager Maria Feodorovna, tried to speak, but to no avail.

In the end, it came to the Grand Duke's conspiracy. Grand Duke Dmitry Pavlovich, Nicholas II's favorite cousin, was involved in Rasputin's assassination. Grand Duke Nikolai Mikhailovich wrote to Maria Feodorovna: "The hypnotist has been killed, now it's the turn of the hypnotized, she must disappear."

They all saw that this indecisive policy, this dependence on Rasputin, was leading Russia to destruction, but they could not do anything! They thought that they would kill Rasputin, and things would somehow get better, but they didn’t get better - everything had gone too far. Nikolai believed that relations with Rasputin were a private matter of his family, in which no one had the right to interfere. He did not understand that the emperor could not have private relations with Rasputin, that the matter had taken on a political turn. And he miscalculated cruelly, although one can understand him as a person. Therefore, personality is certainly of great importance!

About Rasputin and his murder
From the memoirs of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna

Everything that happened to Russia due to the direct or indirect influence of Rasputin can, in my opinion, be regarded as a vindictive expression of the dark, terrible, all-consuming hatred that burned for centuries in the soul of the Russian peasant in relation to the upper classes, who did not try to understand him or attract him to your side. Rasputin, in his own way, loved both the empress and the emperor. He felt sorry for them, as children feel sorry for those who have made a mistake through the fault of adults. They both liked his seeming sincerity and kindness. His speeches - they had never heard anything like it before - attracted them with their simple logic and novelty. The emperor himself strove for intimacy with his people. But Rasputin, who had no education and was not accustomed to such an environment, was spoiled by the boundless trust that his high patrons placed in him.

Emperor Nicholas II and Supreme Commander led. Prince Nikolai Nikolaevich during a review of the fortifications of the Przemysl fortress

Is there evidence that Empress Alexandra Feodorovna directly influenced her husband's specific political decisions?

Certainly! At one time there was such a book by Kasvinov “23 steps down”, about the murder of the royal family. So, one of the most serious political mistakes of Nicholas II was the decision to become the most supreme commander in 1915. It was, if you like, the first step towards renunciation!

- And only Alexandra Feodorovna supported this decision?

She convinced him! Alexandra Fedorovna was a very strong-willed, very smart and very cunning woman. What did she fight for? For the future of their son. She was afraid that Grand Duke Nikolai Nikolayevich (Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Army in 1914-1915 - ed.), who was very popular in the army, will deprive Nike of the throne and become emperor himself. Let us leave aside the question of whether this was actually the case.

But, believing in the desire of Nikolai Nikolaevich to take the Russian throne, the empress began to intrigue. “In this difficult time of trials, only you can lead the army, you must do it, this is your duty,” she persuaded her husband. And Nikolai succumbed to her persuasion, sent his uncle to command the Caucasian front and took command of the Russian army. He did not listen to his mother, who begged him not to take a disastrous step - she just perfectly understood that if he became commander in chief, all the failures at the front would be associated with his name; nor the eight ministers who wrote him a petition; nor State Duma Chairman Rodzianko.

The emperor left the capital, lived for months at headquarters, and as a result could not return to the capital, where a revolution took place in his absence.

Emperor Nicholas II and commanders of the fronts at a meeting of the Headquarters

Nicholas II at the front

Nicholas II with Generals Alekseev and Pustovoitenko at Headquarters

What kind of person was the empress? You said - strong-willed, smart. But at the same time, she gives the impression of a sad, melancholy, cold, closed person ...

I wouldn't say she was cold. Read their letters - after all, in letters a person opens up. She is a passionate, loving woman. A woman of power who fights for what she sees fit, fighting to ensure that the throne is passed to her son despite his terminal illness. You can understand her, but she, in my opinion, lacked the breadth of her vision.

We will not say why Rasputin acquired such influence over her. I am deeply convinced that the matter is not only in the sick Tsarevich Alexei, whom he helped. The fact is that the Empress herself needed a person who would support her in this hostile world for her. She arrived, shy, embarrassed, in front of her is the rather strong Empress Maria Feodorovna, whom the court loves. Maria Fedorovna loves balls, but Alix does not like balls. Petersburg society is accustomed to dancing, accustomed to, accustomed to having fun, and the new empress is a completely different person.

Nicholas II with his mother Maria Feodorovna

Nicholas II with his wife

Nicholas II with Alexandra Feodorovna

Gradually, the relationship between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law gets worse and worse. And in the end it comes to a complete break. Maria Fedorovna, in her last diary before the revolution, in 1916, calls Alexandra Fedorovna only "fury". “This fury” - she can’t even write her name ...

Elements of the great crisis that led to the renunciation

- Nevertheless, Nikolai and Alexandra were a wonderful family, right?

Definitely a wonderful family! They sit, read books to each other, their correspondence is wonderful, tender. They love each other, they are spiritually close, physically close, they have wonderful children. Children are different, some of them are more serious, some, like Anastasia, more mischievous, some secretly smoke.

About the atmosphere in the family of Nikolai II and Alexandra Feodorovna
From the memoirs of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna

The emperor and his wife were always tender in their relations with each other and children, and it was so pleasant to be in an atmosphere of love and family happiness.

At a costume ball. 1903

But after the assassination of Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich (Governor-General of Moscow, uncle of Nicholas II, husband of Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna - ed.) in 1905, the family locks up in Tsarskoe Selo, no more - not a single big ball, the last big ball takes place in 1903, a costume ball, where Nikolai is in the costume of Tsar Alexei Mikhailovich, Alexander is in the costume of the queen. And then they become more and more closed.

Alexandra Fedorovna did not understand much, did not understand the situation in the country. For example, failures in the war... When you are told that Russia almost won the First World War, do not believe it. A serious socio-economic crisis was growing in Russia. First of all, it manifested itself in the inability of the railways to cope with freight traffic. It was impossible to simultaneously deliver food to large cities and carry military supplies to the front. Despite the railway boom that began under Witte in the 1880s, Russia had a poorly developed railway network compared to European countries.

Groundbreaking ceremony for the Trans-Siberian Railway

- Despite the construction of the Trans-Siberian Railway, was this not enough for such a large country?

Absolutely! This was not enough, the railways could not cope. Why am I talking about this? When food shortages began in Petrograd, in Moscow, what does Alexandra Fyodorovna write to her husband? "Our Friend advises (Friend - so Alexandra Fedorovna called Rasputin in correspondence. - Ed.): order to attach one or two wagons with food to each echelon that goes to the front. To write this means to be completely unaware of what is happening. It is a search for simple solutions, solutions to the problem, the roots of which do not lie in this at all! What is one or two carriages for the multi-million dollar Petrograd and Moscow?..

Yet it grew!

Prince Felix Yusupov, participant in the conspiracy against Rasputin

Two or three years ago we received the Yusupov archive - Viktor Fedorovich Vekselberg bought it and donated it to the State Archive. This archive contains letters from the teacher Felix Yusupov in the Corps of Pages, who went with Yusupov to Rakitnoye, where he was exiled after participating in the murder of Rasputin. Two weeks before the revolution, he returned to Petrograd. And he writes to Felix, who is still in Rakitnoye: “Can you imagine that I haven’t seen or eaten a piece of meat in two weeks?” There is no meat! The bakeries are closed because there is no flour. And this is not the result of some malicious conspiracy, as they sometimes write about it, which is complete nonsense and nonsense. And evidence of the crisis that has gripped the country.

The leader of the Cadets, Milyukov, speaks in the State Duma - he seems to be a wonderful historian, a wonderful person - but what does he say from the Duma rostrum? He throws accusations after accusations against the government, addressing them to Nicholas II, of course, and ends each passage with the words: “What is this? Stupidity or treason? The word "treason" has already been dropped.

It's always easy to blame your failures on someone else. It's not we who fight badly, it's treason! Rumors begin to circulate that from Tsarskoye Selo the empress has a direct gold cable laid to Wilhelm's headquarters, that she is selling state secrets. When she arrives at headquarters, the officers are defiantly silent in her presence. It's like a snowball growing! The economy, the railroad crisis, failures at the front, the political crisis, Rasputin, the family split - all these are elements of a great crisis, which eventually led to the abdication of the emperor and the collapse of the monarchy.

By the way, I am sure that those people who thought about the abdication of Nicholas II, and he himself, did not at all assume that this was the end of the monarchy. Why? Because they had no experience of political struggle, they did not understand that they don’t change horses in the middle! Therefore, the commanders of the fronts, as one, wrote to Nicholas that in order to save the Motherland and continue the war, he must abdicate the throne.

About the situation at the beginning of the war

From the memoirs of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna

In the beginning, the war went well. Every day a crowd of Muscovites staged patriotic demonstrations in the square opposite our house. The people in the front rows held flags and portraits of the emperor and empress. With their heads uncovered, they sang the national anthem, shouted out words of approval and greetings, and calmly dispersed. People took it as entertainment. Enthusiasm took on more and more violent forms, but the authorities did not want to prevent this expression of loyal feelings, people refused to leave the square and disperse. The last gathering turned into rampant drinking and ended with bottles and stones thrown at our windows. The police were called and lined up along the sidewalk to block access to our house. Excited cries and muffled murmurs of the crowd came from the street all night.

About the bomb in the temple and the changing moods

From the memoirs of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna

On Easter Eve, when we were in Tsarskoye Selo, a conspiracy was uncovered. Two members of the terrorist organization, disguised as singers, tried to get into the choir, which sang at services in the palace church. Apparently, they planned to carry bombs under their clothes and detonate them in the church during the Easter service. The emperor, although he knew about the plot, went with his family to church as usual. Many people were arrested that day. Nothing happened, but it was the saddest service I have ever attended.

Abdication of the throne of Emperor Nicholas II.

There are still myths about the renunciation - that it had no legal force, or that the emperor was forced to abdicate ...

This just surprises me! How can you say such nonsense? You see, the renunciation manifesto was published in all the papers, in all! And in the year and a half that Nikolai lived after that, he never said: “No, they forced me, this is not my real renunciation!”

The attitude towards the emperor and empress in society is also “steps down”: from delight and devotion to ridicule and aggression?

When Rasputin was killed, Nicholas II was at headquarters in Mogilev, and the Empress was in the capital. What is she doing? Alexandra Fedorovna summons the Petrograd Chief of Police and orders the arrest of Grand Duke Dmitry Pavlovich and Yusupov, participants in the murder of Rasputin. This caused an outburst of indignation in the family. Who is she?! What right does she have to order someone to be arrested? This proves 100% who rules with us - not Nikolai, but Alexandra!

Then the family (mother, grand dukes and grand duchesses) turned to Nikolai with a request not to punish Dmitry Pavlovich. Nikolay imposed a resolution on the document: “I am surprised by your appeal to me. No one is allowed to kill!" Decent answer? Of course yes! No one dictated this to him, he himself, from the depths of his soul, wrote it.

In general, Nicholas II as a person can be respected - he was an honest, decent person. But not too smart and without a strong will.

“I don’t feel sorry for myself, but I feel sorry for the people”

Alexander III and Maria Feodorovna

The phrase of Nicholas II is known after the abdication: "I do not feel sorry for myself, but I feel sorry for the people." He really rooted for the people, for the country. How well did he know his people?

I will give you an example from another area. When Maria Fedorovna married Alexander Alexandrovich and when they - then the Tsarevich and Tsesarevna - traveled around Russia, she described such a situation in her diary. She, who grew up in a rather poor but democratic Danish royal court, could not understand why her beloved Sasha did not want to communicate with the people. He does not want to leave the ship on which they traveled, to the people, he does not want to take bread and salt, he is absolutely not interested in all this.

But she arranged it so that he had to get off at one of the points of their route, where they landed. He did everything flawlessly: he received the foremen, bread and salt, charmed everyone. He came back and ... gave her a wild scandal: he stamped his feet, broke the lamp. She was horrified! Her sweet and beloved Sasha, who is throwing a kerosene lamp on the wooden floor, is about to burst into flames! She couldn't understand why? Because the unity of the king and the people was like a theater where everyone played their roles.

Even chronicle footage has been preserved of Nicholas II sailing away from Kostroma in 1913. People go into the water up to their chests, stretch their hands to him, this is the king-father ... and after 4 years these same people sing shameful ditties about both the king and the queen!

- The fact that, for example, his daughters were sisters of mercy, was it also a theater?

No, I think it was sincere. They were still deeply religious people, and, of course, Christianity and mercy are almost synonymous. The girls really were sisters of mercy, Alexandra Fedorovna really assisted in operations. Some of the daughters liked it, some didn't, but they were no exception among the imperial family, among the Romanovs. They gave their palaces for hospitals - there was a hospital in the Winter Palace, and not only the emperor's family, but also other grand duchesses. The men fought and the women did charity work. So mercy is just not ostentatious.

Princess Tatiana in the hospital

Alexandra Fedorovna - sister of mercy

Princesses with the wounded in the infirmary of Tsarskoye Selo, winter 1915-16

But in a sense, any court action, any court ceremony is a theater, with its own script, with its characters, and so on.

Nicholas II and Alexandra Fedorovna in the hospital for the wounded

From the memoirs of Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna

The Empress, who spoke Russian very well, made her rounds through the wards and talked for a long time with each patient. I walked behind and not so much listened to the words - she said the same thing to everyone - how much I watched the expression on their faces. Despite the sincere sympathy of the empress for the suffering of the wounded, something prevented her from expressing her true feelings and comforting those to whom she addressed. Although she spoke Russian correctly and almost without an accent, people did not understand her: her words did not find a response in their souls. They looked at her with fear when she approached and started a conversation. I visited hospitals with the emperor more than once. His visits looked different. The emperor behaved simply and charmingly. With his appearance, a special atmosphere of joy arose. Despite his small stature, he always seemed taller than everyone present and moved from bed to bed with extraordinary dignity. After a short conversation with him, the expression of anxious expectation in the eyes of the patients was replaced by a joyful animation.

1917 - This year marks the 100th anniversary of the revolution. How, in your opinion, should we talk about it, how should we approach the discussion of this topic? Ipatiev house

How was the decision to canonize them made? "Dug", as you say, weighed. After all, the commission did not immediately declare him a martyr, there were quite big disputes on this score. After all, it was not in vain that he was canonized as a martyr, as one who gave his life for the Orthodox faith. Not because he was an emperor, not because he was an outstanding statesman, but because he did not renounce Orthodoxy. Until their martyr's end, the royal family constantly invited priests who served Mass, even in the Ipatiev House, not to mention Tobolsk. The family of Nicholas II was a deeply religious family.

- But even about canonization there are different opinions.

They were canonized as passion-bearers - what different opinions can there be?

Some insist that the canonization was hasty and politically motivated. What to say to that?

From the report of the Metropolitan of Krutitsy and Kolomna Yuvenaly,Chairman of the Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints at the Bishops' Jubilee Council

... Behind the many sufferings endured by the Royal Family over the last 17 months of their lives, which ended with execution in the basement of the Yekaterinburg Ipatiev House on the night of July 17, 1918, we see people who sincerely strived to embody the commandments of the Gospel in their lives. In the suffering endured by the Royal Family in captivity with meekness, patience and humility, in their martyrdom, the light of Christ's faith conquering evil was revealed, just as it shone in the life and death of millions of Orthodox Christians who suffered persecution for Christ in the 20th century. It is in understanding this feat of the Royal Family that the Commission, in complete unanimity and with the approval of the Holy Synod, finds it possible to glorify in the Cathedral of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in the face of the Passion-Bearers Emperor Nicholas II, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatyana, Maria and Anastasia.

- How do you generally assess the level of discussions about Nicholas II, about the imperial family, about 1917 today?

What is a discussion? How can you argue with the ignorant? In order to say something, a person must know at least something, if he does not know anything, it is useless to discuss with him. So much rubbish has appeared in recent years about the royal family and the situation in Russia at the beginning of the 20th century. But what pleases me is that there are also very serious works, for example, studies by Boris Nikolaevich Mironov, Mikhail Abramovich Davydov, which deal with economic history. So Boris Nikolayevich Mironov has a wonderful work, where he analyzed the metric data of people who were called up for military service. When a person was called up for service, his height, weight, and so on were measured. Mironov was able to establish that in the fifty years that have passed since the liberation of the serfs, the growth of conscripts has increased by 6-7 centimeters!

- That is, they began to eat better?

Certainly! Live better! But what did Soviet historiography talk about? "The exacerbation, beyond the ordinary, of the needs and calamities of the oppressed classes," "relative impoverishment," "absolute impoverishment," and so on. In fact, as I understand it, if you believe the works that I named - and I have no reason not to believe them - the revolution did not come about because people began to live worse, but because, paradoxically as it sounds, what is better began to live! But everyone wanted to live even better. The situation of the people even after the reform was extremely difficult, the situation was terrible: the working day was 11 hours, terrible working conditions, but in the countryside they began to eat better, dress better. There was a protest against the slow movement forward, we wanted to go faster.

Sergei Mironenko.
Photo: Alexander Bury / russkiymir.ru

They don't look for good from good, in other words? Sounds menacing...

Why?

Because one involuntarily wants to draw an analogy with our days: over the past 25 years, people have learned that it is possible to live better ...

They don't look for good from good, yes. For example, the Narodnaya Volya revolutionaries who killed Alexander II, the liberator Tsar, were also dissatisfied. Although he is the king-liberator, he is indecisive! He does not want to go further in the reforms - he needs to be pushed. If he doesn't go, he must be killed, those who oppress the people must be killed... You can't fence yourself off from this. We need to understand why this all happened. I do not advise you to draw analogies with today, because analogies are usually erroneous.

Usually today they repeat something else: the words of Klyuchevsky that history is a warden who punishes for ignorance of her lessons; that those who do not know their history are doomed to repeat its mistakes...

Of course, one must know history not only in order not to make the same mistakes. I think the main thing for which you need to know your history is in order to feel like a citizen of your country. Without knowing your own history, you cannot be a citizen, in the truest sense of the word.

Tsar Nicholas II and the Holy Royal Martyrs

"The king who glorifies me, I will glorify."
Saint Seraphim of Sarov"

We have a tsar of a righteous and pious life,” wrote St. John of Kronstadt about Sovereign Nicholas II in 1905. “God sent Him a heavy cross of suffering, as His chosen one and beloved child.”

The Holy Tsar-Martyr Nicholas II was born on May 19, 1868 near St. Petersburg, in Tsarskoye Selo. After the sacrament of the baptism of the Royal Infant, the choir sang a song of thanksgiving, and the bells of all churches and the thunder of cannons echoed the singing. They served the Divine Liturgy, and the newly baptized infant was communed with the Holy Mysteries of Christ.

Grand Duke Nicholas from childhood was distinguished by piety and tried in virtues to imitate the righteous Job the Long-suffering, on whose memorial day he was born, and St. Nicholas, after whom he was named. "I was born on the day of Job the Long-suffering," he said, "and I am destined to suffer." Relatives noted: "Nikolai's soul is pure, like crystal, and passionately loving everyone." He was deeply touched by every human sorrow and every need. He began and ended the day with prayer; knew the rank of church services well, during which he liked to sing along to the church choir.
The education of his son, by the will of the August Father Alexander III, was carried out strictly in the Russian Orthodox spirit. The royal youth spent a lot of time reading a book. He surprised his teachers with an extraordinary memory and extraordinary abilities. The future Sovereign successfully completed the highest course of economic, legal and military sciences under the guidance of outstanding mentors and underwent military training in the infantry, cavalry, artillery and navy.

In the autumn of 1891, when dozens of provinces of Russia were exhausted from hunger, Alexander III put his son at the head of the Committee for Assistance to the Starving. The future Tsar saw with his own eyes the human grief and worked tirelessly to alleviate the suffering of his people.
A serious test was sent to the Imperial family in the fall of 1888: a terrible wreck of the royal train took place near Kharkov. The wagons crashed down the high embankment. By the Providence of God, the life of Emperor Alexander III and the entire August family was miraculously saved.
A new test followed in 1891 during the Tsarevich's journey through the Far East: an assassination attempt was made on him in Japan. Nikolai Alexandrovich almost died from a saber blow of a religious fanatic, but the Greek Prince George knocked down the attacker with a bamboo cane. And again a miracle happened: only a slight wound remained on the head of the Heir to the Throne. The Almighty once again reminded His Word: "Do not touch My anointed ones" (Ps. 104:15) and revealed to the world that the kings and kingdoms of the earth are in His power.
In the spring of 1894, seeing the unwavering decision of the Tsarevich to marry Princess Alice of Hesse-Darmstadt, the August Parents finally gave their blessing to that. “Our Savior said: “Everything that you ask from God, God will give you,” Grand Duke Nikolai wrote at that time, “these words are infinitely dear to me, because for five years I prayed them, repeating them every night, begging Him to make it easier for Alice to convert to the Orthodox faith and to give her to me as a wife." With deep faith and love, the Tsarevich persuaded the princess to accept Holy Orthodoxy. In a decisive conversation, he said: “When you find out how beautiful, fertile and humble our Orthodox religion is, how magnificent our churches and monasteries are, and how solemn and majestic our services are, you will love them and nothing will separate us.”
In the autumn of 1894, during the severe illness of the Sovereign, the Tsarevich was relentlessly at his bedside. "As a devoted son and as the first faithful servant of his Father," he wrote to his bride in those days, "I must be with him everywhere."
A few days before the death of Alexander III, Princess Alice arrived in Russia. The rite of its accession to the Orthodox Church was performed by the All-Russian pastor John of Kronstadt. During the Anointing, she was named Alexandra in honor of the Holy Martyr Queen. On that significant day, the August bride and groom, after the sacrament of repentance, communed together with the Holy Mysteries of Christ. With all my heart, deeply and sincerely, Alexandra Feodorovna accepted Orthodoxy. "Your country will be my country," she said, "your people will be my people, and your God will be my God" (Ruth 1:16).

Documentary based on the book "The Life of the Holy Royal Martyrs"

On the day of the death of the Emperor, Nikolai Alexandrovich, in deep sorrow, said that he did not want the Tsar's crown, but, fearing to disobey the will of the Almighty and his father's will, he accepts the Tsar's crown. He trusts in the Lord God, and not in his weak strength.
For the rest of his life, the Tsarevich kept in his heart the precepts of the Sovereign Father, uttered by him on the eve of his death: “You have to take the heavy burden of state power from my shoulders and carry it to the grave just as I carried it and as our ancestors carried it. I give you the Kingdom I received it thirteen years ago from my bleeding father... On that tragic day, the question arose before me: which way to go? , or the one that my own conviction, my highest sacred duty of the Sovereign and my conscience suggested to me. I chose my path. The liberals dubbed it reactionary. I was only interested in the good of my people and the greatness of Russia. I strove to give external and internal peace, so that the state could freely and calmly develop, grow stronger, grow richer and prosper.The autocracy created the historical individuality of Russia.If the autocracy collapses, God forbid, then Russia will collapse with it. The fall of primordially Russian power will open an endless era of unrest and bloody civil strife. I bequeath to you to love everything that serves the good, honor and dignity of Russia. Protect the Autocracy, remembering that you are responsible for the fate of your subjects before the Throne of the Most High. Faith in God and in the holiness of your royal duty will be for you the basis of your life ... In foreign policy - keep an independent position. Remember: Russia has no friends. They are afraid of our immensity. Avoid wars. In domestic politics, patronize the Church first of all. She saved Russia more than once in a time of trouble. Strengthen the family, because it is the basis of any state."
Emperor Nicholas II ascended the Throne on November 2, 1894. “In this mournful but solemn hour of Our accession to the Ancestral Throne,” he said, “we take a sacred vow, before the face of the Almighty, to always have as a single goal the peaceful prosperity, power and glory of dear Russia and the happiness of all Our loyal subjects.”
The Sovereign marked the beginning of his reign with deeds of love and mercy: prisoners in prisons received relief; there was great debt forgiveness; significant assistance was provided to needy scientists, writers and students.
Autocrat of All Russia Nicholas II was married to the Kingdom on May 27, 1896 in Moscow, in the Assumption Cathedral of the Kremlin. Metropolitan Sergius of Moscow addressed him with the words: "... as there is no higher, so there is no more difficult on earth Tsar's power, there is no burden heavier than Tsar's service. Through the visible anointing, let the invisible power from above illuminate ... Your autocratic activity for the good and happiness Your loyal subjects."
Emperor Nicholas II read the Symbol of Faith; dressed in purple and placing the Royal crown on his head, he took in his hands the Orb and the Scepter. In prayer to the King of Kings, the Sovereign asked that the gifts of the Holy Spirit be sent down on him and instruct him in the work he was sent to serve. The chorus burst out "We praise God to you." After the Divine Liturgy, he received Holy Chrismation. The emperor entered the altar through the Royal Doors and took communion of the Holy Mysteries of Christ, as a clergyman.
The Orthodox Tsar, when performing the Sacrament of Confirmation during the crowning of the Kingdom, becomes a sacred person and a bearer of the special grace of the Holy Spirit. This grace works through Him in His keeping of the law and keeps evil from spreading in the world. According to the words of the Apostle Paul, "the mystery of iniquity is already at work, but it will not be accomplished until the One who restrains is taken from the midst" (2 Thess. 2,7). Emperor Nicholas II was deeply imbued with the consciousness of this spiritual mission, which lies with the Anointed One of God.
By a fateful coincidence, the days of the coronation celebrations were overshadowed by the tragedy at the Khodynka field, where about half a million people gathered. At the time of distribution of gifts there was a terrible stampede, which claimed the lives of more than a thousand people. The next day, the Emperor and Empress attended a memorial service for the dead and provided assistance to the families of the victims.
Sovereign Nicholas II was imbued with love for man and believed that in politics it is necessary to follow the precepts of Christ. The All-Russian Emperor became the inspirer of the first world conference on the prevention of wars, which took place in the capital of Holland in 1899. He was the first among the rulers to defend the universal world and became truly the King-Peacemaker.
The sovereign tirelessly sought to give inner peace to the country so that it could freely develop and prosper. By nature, he was completely incapable of harming anyone. During the entire reign, the Sovereign did not sign a single death sentence, not a single request for pardon that reached the Tsar was rejected by him. Every time he was worried that the pardon would not be late.
The surprisingly sincere look of the Sovereign always shone with genuine kindness. Once the Tsar visited the cruiser "Rurik", where there was a revolutionary who swore an oath to kill him. The sailor did not fulfill his promise. "I couldn't do it," he explained. "Those eyes looked at me so meekly, so kindly."
The sovereign in his reign and everyday life adhered to the original Russian Orthodox principles. He deeply knew Russian history and literature, was a great connoisseur of his native language and did not tolerate the use of foreign words in it. "The Russian language is so rich," he said, "that it allows us to replace foreign expressions in all cases. Not a single word of non-Slavic origin should disfigure our language."
The sovereign was unmercenary. He generously helped those in need from his own funds, without thinking about the size of the requested amount. His kindness was never shown out and was not diminished by countless disappointments. Four million rubles of royal money, which had been in the London bank since the reign of Emperor Alexander II, Nikolai Alexandrovich spent on the maintenance of hospitals and other charitable institutions. "He will soon give away everything he has," said the manager of His Majesty's cabinet, basing his desire to leave his post on this. “His dresses were often mended,” recalls the servant of the Tsar. “He did not like extravagance and luxury. After the murder of the Royal Family in Yekaterinburg, the Emperor's military trousers were found. There were patches and notes on them: "Made on August 4, 1900", "Renewed on October 8, 1916".
The Christian virtues of the Sovereign: meekness and kindness of heart, modesty and simplicity were not understood by many and taken for weakness of character. However, thanks to precisely these spiritual and moral qualities, an enormous spiritual strength was embodied in him, so necessary for the Anointed of God for the Tsar's service. “They say about the Russian Emperor that he is accessible to various influences,” wrote French President Loubet. “This is profoundly wrong. The Russian Emperor himself carries out his ideas.
During the difficult war with Japan, which began in 1904, the Sovereign declared: "I will never conclude a peace shameful and unworthy of great Russia." The Russian delegation at the peace talks with Japan followed his instructions: "Not a penny of indemnity, not an inch of land." Despite the pressure exerted on the Tsar from all sides, he showed a firm will, and success in the negotiations belongs entirely to him.
Tsar Nicholas II possessed rare endurance and courage. Deep faith in the Providence of God strengthened him and gave him perfect peace of mind, which never left him. “How many years I lived near the Tsar and never saw him in anger,” recalls his servant. “He was always very even and calm.” The emperor did not fear for his life, was not afraid of assassination attempts and refused the most necessary security measures. At the decisive moment of the Kronstadt rebellion in 1906, Nikolai Alexandrovich, after the report of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, said: “If you see me so calm, it is because I have an unshakable faith that the fate of Russia, my own fate and the fate of my family are in hands of the Lord. Whatever happens, I bow to His Will."
The royal couple was an example of a truly Christian family life. The relations of the August Spouses were distinguished by sincere love, cordial understanding and deep fidelity. “Our love and our life are one whole, we are so united that there is no doubt about love and fidelity - nothing can separate us or reduce our love,” Alexandra Feodorovna wrote to her husband in 1909. “I can’t believe that today is the twentieth anniversary of our wedding!” Nikolai Alexandrovich wrote in his diary on November 27, 1914. “The Lord blessed us with rare family happiness; if only to be able to be worthy of His great mercy during the rest of our lives.”
The Lord blessed this love marriage with the birth of four daughters - Olga, Tatyana, Maria, Anastasia - and a son, Alexei. The long-awaited Heir to the Throne was born on August 12, 1904, he became the favorite of the whole family. Relatives noted the nobility of the character of the Tsarevich, the kindness and responsiveness of his heart. “There is not a single vicious trait in the soul of this child,” one of his teachers said, “his soul is the most fertile ground for all good seeds.” Alexei loved people and tried with all his might to help them, especially those who seemed unfairly offended to him. "When I am King, there will be no poor and unhappy," he said. "I want everyone to be happy."
An incurable hereditary disease - hemophilia, discovered in Tsarevich shortly after birth, constantly threatened his life. This illness demanded from the family a huge strain of mental and physical strength, boundless faith and humility. During an exacerbation of the disease in 1912, the doctors pronounced a hopeless sentence on the boy, however, the Sovereign humbly answered questions about the health of the Tsarevich: "We hope in God."
The Tsar and Tsaritsa brought up children in devotion to the Russian people and carefully prepared them for the forthcoming work and feat. “Children should learn self-denial, learn to give up their own desires for the sake of other people,” the Empress believed. “The higher a person is, the sooner he should help everyone and never remind his position in his address,” said the Sovereign, “my children should be like that.” The Tsarevich and the Grand Duchesses extended their care and attention to everyone they knew. They were brought up in simplicity and strictness. “The duty of parents in relation to children,” the Empress wrote, “is to prepare them for life, for any trials that God will send them.” The Tsarevich and the Grand Duchesses slept on hard camp beds without pillows; dressed simply; dress and shoes passed from older to younger. The food was the simplest. Tsarevich Alexei's favorite food was cabbage soup, porridge and black bread, "which, as he said, all my soldiers eat." “They led a modest life,” wrote a person close to them, “they were easy to handle and did not attach importance to their royal position.”
It was a truly Orthodox family, in which the traditions and way of life of pious Russian families reigned. “Each member of the family should take part in the arrangement of the house,” the Empress wrote in her diary, “and the most complete family happiness can be achieved when everyone honestly fulfills their duties.” The August Family led a secluded life. They did not like celebrations and loud speeches, etiquette was a burden to them. The Empress and the Grand Duchesses often sang in the church on the kliros during the Divine Liturgy. "And with what trepidation, with what bright tears they approached the Holy Chalice!" - recalled Archbishop Theophan of Poltava. In the evenings, the Tsar often read aloud to the family circle. The queen and daughters were engaged in needlework, talked about God and prayed. “There is nothing impossible for God,” the Empress wrote. “I believe that whoever is pure in his soul will always be heard and he is not afraid of any difficulties and dangers of life, since they are insurmountable only for those who believe little and shallow” .
Alexandra Feodorovna was a born sister of mercy. She visited the sick, providing them with heartfelt care and support, and when she could not go to the suffering herself, she sent her daughters. The empress was convinced that children should know that in addition to beauty, there is a lot of sadness in the world. She herself never grumbled, did not feel sorry for herself at all, considering it her duty "to remain faithful to Christ and take care of those who are near."
The empress was called a real ascetic of charity. Being an impeccable wife and mother, she especially sympathized with the sorrows of other mothers and provided them with all possible help and care. During the famine of 1898, she donated an eighth of the family's annual income to the suffering. Alexandra Feodorovna often gave financial assistance to those in need through her close associates, trying to keep it a secret. The empress arranged charity bazaars, the proceeds from which went to help the sick; she organized educational workshops for the poor throughout the country and opened a school for the sisters of mercy. At her own expense, the Tsaritsa built a house for disabled soldiers of the Russo-Japanese War, where they learned every trade.
The royal couple patronized the Orthodox Church not only in Russia, but throughout the world: during the reign of Nicholas II, hundreds of monasteries and thousands of churches were built. The sovereign was zealously concerned about the spiritual enlightenment of the people: tens of thousands of parochial schools were opened throughout the country. The pious Emperor supported the development of the arts that elevate the soul of an Orthodox Christian - church architecture, icon painting, ancient church singing and bell ringing.
During the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, the Russian Orthodox Church was enriched by a greater number of new saints and new church celebrations than during the entire 19th century. In 1903, having familiarized himself with the materials for the glorification of the great elder Seraphim of Sarov, the Tsar did not agree with the opinion of the Synod and boldly inscribed: "Immediately glorify." In the summer of the same year, the Royal Couple came to Sarov for a great spiritual celebration that brought together hundreds of thousands of Orthodox Russian people. The sovereign on foot, a reverent pilgrim, on his shoulders carried the coffin with the holy relics of the Pleaser of God and communed with the Empress of the Holy Mysteries of Christ. On August 1, in Sarov, the Sovereign wrote in his diary: “Wonderful is God in His saints. Great is the inexpressible mercy of His dear Russia; inexpressibly comforting is the evidence of a new manifestation of the grace of the Lord to all of us.
In the Diveevo Monastery, Their Majesties visited the blessed Elder Pasha of Sarovskaya, who foretold the tragic fate of the Royal Family. Orthodox Russia in those memorable days touchingly expressed its love and devotion to the Tsar and Tsaritsa. Here they saw with their own eyes the true Holy Rus'. The Sarov celebrations strengthened the Tsar's faith in his people.
The sovereign was aware of the need for the revival of Russia on the spiritual foundations of Holy Rus'. “The Russian kingdom is wavering, staggering, close to falling,” wrote the righteous John of Kronstadt at that time, “and if Russia is not cleansed of many tares, then it will become empty, like ancient kingdoms and cities, wiped off the face of the earth by the justice of God for their godlessness and for their iniquity." According to the Sovereign's plan, the success of what was conceived largely depended on the restoration of the Patriarchate and the choice of the Patriarch. After deep reflection, he decided to place, if God wills, the heavy burden of the Patriarchal service on himself, taking monasticism and holy orders. He thought to leave the Royal Throne to his son, appointing the Empress and brother Michael as regents under him. In March 1905, the Sovereign met with the members of the Holy Synod and informed them of his intention. Silence followed. The great moment was missed - Jerusalem "knew not the time of her visit" (Luke 19:44).
The Sovereign, as the bearer of the Supreme power of the Orthodox Autocratic Kingdom, carried out the sacred duties of the Ecumenical Patron and Defender of Orthodoxy, protecting church peace throughout the world. He stood up for the persecuted when the Turks slaughtered the Armenians, oppressed and oppressed the Slavs, and widely opened the borders of Russia to Christian refugees. When Austria-Hungary attacked defenseless Serbia in the summer of 1914, Tsar Nicholas II answered the call for help without hesitation. Russia defended a fraternal country. The Serbian Prince Alexander sent a message to the Sovereign: "The most difficult times cannot but strengthen the bonds of deep affection with which Serbia is connected with holy Slavic Russia, and feelings of eternal gratitude to Your Majesty for help and protection will be sacredly kept in the hearts of the Serbs."
God's Anointed One was deeply aware of his duty as a King and said more than once: "Ministers may change, but I alone bear responsibility before God for the good of our people." Proceeding from the primordially Russian principle of conciliarity, he sought to attract the best people to govern the country, remaining a resolute opponent of the introduction of constitutional government in Russia. He tried to pacify political passions and give inner peace to the country. However, passions continued to rage. The newspaper "Liberation", published at that time abroad, openly called the "liberation forces" opposed to the Tsarist power in Russia: "The entire intelligentsia and part of the people; all the zemstvos, part of the city dumas ... the entire press." Prime Minister Stolypin said in 1907: "They need great upheavals, we need Great Russia."
In the twentieth year of the reign of Emperor Nicholas II, the Russian economy reached its highest peak. The grain harvest has doubled since the beginning of the reign; the population grew by fifty million people. From an illiterate Russia quickly became literate. The economists of Europe predicted in 1913 that by the middle of this century Russia would dominate Europe politically, economically and financially.
The World War began on the morning of August 1, 1914, on the day of remembrance of St. Seraphim of Sarov. Sovereign Nicholas II arrived at the Diveevo Compound of St. Petersburg. They remember: “The Sovereign stood at the icon of St. Seraphim. They sang: “Save, Lord, Thy people and bless Thy heritage, granting victory to our blessed Emperor Nikolai Alexandrovich against the opposition and preserving Thy Cross with Your residence.” The Tsar wept very much in front of the image of the great old man. Blessed Diveyevo Pasha Sarovskaya said that the enemies of the Fatherland started the war in order to overthrow the Tsar and tear Russia apart.
A few days after the start of the war, the Emperor and his family arrived in Moscow. The people rejoiced, the bells of the Mother See rang. To all greetings, the Tsar answered: "In the hour of a military threat, so suddenly and contrary to my intentions, approaching my peace-loving people, I, according to the custom of Sovereign ancestors, seek strengthening of spiritual strength in prayer at the shrines of Moscow."
From the first days of the war, the sovereign, in addition to the vigilant labors of the state, traveled around the front, cities and villages of Russia, blessing the troops and encouraging the people in the test sent to him. The king dearly loved the army and took its needs to heart. A case is known when the Sovereign walked several miles in a new soldier's uniform in order to better understand the hardships of a soldier's service. He fatherly took care of the wounded soldiers, visiting hospitals and infirmaries. In his treatment of the lower ranks and soldiers, one felt genuine, sincere love for a simple Russian person.
The queen tried to adapt as many palaces as possible for hospitals. Often she was personally involved in the formation of sanitary trains and warehouses of medicines in the cities of Russia.
Alexandra Feodorovna and the older princesses became sisters of mercy in the Tsarskoye Selo hospital. Their whole day was devoted to the wounded, they gave them all their love and care. Tsarevich Alexei also encouraged the suffering, talking for a long time with the soldiers. The empress worked in the operating room. Eyewitnesses recall: "She gave sterile instruments to the surgeon, helping with the most difficult operations, taking amputated arms and legs from his hands, removing bloody and lice-ridden clothes." She did her work with the quiet humility and indefatigability of a man to whom God had appointed this service. During difficult operations, soldiers often begged the Empress to be near them. She comforted the wounded and prayed with them. “I received crippled men with terrible wounds,” Alexandra Fedorovna wrote. “My heart aches for them. I especially sympathize with them as a wife and mother.” They remember how in Peterhof, seeing off the regiment to the front, during the prayer service, the Empress wept bitterly, as if saying goodbye to her own children.
The sovereign possessed the most valuable qualities for a military leader: high self-control and a rare ability to quickly and soberly make decisions in any circumstances. In the summer of 1915, in the most difficult time for the Russian army, the Tsar assumed the supreme command of the troops. He was convinced that only in this case the enemy would be defeated. As soon as the Anointed of God stood at the head of the army, happiness returned to Russian weapons. The arrival of the young Tsarevich Alexei to the front also greatly contributed to the rise in the morale of the soldiers.
In the spring of 1916, by the will of the Tsar, the Vladimir Icon of the Mother of God was brought to the active army from the Moscow Kremlin, before which prayers were served with faith and hope. At this time, the Sovereign ordered the launch of an offensive on the Southwestern Front, which was crowned with great success. While the Sovereign led the troops, not an inch of land was given to the enemy.
By February 1917, the army held firm, the troops lacked nothing, and victory was beyond doubt. Emperor Nicholas II, in the most difficult conditions, brought Russia to the threshold of victory. Enemies did not allow him to cross this threshold. “Only now is it possible to overthrow the Tsar,” they said, “and then, after the victory over the Germans, the power of the Sovereign will be strengthened for a long time.”
As far back as 1832, the Monk Seraphim of Sarov predicted a general rebellion against the Tsar’s power and the bloody moment of its fall: “They will wait until such a time when it will be very difficult for the Russian Land, and in one day and in all places of the Russian Land there is a general revolt, and since many of the employees will then themselves participate in their evil intentions, there will be no one to appease them, and at first a lot of innocent blood will be shed, its rivers will flow across the Russian Land, many nobles, and clergy, and merchants, disposed towards the Sovereign, will be killed ... "
In December 1916, the Empress visited the Tithes Monastery in Novgorod. Elder Maria, who had been lying in heavy chains for many years, stretched out her withered hands to her and said: “Here comes the Martyr - Tsaritsa Alexandra”, hugged her and blessed her. Blessed Pasha of Sarovskaya, before her death in 1915, kept bowing to the ground in front of the portrait of the Sovereign. "He will be higher than all kings," she said. The blessed one prayed to the portraits of the Tsar and the Royal Family along with the icons, crying out: "Holy Royal Martyrs, pray to God for us." Once, her words were conveyed to the Tsar: "Sovereign, descend from the Throne yourself."
It was March 15, 1917. Unrest grew in the capital. A "general's rebellion" broke out in the active army. The highest ranks of the army asked the Sovereign to abdicate the Throne "for the sake of saving Russia and defeating an external enemy," although victory was already a foregone conclusion. This request was made on their knees to the Tsar and his closest relatives. Without violating the oath of the Anointed of God and without abolishing the Autocratic Monarchy, Emperor Nicholas II transferred the Tsar's power to the eldest of the family - brother Michael. On this day, the Sovereign wrote in his diary: "All around is treason, cowardice and deceit." The empress, having learned about the renunciation, said: "This is the Will of God. God allowed this for the salvation of Russia." The people lost the one who possessed the successive grace to create Russian Law.
It was on that fateful day in the village of Kolomenskoye, near Moscow, that the miraculous appearance of the icon of the Mother of God, called "Reigning", took place. The Queen of Heaven is depicted on it in royal purple, with a crown on her head, with a Scepter and Orb in her hands. The Most Pure One took upon Herself the burden of Tsarist power over the people of Russia.
The way of the cross of the Royal Family to Golgotha ​​began. She gave herself completely into the hands of the Lord. “Everything is in the Will of God,” said the Sovereign in difficult moments of life, “I trust in His mercy and calmly, humbly look into the future.”
Russia met with silence the news of the arrest on March 21, 1917 by the Provisional Government of the Tsar and Tsaritsa. After the abdication of the Sovereign, the Chief Procurator of the Holy Synod asked the Synod to send out an appeal to the people - to support the Orthodox Monarchy. The synod refused.
The commission of inquiry appointed by the Provisional Government harassed the Tsar and Tsarina with searches and interrogations, but did not find a single fact convicting them of treason. When asked by one of the members of the commission why their correspondence had not yet been published, he was answered: "If we publish it, then the people will worship them as saints."
The August Family, being imprisoned in Tsarskoye Selo, worked tirelessly. In the spring, the Emperor and his children cleared the park of snow; in the summer they worked in the garden; cut and sawed trees. The indefatigability of the Tsar impressed the soldiers so much that one of them said: "After all, if he is given a piece of land and he himself works on it, then soon he will earn all of Russia for himself again."
In August 1917, the Royal Family was taken under guard to Siberia. On the day of the feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord, they arrived in Tobolsk on the ship "Rus". At the sight of the August Family, ordinary people took off their hats, crossed themselves, many fell on their knees: not only women, but also men wept. Once the Sovereign asked a Red Army soldier from the guards what was happening in Russia. He replied: "Blood is flowing from the internecine war. People are destroying each other." Nikolai Alexandrovich said nothing and, sighing heavily, turned his gaze to the sky. The regime of keeping the Royal Prisoners was gradually tightened. The empress wrote at that time: "We must endure, purify, be reborn!"
Exactly one year after his abdication, in Tobolsk, the Sovereign wrote in his diary: “How long will our unfortunate Motherland be tormented and torn apart by external and internal enemies? But still, no one is like God! May His Holy Will be done!"
The Royal Family loved Russia with all their hearts and could not imagine life outside the Motherland. “How I love my country, with all its shortcomings. It is dearer and dearer to me, and every day I thank the Lord for allowing us to stay here,” wrote Alexandra Feodorovna, being imprisoned. "I would not want to leave Russia. I love her too much," said the Sovereign. "I'd rather go to the farthest end of Siberia."
"Until now," the servants of the Sovereign recalled, "we have not seen such a noble, compassionate, loving, righteous Family and, probably, we will not see it again." Bishop Germogen of Tobolsk, who at one time spread slander against the Empress, now openly admitted his mistake. In 1918, before his martyrdom, he wrote a letter in which he called the Royal Family "the long-suffering Holy Family" and implored everyone to be careful in condemning every person, and especially the Anointed of God - the Tsar.
At the end of April 1918, the August Prisoners were brought under escort to Yekaterinburg, which became for them the Russian Golgotha. "Perhaps a redemptive sacrifice is needed to save Russia: I will be this sacrifice," said the Sovereign, "may the will of God be done!" Constant insults and bullying by the guards in the Ipatiev House caused the Royal Family deep moral and physical suffering, which they endured with good-naturedness and forgiveness. Empress Alexandra Feodorovna wrote in her diary, recalling the words of St. Seraphim of Sarov: "Reproached - bless, persecuted - endure, blasphemy - console yourself, slandered - rejoice. This is our way. He who endures to the end will be saved."
The Royal Family was aware of the approach of death. In those days, Grand Duchess Tatyana in one of her books underlined the lines: “Believers in the Lord Jesus Christ went to their death, facing inevitable death as if on a holiday, retaining the same wondrous peace of mind that did not leave them for a minute. They walked calmly meet death because they hoped to enter into a different, spiritual life, opening up for a person beyond the grave.
On Sunday, July 14, three days before the martyr's death, at the request of the Sovereign, they were allowed to perform divine services in the house. On this day, for the first time, none of the Royal Prisoners sang during the service, they prayed in silence. According to the rank of the service, it is necessary to read the prayer for the dead "With the saints, rest in peace" in a certain place. Instead of reading, the deacon this time sang a prayer. Somewhat embarrassed by the deviation from the rule, the priest began to sing. The royal family knelt down. So they prepared for death by accepting a funeral parting word.
Grand Duchess Olga wrote from captivity: “Father asks me to tell all those who remained devoted to him, and those on whom they can influence, so that they do not avenge him - he has forgiven everyone and prays for everyone, and that they remember that something the evil that is now in the world will be even stronger, but that it is not evil that will conquer evil, but only love. In the letter of the Sovereign to his sister, the strength of his spirit was manifested as never before in difficult days of trials: "I firmly believe that the Lord will have mercy on Russia and die passions in the end. May His Holy Will be done."
By the providence of God, the Royal Martyrs were taken from earthly life all together, as a reward for boundless mutual love, which tightly bound them into one inseparable whole.
On the night of the martyrdom of the Royal Family, Blessed Mary of Diveyevo raged and shouted: "The princesses with bayonets! Damned Jews!" She raged terribly, and only then did they understand what she was screaming about. Under the arches of the Ipatiev cellar, in which the Royal Martyrs and their faithful servants completed their way of the cross, inscriptions left by the executioners were discovered. One of them consisted of four cabalistic signs. It was deciphered as follows: "Here, by order of the satanic forces. The Tsar was sacrificed for the destruction of the State. All nations are informed about this."
The very date of the savage murder is not accidental - July 17th. On this day, the Russian Orthodox Church honors the memory of the holy noble prince Andrei Bogolyubsky, who, with his martyr's blood, consecrated the autocracy of Rus'. According to the chroniclers, the conspirators killed him in the most cruel way. Saint Prince Andrei was the first to proclaim the idea of ​​Orthodoxy and Autocracy as the basis of the statehood of Holy Rus' and was, in fact, the first Russian Tsar.
In those tragic days, His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon in Moscow, in the Kazan Cathedral, publicly declared: “The other day a terrible deed happened: the former Sovereign Nikolai Alexandrovich was shot ... We must, obeying the teaching of the Word of God, condemn this case, otherwise the blood of the executed will fall and on us, and not only on those who committed it. We know that when he abdicated the Throne, he did this with the benefit of Russia in mind and out of love for her. After his abdication, he could have found security and a relatively peaceful life for border, but he did not, wanting to suffer with Russia."
Shortly after the revolution, Metropolitan Macarius of Moscow had a vision of the Sovereign standing next to Christ. The Savior said to the King: "You see, I have two cups in my hands - this one, bitter, for your people, and the other, sweet, for you." The king fell to his knees and prayed for a long time to the Lord to give him a bitter cup to drink instead of his people. The Savior took out a red-hot coal from the bitter cup and placed it in the Sovereign's hand. Nikolai Alexandrovich began to shift the coal from palm to palm, and at the same time, his body became enlightened until he became like a bright spirit ... And again St. Macarius saw the Tsar among the multitude of people. With his own hands he distributed manna to him. An invisible voice at that time said: "The sovereign took the guilt of the Russian people upon himself; the Russian people are forgiven."
"Forgive them their sin; and if not, then blot me out of Your book, in which You wrote" (Ex. 32.32), - Nikolai Alexandrovich emphasized the lines in the Holy Scriptures. The sovereign courageously ascended Golgotha ​​and with meek obedience to the Will of God accepted a martyr's death. He left as a legacy the unclouded Monarchical Beginning as a precious Pledge received by him from his Royal Ancestors.
St. Seraphim of Sarov in 1832 predicted not only the fall of the Tsar's power, but also the moment of its restoration and the resurrection of Russia: "... but when the Russian Land is divided and one side will obviously remain with the rebels, the other will obviously become for the GOVERNMENT and the Fatherland and the Holy The Church - and the Lord and the entire Royal family will be preserved by the Lord with His invisible right hand and will give complete victory to those who raised their arms for HIM, for the Church and for the good of the indivisibility of the Russian Land - but not so much blood will be shed here, but when the right side for the GOVERNMENT will receive victory and catch all traitors and betray them into the hands of Justice, then no one will be sent to Siberia, but everyone will be executed, and here even more blood will be shed, but this blood will be the last, cleansing blood, for after that the Lord will bless His people with peace and He will exalt His Anointed David, His servant, a Man after His own heart."

Documentary film "Emperor Nicholas II. Return"

Our king is Mukden, our king is Tsushima,

Our king is a bloodstain

The stench of gunpowder and smoke

In which the mind is dark ...

Our king is blind squalor,

Prison and whip, jurisdiction, execution,

Tsar hangman, the low twice,

What he promised, but did not dare to give.

He's a coward, he feels stuttering

But it will be, the hour of reckoning awaits.

Who began to reign - Khodynka,

He will finish - standing on the scaffold.

K. Balmont "Our Tsar". 1906

Today is the 100th anniversary of the abdication of Nicholas II.

Nicholas II was born in 1868 and as a teenager was present at the death of his grandfather, Alexander the Liberator. In 1894, after the death of his father, he came to the throne. In 1917 he was overthrown from the throne, and in 1918 he was shot without trial together with his family in Yekaterinburg.

In Soviet times, there was such an anecdote. With the introduction of the title of Hero of Socialist Labor in 1938, one of the first to receive this title was Nikolai Aleksandrovich Romanov (posthumously). With the wording "For the creation of a revolutionary situation in Russia."

This anecdote reflects a sad historical reality. Nicholas II inherited from his father a rather powerful country and an excellent assistant - the outstanding Russian reformer S. Yu. Witte. Witte was dismissed because he opposed Russia's involvement in the war with Japan. The defeat in the Russo-Japanese War accelerated the revolutionary processes - the first Russian revolution took place. Witte was replaced by the strong-willed and decisive P. A. Stolypin. He began reforms that were supposed to turn Russia into a decent bourgeois-monarchical state. Stolypin categorically objected to any action that could drag Russia into a new war. Stolypin died. A new big war led Russia to a new, big revolution in 1917. It turns out that Nicholas II, with his own hands, contributed to the emergence of two revolutionary situations in Russia.

Nevertheless, in 2000, he and his family were canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church as saints. The attitude towards the personality of Nicholas II in Russian society is polar, although the official media did everything to portray the last Russian Tsar as "white and fluffy." During the reign of Boris N. Yeltsin, the found remains of the royal family were buried in the aisle of the Peter and Paul Cathedral.

They say that Nicholas II shot quite a few people - just a couple of thousand people, not like, they say, he is "the bloody tyrant Stalin." But how he shot them! Peaceful, unarmed people came to the king with banners, with icons and portraits of the monarch, with church hymns; they sincerely believed that the father-king loved them, that he would intercede for them, listen and solve their problems. And in them - a hail of bullets.

I think that already on that day, January 9, 1905 (Bloody Sunday), the tsar signed his own death warrant.

Well, okay, the Bolsheviks shot innocent children - this can be condemned. Although, again, did the tsar feel sorry for the children shot by soldiers in 1905, as well as orphans whose fathers did not return home from the demonstration?

But, in any case, Nicholas himself was by no means "innocent victim" and those who made him holy are well aware of this. Therefore, the canonization of Nicholas the Bloody and all this chanting and glorification of his "spiritual and moral deeds" is hypocrisy, is a purely political game that goes far beyond religion.

Now the "patriotic intelligentsia" is fanning the myth about Nicholas II and Nicholas Russia, about the wise and far-sighted monarch and the prosperity of his country and people. Allegedly, the Russian Empire developed so dynamically that - if not for the "damned Bolsheviks" - in a couple of decades it would have become the first world power. However, all these tales do not stand up to scrutiny.

Yes, Russian industry was then developing at a rather rapid pace, but despite this, Russia remained a backward agrarian-industrial country. It was 20 times inferior to the United States in coal production, smelted 11 times less iron and steel per capita than the States. Russia almost did not produce electric generators, tractors, combines, excavators, optical instruments and many other important types of machinery and equipment - and this despite the presence of outstanding scientists and designers in the country.

During the First World War, Russia built 3.5 thousand aircraft - against 47.3 thousand German, 47.8 thousand British and 52.1 thousand French. Even the equally backward and rotten Austro-Hungarian Empire was able to produce 5.4 thousand airplanes!

The backwardness of the then Russia is clearly visible from the structure of its exports. In 1909-1913, 41.7% of exports were grain. The following lines in the list of main export items were occupied by timber, cow butter and eggs, yarn, flour and bran, sugar, cake and oil products. And no cars for you, no "high-tech products"! Their country imported, and at the same time imported coal and coke (having Donbass) and cotton (having Central Asia).

Russia was the world's largest exporter of grain (26% of world exports) - anti-Soviet "patriots" are so fond of talking about this! But its peasants were malnourished and regularly starved. Moreover, according to Leo Tolstoy, the famine in Russia came not when the bread was not born, but when the quinoa was not born!

Today it is believed that Nicholas II was a fiery patriot of Russia. But then how did it happen that during his reign the country fell into complete economic and political dependence on the West?

The key sectors of heavy industry—coal, metallurgical, oil, platinum, locomotive and shipbuilding, electrical engineering—were completely controlled by Western capital.

Thus, 70% of coal production in the Donbass was controlled by Franco-Belgian capitalists; even the governing body of the Russian syndicate "Produgol" was located abroad (the so-called "Paris Committee"). Foreigners owned 34% of the share capital of Russian banks.

In addition, the tsarist government got into colossal debts. The state budget deficit sometimes reached 1/4 of revenues and was covered by loans - mostly external. Therefore, one should not be surprised that, as a result, the West dragged Russia - as a supplier of "cannon fodder" - into its showdown, into the imperialist slaughter, which, in fact, brought the autocracy to the final collapse.

then to be surprised that in the end the West dragged Russia - as a supplier of "cannon fodder" - into its showdown, into the imperialist slaughter, which, in fact, brought the autocracy to the final collapse.

The country was clearly not ready for war. The weakness of its army was revealed as early as 1904-05, and in 1914-17 it manifested itself with even greater force - and this fundamental weakness of the army, due to the general backwardness of the country and the rottenness of its top, could not be compensated for by the courage of Russian soldiers and the military skill of individual generals.

He was even more unprepared for a new type of war - for a large-scale and protracted war, requiring the full mobilization of the forces of the whole country - the rear.

Russia outright lost to Germany in the production of rifles (for all the years of the war - 3.85 million units against 8.55), easel machine guns (28 thousand units against 280), artillery pieces (11.7 thousand against 64 thousand units). ) and shells for them (67 million vs. 306). Only in the production of cartridges did we take first place among all the warring countries.

The authorities of Russia, "skillfully" headed by Nicholas II, were unable to overcome the speculation and sabotage of the capitalists, who disrupted the supplies necessary for the front and rear. And when the tsarist government had not yet coped with the task of supplying industrial cities (and, above all, Petrograd) with food (the announced surplus appraisal failed miserably), then it was swept away by a wave of popular indignation!

Most contemporaries and historians note that Nicholas had an average level of intelligence and knowledge (although he was not stupid), that he combined weak will and stubbornness, that he was subject to foreign influence, and that managing a huge empire was a “heavy burden” for him. In short, he was a statesman. The last Russian emperor does not in any way draw on an outstanding historical figure!

Yes, and the champion of "democratic rights and freedoms" is not very drawn. He dispersed two State Dumas, and signed the liberal Manifesto of October 17, 1905, when the revolution had already driven him into a corner. And here it would be useful to remember that during his reign, and, probably, with his knowledge, our great writer Leo Nikolayevich Tolstoy was anathematized by the church. The old count - "the conscience of the Russian people" - was attacked for raising his voice in defense of the downtrodden and oppressed peasant.

Nevertheless, in 2000, he and his family were canonized by the Russian Orthodox Church as saints. The attitude towards the personality of Nicholas II in Russian society is polar, although the official media did everything to portray the last Russian Tsar as "white and fluffy."

Under the Law of Succession, one of the most important laws of the Russian Empire, none of the remaining Romanovs have legal rights to the throne. Does Russia need a new dynasty? This is another question.

based on materials a_gor2

P.S. Duck, all the same, who was Tsar Nicholas 2, a far-sighted monarch, a "tsar-father", a "saint", as he is now commonly called, or a weak-willed ruler, a rag, a king who earned the nickname "bloody", by the fact that he shot a peaceful demonstration that brought his own the state to decline and death, and only thanks to the Bolsheviks, led by Lenin, who saved the country at that difficult time. The answer is obvious to me.

* Extremist and terrorist organizations banned in the Russian Federation: Jehovah's Witnesses, National Bolshevik Party, Right Sector, Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), Islamic State (ISIS, ISIS, Daesh), Jabhat Fatah ash-Sham", "Jabhat al-Nusra", "Al-Qaeda", "UNA-UNSO", "Taliban", "Majlis of the Crimean Tatar people", "Misanthropic Division", "Brotherhood" Korchinsky, "Trident named after. Stepan Bandera", "Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists" (OUN)

Now on main

Related Articles

• 

  IA Red Spring

  Born in deaf years ... On the threshold of life

  Nadezhda Konstantinovna Krupskaya Olga Skopina © IA Krasnaya Vesna Recently, the 150th anniversary of Nadezhda Konstantinovna Krupskaya, one of the largest figures in the Russian revolutionary movement, the Bolshevik and wife of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, somehow quietly and imperceptibly passed. “But you will not die in our souls, oblivion does not threaten you, / The judgment of time is not terrible for him, / Whose image is with Lenin ...

  21.04.2019 14:52 16

• 

  IA Red Spring

  Hope. The difficult happiness of a revolutionary

  Nadezhda Konstantinovna Krupskaya Skopina Olga © IA Krasnaya Vesna In 1889, 20-year-old Nadezhda Krupskaya, a gold medalist, aspiring talented teacher, entered the newly opened Higher Women's Courses in St. Petersburg. The courses were famous for their high scientific level and democratic spirit, attracting progressive girls. But in the 1880s, according to a contemporary, “the reaction strangled and distorted the exchange rates”: the number of ...

  20.04.2019 14:28 20

• 

  Alexander Maisuryan

  Day in history. Red banner over Buchenwald. 18+

  1945 A Soviet prisoner of war, after the complete liberation of the Buchenwald concentration camp, points to a former guard who brutally beat prisoners on April 11 - the international day for the liberation of prisoners of Nazi concentration camps. On this day in 1945, American troops liberated the Buchenwald concentration camp. A few hours before their arrival, an uprising of prisoners broke out here. A red banner was raised over the camp ... From the memoirs of one ...

  18.04.2019 21:41 33

• 

  Alexander Maisuryan

  To the anniversary of the war

  Vasily Vereshchagin. Apotheosis of war. 1871 April 14, 2014 by decree of Mr. Turchinov, after the February coup occupied the presidential chair, a war was unleashed in Ukraine. And this war has been going on for 5 years - longer than the Great Patriotic War. What is she doing, what are her goals? Formally, the goals on the part of Kyiv are known - to return the LPR and DPR to ...

  18.04.2019 21:35 14

• 

  Vladimir Veretennikov

  Photo: Gleb Spiridonov / RIA Novosti Exactly seventy-five years ago, on April 18, 1944, five Soviet prisoners of war escaped from the territory of a German tank repair plant in Riga. They escaped from captivity not on foot, but on board a Tiger tank stolen from the enemy. The similarity of this incident with the plot of the recent blockbuster "T-34" is striking. But the escape from Riga, like any ...

  18.04.2019 14:28 25

• 

  arctus

  On April 16, 1861, a memorial service was held in Kazan

  Kurtinskaya memorial service - a mass anti-government demonstration in memory of the victims of the massacre of peasants in the village of Bezdna, Spassky district. Bezdnensky unrest, speech of the peasants of the Kazan province in response to the peasant reform of 1861. Unrest began in April 1861 in the village of Bezdna, Spassky district, where the peasant Anton Petrov interpreted some articles of the "Regulations on February 19" in the interests of ...

  17.04.2019 21:39 25

• 

  V.E.Bagdasaryan

  Clans and power * Vardan Baghdasaryan. Global Process #112

  #ProgramSulakshin #SaveRussia #RebuildRussia #MoralState #SulakshinRight Help financially: https://money.yandex.ru/to/4100139792… 💳 OUR RESOURCES ➤Sulakshin Center: http://rusrand.ru/ 🔬🔭 ➤New Type Party: http ://rusrand..yandex.ru/narzur 📰 https://youtube.com/c/NarZhurTV?sub_co… 📺

  16.04.2019 23:26 22

• 

  Andrey Kolybanov

  Under whom is this done? Who is guilty? And finally what to do?

  The thing is, there is nothing to hide. Photographs of the agony of ZiL are published quite officially. That is, as I understand it, it’s impossible to hang a fake on me (although, in principle, everything is possible with us). We quote a piece: “Automobile plant them. I.A. Likhachev was one of the oldest automobile enterprises in Russia. It was founded in 1916 and lasted until 2013. Two years after...

  16.04.2019 1:31 66

• 

  Alexey Volynets

  Postal banking of the Russian Empire

  ©Biblioteca Ambrosiana/De Agostini/AKG-Images/Vostock Photo The advent of regular post and telegraph has had no less impact on society than the recent advent of the Internet. In the century before last, it was the post and telegraph that became the main means of mass communication. Over the 19th century, the number of post offices in Russia increased 9 times - from five hundred to 4.4 thousand. If in 1825 5 million letters were sent in our country, by the end of the century - 60 times more! The introduction of the telegraph went even more rapidly, ...

  12.04.2019 19:24 9

• 

  from blogs

  Towards the holiday: April 12. 108 minutes of feat

  Yuri Gagarin undergoing a medical examination before space flight Yuri Gagarin and Sergei Korolev Yuri Gagarin on the launch pad at the Baikonur Cosmodrome saying goodbye to Sergei Korolev Yuri Gagarin on the way to his spacecraft Yuri Gagarin in the cockpit of the Vostok-1 spacecraft Yuri Gagarin in the cockpit of the spacecraft Vostok-1 Yuri Gagarin in the cockpit of the Vostok-1 spacecraft Inner…

  12.04.2019 2:12 35

• 

  Alexander Rusin

  Kin-Dza-Dza

  Yesterday, one of the greatest directors, Georgy Danelia, who shot, among other things, a truly prophetic film, Kin-dza-dza, died. At the time of the release of the film on the screens, we could not even imagine with what incredible fullness it would be embodied in our reality. Only in recent years have we been able to realize this fully. Modern Russia is, in fact, what it is…

  7.04.2019 18:53 74

• 

  novy-reader

  Minsk process a hundred years ago

  photo from here From the editors of NJ: One hundred years ago, the "Minsk process" concerned foreign countries and peoples, and today's Minsk conspiracy against the Russian people. The Russian land has never known such betrayal! _________________________________________________________________________ Secret telegram of Minister of Foreign Affairs diploma, agent in Mongolia dated November 10 (October 28), 1913 Kindly advise the Mongolian government to stop hostilities ...

  6.04.2019 21:24 39

• 

  Alexey Volynets

  How the aristocracy was financially stimulated in the Russian Empire

  ©Glasshouse Images/Alamy Stock Photo/Vostock Photo The Russian Empire was a class-based state, with the most privileged stratum, the nobility, crowning the top of the social pyramid. At the end of the 19th century, legal estates were still clearly manifested everywhere, even in the banking system. On April 21, 1885, on behalf of Tsar Alexander III, the “Highest Rescript Given to the Noble Russian Nobility” was issued - the definition of the estate was written that way, in capital letters. Composed in the most magnificent and solemn…

  5.04.2019 18:01 25

• 

  KIROVTANIN

  THEY GUESSED

  I read the message of Ivan the Terrible to Stefan Batory and took such self-pity - the middle of the sixteenth century, but we cannot get through to the sea, and only after two hundred years we will make our way, we have been at war with Europe for decades and we write letters to it on twenty sheets proving that Eurasia also needs the sea ... They were not allowed to we didn’t have technology people, we strictly followed ...

  3.04.2019 19:02 36

• 

  arctus

  On this day in 1801 Emperor Paul I was assassinated.

  But the calls of modern quasi-monarchists to repentance are not heard. Why? Because, as Porfiry Petrovich said, "you killed it, sir." They killed their own, close, nobles, themselves that neither is "blue blood". They killed not by instantaneous death - for example, by a bullet, but by painful death: they beat him to death, after which they strangled him. And Klia hears a terrible voice Behind these terrible walls, Caligula's last hour ...

  25.03.2019 16:59 31

• 

  Taiga Info

  Siberian archaeologists found ancient stone tools in Tibet at an altitude of 4.6 km

  Photo: © archeology.nsc.ru. Exhibited Artifacts at the Nyawa Dewu Site Scientists of the Institute of Archeology and Ethnography of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, together with colleagues from the University of Arizona and the Chinese Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, discovered signs of an early Upper Paleolithic culture in Tibet. At an altitude of 4.6 km above sea level, where a person experiences a lack of oxygen, ancient people not only existed, ...

  24.03.2019 15:06 32

• 

  Alexey Volynets

  Opening a banking house in the 19th century was no more difficult than a city bath

  ©Historic Images/Alamy Stock Photo/Vostock Photo At the end of the 19th century, there were three types of non-state credit institutions in the Russian Empire: almost four dozen large joint-stock banks, one and a half hundred public municipal banks, and several hundred various banking houses and offices. During the reign of Alexander II, special legislation was adopted regarding the first two types of banks. The law regulated in detail the creation and liquidation of joint-stock and city banks, and the Ministry of Finance received ...

  22.03.2019 15:52 19

• 

  arctus

  On March 19, 1922, the Shukhov tower was built about 150 meters

  What did the Bolsheviks do in the first years of Soviet power? Built, my friends. And if it were not for the Civil War unleashed by the enemy, who knows whether Hitler would have had the idea to attack the USSR in general. The construction of the world-famous radio tower, designed by engineer Vladimir Shukhov, began on March 12, 1919. Built in three years. Three tough years. Built…

  20.03.2019 14:37 32

• 

  Alexey Volynets

  How the first Russian lottery was held in 1864

  ©Pump Park Vintage Photography/Alamy Stock Photo/Vostock Photo In Russia, lottery games have been known since the time of Tsar Peter I. Under Catherine II, the first state lottery for the nobility was also held. But only in 1864, for the first time in our country, a lottery took place, which swept the whole country and aroused general excitement for decades. The game, which was played on behalf of the Russian Empire, was then for the first time combined with the first successful domestic loan in our history. Royal decree of November 13, 1864 ....

  17.03.2019 15:43 17

• 

  arctus

  The kulak has never been either an image or an example of a Russian peasant

  - ... a question about the kulaks. Fists are considered to be the most hardworking and capable. - During the revolution of 1905, the peasants, without any Stalins, GPUs and Chekists, burned not only the landowners' estates, but above all the kulaks, who were actually greedy, paid the laborers a sack of grain for the season of work (women also had a handkerchief as a gift). Then against the fists herself ...

  10.03.2019 17:24 76

• 

  Evgenia Malyarenko Ksenia Askerova

  In Germany, showed a treasure map of the Third Reich

  Photo: Dariusz Franz Dziwiatek / The First News The Historical Foundation showed the diary of a Third Reich officer with a treasure map. The manuscript tells about the places where German troops hid looted treasures from all over the occupied territory. The authenticity of the diary was confirmed by experts from five German scientific institutions. The British tabloid Daily Mail wrote about the publication of the Schlesische Brücke (Silesian…

And for the simple reason that they clearly saw the royal sins and did not consider him a saint.
Among the critics of the canonization of the emperor was Alexei Osipov, professor of theology at the Moscow Theological Academy, who, despite the lack of holy orders, has great authority among some Orthodox believers and bishops: dozens of the current bishops are simply his students, he published an entire article with arguments against canonization. .

ON THE CANONIZATION OF THE LAST RUSSIAN Tsar

There are a number of serious considerations that should at least make any open-minded person think. on the causes of the very idea of ​​canonization of Nicholas II, its arguments and the possible consequences of its implementation.

As is known, " which does not have the recognition of the entire Orthodox Plenitude, due to its anticanonicity, a group of bishops calling themselves the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, which for decades has been causing discord among our Orthodox compatriots "(From the Appeal of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church. 1990), or the so-called Russian Church Abroad, without the blessing of the Mother Church canonized (mainly for political reasons) the last Russian Emperor.

And so, quite recently (since the time of the so-called perestroika), a small but extremely active circle of people who have the warmest sympathy for the Church Abroad, using newspapers, magazines, radio, pedagogical and lecture chairs, and even ambos, began to insist with amazing categorical on the canonization and the Russian Orthodox Church of the former Sovereign (the former, since he himself removed this rank, which, for example, for the late Metropolitan of St. Petersburg John Snychev was the main argument against the canonization of Nicholas II) (! - V.K.) and his families, as well as servants (i.e., non-Orthodox: Lutheran E. Schneider and Catholic A. Troupe).

At the same time, the completely non-church, typically political excitement raised around this issue and, in essence, comes down to forcing the officials of the Church and all its members to recognize the sanctity of Nicholas II ...
-
..If we raise the question of canonization, based on his life and work, then at least the following serious facts cannot be ignored.

1. Unprecedented in the history of the Russian state, the abdication of the Sovereign from the throne had, among others, the following fatal consequences for the country. Nicholas II, failing to ensure the implementation of the most important law of the Russian Empire in this exceptional situation - the unconditional succession to the throne (Article 37), by his abdication (and for the Heir) abolished the Autocracy in Russia and thereby opened a direct road to the establishment of a revolutionary dictatorship. At the same time, he not only illegally renounced for the Heir, not only transferred power to someone (Michael) who did not even know about it, and when he found out, did not accept it, but also directly violated the decisions and oaths of the Great Moscow Council of 1613 ...

In the case of Nicholas II, the situation is even more serious. He not only abdicated the throne himself, but, without ensuring his succession, he completely destroyed the royal power in Russia as such. So his renunciation does not correspond to the departure of the clergyman to rest, when the right to serve is preserved, and not even just the removal of his rank, but the destruction of this ministry itself in Rus' ...

2. The attitude of Nicholas II to the Church. Not only did he not abolish or mitigate the anti-canonical heading and administration of the Church by a layman (emperor) introduced on the Protestant model and its de facto subordination to chief procurators, royal favorites, Rasputin, expressed in their interference in any, including purely internal affairs, but and aggravated its oppressed position with the reforms of 1905-1906 ...

Previously persecuted religious communities were given freedom. In ancient Orthodox Moscow, councils of schismatics met without hindrance, and congresses of Baptists met. For the Orthodox Church, however, the favorable summer has not yet arrived. .. The attitude of the reigning dynasty towards the Orthodox Church is a historical example of ingratitude... The St. Petersburg period of Russian history is ending with a terrible shame and grave nationwide disaster” (“Church and Society”, 1998, no. 4, p. 60).

3. The freedoms granted by the Emperor in 1905, not limited by the proper framework and soon degenerated, in fact, into outright arbitrariness, in addition to direct humiliation of the Russian Church, opened up the legal possibility of discrediting both the throne and Orthodoxy, the development in the country of all kinds of mysticism, occultism, sectarianism, immoralism and so on.

Immediately after the decree, all kinds of societies, organizations, parties and unions began to emerge in abundance and reappear, publishing a huge number of magazines, newspapers, books in which liberal, anti-monarchist, anti-church, revolutionary, atheistic ideas are actively promoted. In Russia, the era of democracy has begun in the image and likeness of the “enlightened” West...

Many of the hierarchs of the Church, from the royal House and statesmen, even from close friends, turned their backs on Nicholas II (and took part in a conspiracy against the person closest to the royal family - Rasputin). The reaction of the Holy Synod to his abdication illustrates this convincingly. The Synod did not express regret either about what happened, or even about the arrest of the former Sovereign, and thus clearly showed its assessment of Nicholas II as a ruler.

4. Persistent continuation and deepening of ties with Rasputin until his death, despite the general temptation and the most resolute protests of the most prominent people of Russia (for example: the holy Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna / “he is a servant of Satan” / and other Grand Dukes, the holy Metropolitan Vladimir (Bogoyavlensky ), Metropolitan Anthony (Vadkovsky), confessor of the royal family, Bishop Feofan (Bystrov), Prime Minister P. A. Stolypin, ministers, statesmen and public figures ...

The first anti-Rasputin articles were written not by enemies of the Church and the throne, but by the well-known profound Orthodox writer M.N. Novoselov and a convinced monarchist, a friend of Tsar L.A. Tikhomirov and appeared in Moskovskie Vedomosti in 1910)...

L.A. was also suspended. Tikhomirov, a former Narodnaya Volya revolutionary, and later a defender of the idea of ​​autocracy and a friend of the tsar. Once a group of intellectuals gathered to write an “open letter” to the tsar, but Tikhomirov persuaded them not to do this: “It’s all useless! The Lord closed the eyes of the tsar, and no one can change this. The revolution will inevitably come anyway.” grew, and at the same time, attacks on the royal house also grew "(At the turn of two eras. P. 142).

5. The religiosity of the royal couple, for all their outwardly traditional Orthodoxy, had a distinct character of inter-confessional mysticism. This conclusion follows from many facts. The coldness of the royal family, mainly the queen, towards the Russian clergy is known, which is especially clearly revealed from the letters of Alexandra Feodorovna ("there are only animals in the Synod"!). Even with the highest hierarchs, the relations between the tsar and the tsarina were of an exclusively official nature...

6. What fundamentally does not allow from a Christian point of view to raise the issue of the canonization of Nicholas II is his personal confession to his mother in a letter from exile: “God gives me the strength to forgive everyone, but I can’t forgive General Ruzsky.” This recognition is not removed by the testimony of Grand Duchess Olga that her father forgave everyone, since she does not say anything about the main thing in this matter - did he forgive Ruzsky? Consequently, she either did not know about it, or preferred, for obvious reasons, to remain silent.

Due to both these and a number of other facts, the Commission of the Holy Synod for canonization made, in particular, the following conclusion: “Summing up the study of the state and church activities of the last Russian Emperor, the Commission did not find in it sufficient grounds for his canonization” (Materials. ..С.5).
-
... But, firstly, what will the holiness of our Church then turn into? Secondly, the very raising of the question of the canonization of Nikolai Alexandrovich and his family, and not of the Sovereigns, who had previously suffered, testifies that it was due not to ecclesiastical, but to other reasons.

At the same time, statements about the voluntary acceptance of death by the last Emperor for his people look completely untrue. There is direct evidence that the former august family sought to go abroad. The materials of the Synodal Commission for Canonization indicate: “we will only note the desire of the Royal Family to go abroad and in support of this we will quote the diary entry of the Emperor dated March 10 (23): “I sorted out my things and books and began to put aside everything that I want to take with yourself if you have to leave for England" (p. 58)...

The suffering and death of the last Emperor objectively speak of only one thing: God gave him the opportunity to suffer for the sins that he committed (consciously or unconsciously) against Russia. This idea of ​​his guilt in the sufferings of Russia was expressed ten years before the Yekaterinburg tragedy of St. John of Kronstadt. In an entry dated October 9, 1908, he, who called the tsar pious, utters such terrible words: "The earthly Fatherland suffers for the sins of the Tsar and the people, for the lack of faith and short-sightedness of the Tsar, for his indulgence in the unbelief and blasphemy of Leo Tolstoy ...". (TsGA. SPb. F.2219. Op.1. D.71. L.40-40v. See also: S.L. Firsov. The Orthodox Church and the State in the Last Decade of Autocracy in Russia. St. Petersburg, 1996) ...

Causes deep bewilderment and promoted by supporters of canonization responsibility for "the gravest sin of regicide, which weighs on all the peoples of Russia" (Appeal of the participants of the 3rd conference "The Tsar's Cause and the Ekaterinburg Remains" 8.12.1998) and the call of those living to repentance in it.

Is it not obvious, firstly, that sin is a matter of the personal conscience of the sinner, and not of the one who did not take any part in it? Therefore, it is possible and necessary to pray for the one who has committed a sin, but it is impossible to repent instead of him. The Ninevites repented for their sins, not for the sins of their forefathers.

Secondly, it is completely incomprehensible why the people are guilty of the murder of Nicholas II, and not the emperors Alexander II, Paul I, Peter III, Tsar Fyodor Godunov, or the Grand Dukes Sergei, Mikhail and others, or the holy Tsarevich Demetrius, Saint Elizabeth Feodorovna, Saints Boris and Gleb, or ...? What is the reason for this amazing oddity?

Thirdly, does the idea of ​​the guilt of the people for the sin of the murder of Nicholas II not lead to the fact that our peoples, primarily the Russians, become the main criminals, and the real killers go into the shadows?
And finally, does this idea not contribute to the emergence in the people of a painful complex of guilt, which is completely false, including because, unlike any other sin that can be washed away by repentance, here no one knows what and how one should repent in order to be cleansed? from this sin.
(I wonder what the priest will decide if someone repents to him for the sin of killing Tsar Fyodor Godunov or Nicholas II?)...

It is also necessary to consider those consequences that may entail canonization former august family.
First. The very question of it has already caused such a confrontation in the church environment, among the people, which has not yet been in the history of our Church.
Instead of a sober, serious discussion of the problems natural in such cases, the Orthodox mass media began to make the most harsh statements, completely inappropriate for Christians in the face of the outside world, addressed to their fellows.

Is this not a temptation for believers and unbelievers, and not a direct undermining of the authority of the Church, her preaching about love?
The possible canonization, with a clear disagreement with it, of very many (for example, during the meeting of Metropolitan Yuvenaly of Krutitsy and Kolomna with students of Moscow theological schools on March 31, 1997, it turned out that about half of them) is capable of even more seriously complicating the situation in our society and dividing it even further. one sign, for many will perceive this act as a compulsion of their conscience to venerate someone in whom they see neither a proper example of Christian life, nor even holiness ...
http://www.istina.ucoz.ru/osipov_o_kanonisazii.html
---
The priesthood and the kingdom in the Russian public consciousness(from the history of one archetype) 2000

Trying to comprehend the events taking place in modern Russia, we base our calculations on various political, economic and other factors that are easy to calculate and measure. But the longer we do this, the more we become convinced that there is another kind of reality behind current events: the moods that prevail in Russian society, changing according to some inexplicable, but quite perceptible logic. Paradoxically, they turn out to be stronger and more durable than official ideologies and political regimes. They can be given different names, but here we will call them the archetypes of social consciousness.

One of the most important of these archetypes is the idea of ​​the fusion of church and state (primarily the monarchy), or priesthood and kingdom. This model has a very long history and is still popular even among people who are completely far from religion and monarchist ideology...

One of the most acute and significant discussions in this respect unfolded over the possible canonization of Nicholas II and his family. Although the Synodal Commission of the Russian Orthodox Church sees as possible grounds for canonization only the patient endure of suffering and the personal piety of members of the royal family (that is, those aspects of their life that were not directly related to imperial dignity)2, but for supporters of canonization, it is a completely different matter, namely, the recognition of the sacrifice made by the royal family for the whole of Russia3, and the canonization of everything and everyone that was connected with the life of the last emperor, up to Grigory Rasputin. The canonization of the king is called the work of repentance of the whole Church. The ROCOR hierarchs regard the recognition of the holiness of the imperial family as a necessary condition for reconciliation with the Moscow Patriarchate and elevate it almost to the level of an article of faith; thus, this confession is mentioned separately in the standard text of repentance pronounced by the clergy of the Moscow Patriarchate upon their transfer to the Church Abroad....
http://magazines.russ.ru/continent/2000/104/de10.html
---
On the Authorities and the Church of Christ 2002

Metropolitan Nikolai of Nizhny Novgorod and Arzamas declares that he did not sign the act of canonization of the royal family at the 2000 Council ...
The interview of one of the oldest and most authoritative bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church, Metropolitan Nicholas of Nizhny Novgorod and Arzamas is sensational in its own way. Vladyka Nikolai, who went through the war, has repeatedly stated that he is not afraid of anyone but God, and therefore he always says only what he thinks. It seems to us that in terms of courage and frankness of judgments, his interview has no analogues...
- In Moscow there is a temple where you can see the icon of Rasputin. Now the question of his canonization is being openly raised, that he was a holy elder who was slandered by Masons and liberals. How can the Church treat such statements? Maybe it's really time to reconsider the look at Rasputin, to study his life?
- A whole series of documents with which I am familiar do not speak in favor of Rasputin. The question of him, of course, will be raised as one of the levers that they want to use to bring schism into the Church. Once I looked at a book about Rasputin. You know, you have to have a conscience. And if there is no conscience, then, of course, you can canonize everyone in a row. The question here is how firm or purposeful the Church will be. Why purposeful? Because some time ago, the church assembly heard that there were no grounds for the canonization of the king, and then all these words were forgotten.
http://ruskline.ru/monitoring_smi/2002/05/07/o_vlastyah_i_cerkvi_hristovoj/
---
The Voronezh diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church MP accused the members of the "nationwide repentance for the sin of regicide" group of commercial aspirations 2006
At the end of March, all over Voronezh, posters of color printing were posted with an invitation to everyone to take part in the conciliar repentance for the sin of regicide...

The most popular Voronezh edition of the weekly "Moe!" (110 thousand copies), whose leadership, according to expert estimates, has close contacts with the diocese, posted a commentary by the ruling bishop of the ROC MP, Metropolitan Sergius (Fomin) and representatives of the diocesan clergy.

According to Metropolitan Sergius, "The canonization of Nicholas II and his family as martyrs does not satisfy the newly-minted zealots of the monarchy," reports Portal-Credo.Ru's correspondent.

The hierarch publicly called the "monarchist attachments" the "heresy of kings". In some parishes, he continued, "self-made akathists, where the emperor, by the way, who had abdicated from the throne, are called the tsar-redeemer" became widespread. Such ideas, as the hierarch specifically points out, contradict the basic dogmas of Christianity about the atoning sacrifice of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
The metropolitan recommends to those living today to repent of their personal sins and, almost in the first place, "to those who sow confusion and division among the Orthodox, pervert Orthodox dogmas."

In another commentary for the newspaper, the head of the youth department of the diocese, priest Oleg Shamaev, speaks of a well-established business in the "rite of repentance", in which part of the clergy of many dioceses of the ROC MP is not quite open, but still involved.

Their main goal, according to the representative of the diocese, is to sow a split among the Orthodox in Russia. According to him, the clergy of the Voronezh diocese of the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate have recently often heard confessions from believers confessing to the sin of regicide.

The diocesan priest also noted that the participants in this business project are misleading people also because they call their call for nationwide repentance as if coming from Patriarch Alexy II himself and declare that they have a blessing to conduct their specific pilgrimage activities.
http://www.portal-credo.ru/site/print.php?act=news&id=42112
---
Orthodox against Nicholas II: why the tsar was recognized as a saint 2017

Despite the scandals around Matilda, there were and still are different opinions in the Russian Orthodox Church about the holiness of the last emperor and his family.
The stormy activity to protect the good name of Emperor Nicholas II from director Alexei Uchitel with his film "Matilda", which was developed by Orthodox activists, part of the clergy and even State Duma deputies led by Natalia Poklonskaya, created the public the illusion that being Orthodox and relating to the latter Russian emperor without trembling is impossible. However, in the Russian Orthodox Church there were and still are different opinions about his holiness.
Recall that Nicholas II, his wife, four daughters, a son and ten servants were canonized in 1981 by the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia as martyrs, and then, in 2000, the royal family was recognized as holy martyrs and the Russian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate.
The Council of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church made this decision only on the second attempt.
The first time this could have happened at a council in 1997, but then it turned out that several bishops, as well as some part of the clergy and laity, opposed the recognition of Nicholas II.
Last Judgment
After the fall of the USSR, church life in Russia was on the rise, and in addition to restoring churches and opening monasteries, the leadership of the Moscow Patriarchate was faced with the task of “healing” the schism with white émigrés and their descendants by uniting with ROCOR.
The fact that the canonization of the royal family and other victims of the Bolsheviks in 2000 eliminated one of the contradictions between the two Churches was stated by the future Patriarch Kirill, who then headed the department for external church relations. Indeed, six years later the Churches were reunited.
“We glorified the royal family precisely as martyrs: the basis for this canonization was the innocent death accepted by Nicholas II with Christian humility, and not political activity, which was rather controversial. By the way, this cautious decision did not suit many, because someone did not want this canonization at all, and someone demanded the canonization of the sovereign as a great martyr, “ritually martyred by the Jews,” said many years later a member of the Synodal Commission for Canonization Holy Archpriest Georgy Mitrofanov.
And he added: “It must be borne in mind that someone in our calendar, as it turns out at the Last Judgment, is not a saint.”

"State traitor"
The most senior opponents of the emperor's canonization in the church hierarchy in the 1990s were Metropolitans of St. Petersburg and Ladoga John (Snychev) and Nikolai (Kutepov) of Nizhny Novgorod and Arzamas.
For Bishop John, the worst offense of the king was the abdication of the throne at a critical moment for the country...
However, Metropolitan John died in 1995 and was unable to influence the decision of other bishops.
Metropolitan Nikolai of Nizhny Novgorod, a veteran of the Great Patriotic War who fought near Stalingrad, denied holiness to Nicholas II to the last, calling him a “traitor”. Shortly after the 2000 council, he gave an interview in which he explicitly stated that he had voted against the canonization decision.
“You see, I didn’t take any steps, because if an icon has already been made, where, so to speak, the tsar-father is sitting, what is there to perform? So the issue is resolved. It is resolved without me, without you it is resolved. When all the bishops signed the act of canonization, I marked next to my mural that I signed everything except the third paragraph. In the third paragraph, the tsar-father was walking, and I did not sign under his canonization. He is a traitor. He, one might say, sanctioned the collapse of the country. And no one will convince me otherwise. He had to use force, up to the deprivation of life, because everything was handed over to him, but he considered it necessary to run under the skirt of Alexandra Feodorovna, ”the hierarch was convinced.
As for the Orthodox "foreigners", Vladyka Nikolai spoke very harshly about them. “To run away and bark from there - no big mind is required,” he said ...

"A wise decision"
Opponents of canonization were not only in Russia, but also abroad. Among them is the former prince, Archbishop of San Francisco John (Shakhovskoy). The very first primate of ROCOR, Metropolitan Anthony (Khrapovitsky), a member of the Holy Synod, a witness to the revolution and one of the most respected hierarchs of his time, did not even think about the canonization of the tsar, considering his tragic death as retribution for the “sins of the dynasty”, whose representatives “madly proclaimed themselves the head of the Churches". However, the hatred of the Bolsheviks and the desire to emphasize their cruelty turned out to be more important for the followers of Metropolitan Anthony.
Bishop Maximilian of Vologda later told reporters how Metropolitan Nikolai and other opponents of the canonization of the tsar found themselves in the minority at the 2000 council.
“Let's recall the Council of Bishops in 1997, at which the question of the canonization of the royal martyrs was discussed. Then the materials were already collected and carefully studied. Some bishops said that it was necessary to glorify the sovereign-emperor, others called for the opposite, while most of the bishops took a neutral position. At that time, the solution of the issue of the canonization of the royal martyrs, probably, could have led to a division. And His Holiness [Patriarch Alexy II] made a very wise decision. He said that the glorification should be at the Jubilee Cathedral. Three years have passed, and while talking with those bishops who were against canonization, I saw that their opinion had changed. The hesitant became for canonization, ”the bishop testified.
One way or another, but the opponents of the canonization of the emperor remained in the minority, and their arguments were consigned to oblivion. Although conciliar decisions are binding on all believers and now they cannot afford to openly disagree with the holiness of Nicholas II, judging by the discussions in RuNet around Matilda, it was not possible to achieve complete unanimity on this issue in the ranks of the Orthodox...

Holiness Commission
In order to more clearly understand who the Passion-bearers are called in the Church, one should refer to the official clarifications from the Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints. From 1989 to 2011, it was headed by Metropolitan Yuvenaly of Krutitsy and Kolomna, during which time 1866 ascetics of piety were canonized, including 1776 new martyrs and confessors who suffered during the years of Soviet power.
In his report at the Council of Bishops in 2000, the very one where the issue of the royal family was decided, Vladyka Yuvenaly stated the following: “One of the main arguments of the opponents of the canonization of the royal family is the assertion that the death of Emperor Nicholas II and be recognized as a martyr for Christ. The commission, on the basis of a careful consideration of the circumstances of the death of the royal family, proposes to carry out its canonization in the guise of holy martyrs. In the liturgical and hagiographic literature of the Russian Orthodox Church, the word “passion-bearer” began to be used in relation to those Russian saints who, imitating Christ, endured with patience physical, moral suffering and death at the hands of political opponents.
“In the history of the Russian Church, such martyrs were the holy noble princes Boris and Gleb (1015), Igor Chernigov (1147), Andrei Bogolyubsky (1174), Mikhail of Tverskoy (1319), Tsarevich Dimitri (1591). All of them, with their feat of passion-bearers, showed a high example of Christian morality and patience, ”he noted.
The proposal was accepted, and the council decided to recognize the emperor, his wife and children as holy martyrs, despite the fact that the Council of Bishops of the Russian Church Abroad in 1981 had already recognized the entire royal family and even its servants as “full-fledged” martyrs, among whom was the Catholic valet Aloysius Troupe and Lutheran Goflektress Ekaterina Schneider. The latter died not with the royal family in Yekaterinburg, but two months later in Perm. History knows no other examples of the canonization of Catholics and Protestants by the Orthodox Church.

unholy saints
Meanwhile, the canonization of a Christian in the rank of martyr or passion-bearer in no way whitewashes his entire biography as a whole...
The stubborn fact that most of the life and entire reign of Emperor Nicholas, right up to his abdication and exile, is by no means an example of holiness, was also openly recognized at the 2000 council.
“Summing up the study of the state and church activities of the last Russian emperor, the Commission did not find in this activity alone sufficient grounds for his canonization.
It seems necessary to emphasize that the canonization of a monarch is in no way connected with the monarchist ideology, and even more so does not mean the “canonization” of the monarchical form of government,” Metropolitan Yuvenaly concluded then.
https://www.ridus.ru/news/258954
---
Well, in conclusion, an extremely curious testimony of a person who personally communicated with representatives of the ROCOR -

banana_bunker
The glorification in Washington in November 1981 of the family of citizens of the Romanovs (former tsarist) in the guise (already!) of martyrs is not even an act of ROCOR, in which half was definitely against it. This is an act of the Reagan administration and the structures behind it, as part of the "Crusade" against the "evil empire" of the USSR.

1) How it was.
In 1959, one of the bishops of ROCOR gave out in a sermon that Tsar Nicholas accepted de death for the people. And the martyr (?). And that the godless Russian people need to repent of this too.

The latter was their usual rhetoric. Just as they called on the "cleansing (atomic) fire" of "Christian", "God-loving America" ​​on the atheists in the USSR. But after this push (private theological opinion) of this archpriest, no one returned to the idea of ​​glorification in ROCOR: Nike was too insignificant a person. (Yes, and the evon wife, too ...)

But the actor Reagan came to their nominally supreme power. And they came up with the idea to stir up such a performance. So that religion would help instill in Russians an inferiority complex not only before the West and its consumer products, but also before their own history.

2) What about MP?
The Moscow Patriarchate resisted for a long time, but in 2000 they gave in, and glorified the Romanovs not as martyrs (the rank of general), not as reverends (like senior officers), but ... the ridiculous rank of martyrs (this is not even a junior officer, this is a sergeant major / ensign ).

3) Useful idiots.
Both before and after this shameful act, public speaking psychopaths promoted the cult of these empty and pitiful personalities of the Romanovs.
First of all, it was Konstantin Dushenov. (A former lieutenant commander and not just a member of the CPSU, but a party organizer. He wrote a letter to General Secretary Gorbachev M.S. where he spoke about the shortcomings of perestroika in the Northern Fleet, but received a thrashing. And, instead of a surge in career growth, they quietly left him fleet, where it is clear, they do not like informers. Arriving in his native Leningrad, he retrained as a manager ... in professional Orthodox, for which he let his beard grow to the waist.) ...

Today, such a public psychopath is a Ukrainian woman (you can’t get away with mentality) Mrs. Poklonska.
-
I know this from the personal stories of old people who have already gone to another world - ROCOR laity.

The canonization was pushed through by Bishop Gregory of Washington and Florida ((Count) Grabbe), an omnipotent, as everyone guessed, watcher from the secret services (Empire of GOOD) in the central structures of ROCOR, who held the post of Secretary of the Synod for decades.
Moreover, he intrigued against everyone, right and left, and everything was nothing to him.
Even against archipelago. John (Maximovich) of San Francisco, who was glorified for his cause only in 1994 as the Saint of Shanghai and San Francisco, whom he hated fiercely, accusing him, a “chemically pure” anti-Soviet, as standard, of having connections with the Communists and Moscow .. .

Here is about the personality of this figure, who, from his tender youth, went crazy on anti-Sovietism:
yandex.ru/search/?text=Secretary%20of the Synod%20ROCOR%20bishop%20Gregory%20Grabbe

For example, even in the "truthful" Wiki it is already eloquent:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_(Grabbe)

Once again, briefly, after Nika's canonization
It was so that immediately after the accession of Reagan's inauguration, Count Grabbe, sensing the wind of perestroika of change that blew in bitchy anti-Soviet, suggested that the competent structures of the "Empire of Good" finally wrap this little business up - to create Nicky in quality. the holy MARTYR, hanging his "torments" on the Soviet (Russian) people.
Like the whole ROCOR "with one mouth and one heart" "has been looking forward to this day of light", and for many decades, but the hidden agents of Moscow ***) interfere in the ROCOR Synod, and resist, and put spokes in the wheels.
The idea was liked and met with support in the presidential party (administration) of the artist R.
Decided - done. And no one asked ROCOR. Like everything is FOR ...

I don't know where exactly to read about this today :-(
The fact is that in ROCOR the former criticism of glorification in public space died out immediately after the glorification. In the West, societies are much more totalitarian in the sense of unanimity. And the dissatisfied risked accusations of complicity with the enemy - Soviet communism. With all the consequences. [And inflowing].
Only t.s. in oral tradition.
Where did I get it from.

P.S.
Well, US agitprop began to develop this topic to the fullest.
So I personally listened to religion. (Orthodox) Voice of America program shortly after November 1981. The host [with the epic name Zoran Safir, which is why it was imprinted in the brain] informed the Soviet people, who yearned for religious enlightenment, that in the USSR they, i.e. Orthodox believers [secretly from the party committees and the KGB] revere St. Tsarina Alexandra Feodorovna Romanova as ... the second Mother of God (!!) Neither more nor less.
Whoever is in the subject understands that this is worse than the "myrrh-streaming" of the bronze bust of the "sovereign".

***) There was no Russia Today at that time, as well as social networks... Not even Kaspersky Anti-Virus... And there were already agents of Moscow.

P.S.
What else I forgot to add.
Archbishop of San Francisco John (Maximovich) (*1896 - +1966) - a man of a holy personal life, was subjected (see Wiki) even to a public civil court, where Grabbe was the main accuser. There were many of his admirers and zealots for glorification - all in vain. Only immediately after Grabbe's dismissal in 1994 did he manage to glorify John as the Saint of Shanghai and San Francisco.

Well, arguing theoretically, the Reagan get-together could confine itself to the glorification of John of Shanghai in the guise of saints, a real holy man. Like a really stubborn anti-Soviet, who refused to reunite with Moscow for fundamental ecclesiastical and political reasons. Patriarchy immediately after the war. (And with great personal efforts, he evacuated a mass of Orthodox Russian people (from the Harbin diaspora) from China through the Pacific islands and eventually to the coveted western coast of the United States). Why not a style icon?
An-n no!
Navar from John would not be the same.

Here, from the "Russian tsar" "killed and tortured" by "communist barbarians", moreover, by his former loyal subjects, - here the fat came out in every possible way ...

Opponents of St. Nicky in Russia
Many people in the Russian Federation were against the glorification of Nika. But... who listens to brides... people?

And today, not a single cleric in the MP dares to publicly admit that he "somehow doesn't really believe in the holiness of Nike and her family."

And how many serious, at the level, books have been published since 2000 against the glorification of Nika? I know only one, Alexandra Kolpakidi "Nicholas II. Saint or bloody?", and even then this year.

This is very, very little, realizing that 90% of Russians, if they don’t understand, then feel that Nika’s “holiness” is a complex of guilt on Russians, stupid and bloody “scoops” ...

Results
So, how can we know that the glorification of "St. martyr." Nicky is an act within the framework of the Reagan crusade against the USSR as an "evil empire"?

From a comparison of facts!
NB Legitimate historical method if no others available

Including considering the colorful personality of Grabbe. As well as [impudent] NOT glorification of John (Maximovich) - a real saint, but hated by [special services agent] Grabbe

---
As you can see, everyone agrees that -
a) the canonization was pushed by the West, b) it was a political decision, c) it was necessary to create a sense of guilt among the Russians, c) there was no talk of any holiness of the tsar at that time, d) many clergymen were against it, e) the process itself was in violation all norms.

In summary: canonization was intended to serve as a tool for discrediting the Russian people and imputing collective responsibility for regicide to them, the last tsar turned out to be the most convenient figure for this.

Conclusion: those who are trying to present Nicholas as a saint and demand repentance from the Russian people for regicide are directly and frankly working against Russia and Russians in the interests of the West.

Make personal inferences.