Nicholas II and his family

[Cecilianus]

Alex, I hope you are correct in your assessment of the Tsarina; the historical evidence is far darker, ignoring for the moment the Soviet spin put upon it later.

Rasputin was a heretic. His teachings included the value of libidinousness, fornication and gluttony. The general consensus is that he was either possessed or a demonic being incarnate. Especially after being tossed into the river for dead, UNDER the ice, and showing up a few days later.

And hemophilia does not work such that simple calm would stop the bleeding. The disease is a defective clotting factor.

There are a variety of extremes regarding the historical record. The argument many Orthodox, led by the controversial Blessed Seraphim Rose, make is that God would not let His anointed Tzar be misled, and therefore Rasputin must be a saint and all historical evidence to the contrary must be rejected. The extreme version of the argument against him can be found in Warren H. Carroll’s 1917: Red Banners, White Mantles, which portrays him as being demonically possessed and surviving many assassination attempts which can only be explained through his body being kept alive by preternatural forces. (He was given more than ample doses of poison, shot multiple times at point-blank range, clubbed on the head which later hit the bridge he was thrown off of, and he survived under the ice long enough to break his arms free of his bonds.)

Dr. Carroll is an incredibly story-teller (he originally aspired to be a novelist, not a historian), but his account is more interesting than that of his murderer, Prince Felix Yusupov, which I read right after reading Dr. Carroll’s book. Yusupov portrays him just as an evil man - certainly not a saint, but not necessarily a possessed man either.

His lewd behavior, his association with the khlysty, and his rape of a nun are generally not disputed, and seem to indicate that he was trying to parody or imitate the behavior of the yurodivy. His healing of the Tzar’s son over telegraph cannot be explained through natural causes - the placebo effect over telegraph is not going to make one’s blood clot - but in the absence of natural cause I would not necessarily rush to assert a preternatural cause. Sometimes we just don’t know what happened, and things happen that we have no explanation for. That’s life.

 

[Cavaradossi]

Alex, I hope you are correct in your assessment of the Tsarina; the historical evidence is far darker, ignoring for the moment the Soviet spin put upon it later.

Rasputin was a heretic. His teachings included the value of libidinousness, fornication and gluttony. The general consensus is that he was either possessed or a demonic being incarnate. Especially after being tossed into the river for dead, UNDER the ice, and showing up a few days later.

And hemophilia does not work such that simple calm would stop the bleeding. The disease is a defective clotting factor.

Rasputin certainly was a shady character. We cannot be too sure exactly how deeply he influenced the Tsarina though.

 

[theistgal]

Regardless of how we view their actions when they were in power, I believe we can respect and admire the Tsar and his family for how they accepted their sufferings after they LOST all their power.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Alex, I hope you are correct in your assessment of the Tsarina; the historical evidence is far darker, ignoring for the moment the Soviet spin put upon it later.

Rasputin was a heretic. His teachings included the value of libidinousness, fornication and gluttony. The general consensus is that he was either possessed or a demonic being incarnate. Especially after being tossed into the river for dead, UNDER the ice, and showing up a few days later.

And hemophilia does not work such that simple calm would stop the bleeding. The disease is a defective clotting factor.

As far as the Tsaritsa (Tsarina?) was concerned, I think that the historical record is open (as it is always) to interpretation. There are historical events that are recorded, to be sure, but to which are attached multiple interpretations. And how we interpret history, for instance, reflects more on our own personal history that forms our weltanschauung.

I originally was quite negative about the canonization of the Romanovs but have since come to another conclusion. The historical record that is most publicly accessible has certainly been darkened by the insidious propaganda of the Left. The Tsars were demons incarnate for it when, in fact, what the Left replaced them with in Russa, namely the Bolshevist terror, was truly what was evil, as we know.

I’m only relating what I’ve read and heard about Rasputin. The ROC has had the sense to reject his cause for canonization outrightly.

Hemophilia is a complex disease, to be sure. But my physician friends have assured me that it is possible, in any number of cases, to actually halt the bleeding via clotting if a victim is calm. Rasputin and hemophilia is also discussed in the book, “Nicholas and Alexandra.”

That Rasputin had hypnotic powers is also a likely probability.

The Russian Orthodox Church reviewed the character of the Tsaritsa, her husband and their children very closely. Its canonization procedures are second only to the Vatican’s in this respect. I don’t believe the ROC would have canonized them as it did in 2000 if there was even the slightest dispassionate moral doubt as to their sanctity.

There is always a problem when we consider a saint that had many detractors. In fact, Bl. Pope John XXIII had such detractors who contantly opposed and slowed down his beatification and this despite the fact that more than 300 miracles were cleared by the Vatican as a result of his intercession (when only one is required for beatification).

Meister Eckhart is another example, as is Jerome Savonarola (whose canonization the Jesuits still oppose).

More than any ecclesial commission, however, is the great popular devotion to the Russian Royal Family that the Russians themselves have always had. As we know, Russian newly-wed couples would lay flowers at the “house of special purpose” or the site of the family’s martyrdom in Ekaterinburg. This is why Andropov ordered that building to be levelled, but all at once and under cover of night. A cross was placed on the site, however, and people continued to lay flowers.

Whatever mistakes they may or may not have made, I’ve no doubt that the voice of the people has spoken in favour of the Russian Imperial Passion-bearers.

Alex

 

[Vico]

I have always greatly admired the Tsar and his family; I was horrified ever since childhood to read of how his innocent children were gunned down.

I was very happy when the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia canonized them as Passion Bearers. I have an icon of them, in fact, and they were one of the things that drew me to the Russian Orthodox Church (I didn’t join yet, but have been planning to.)

ROCOR canonized them as martyrs in 1981, and the ROC (inside Russia) as passion bearers in 2000.

nytimes.com/2000/08/15/world/nicholas-ii-and-family-canonized-for-passion.html

article.wn.com/view/2000/08/15/Nicholas_II_family_canonized_in_Russia/

 

[nordskoven]

I recently read Colin Wilson’s book, Rasputin and the Fall of the Romanovs; and earlier read The Last Czar. So it’s sobering to realize the national and international influences meddling with such passion in the lives of the Romanovs. Colin Wilson’s book on Rasputin was extremely careful to document the knowns about this controversial figure. Wilson, a favorite author of mine, traces the lineages of stories about Rasputin. Wilson suggests that the accounts of his actions were generally exaggerated or outright fabrications, and were a means of limiting Rasputin’s clout. While an intense man, one living for some time with his daughter, the access he had to the Romanovs was circumscribed as much as possible by influential persons at the court. Colin Wilson also weighs in on the validity of the Anastasia claimant, and finds it credible.

Rasputin, whether from mystical insight or practical observation, knew the Czar’s life was at risk, and that his life and that of Nicholas II were inextricably entwined. My dad took us to see the silent film about Rasputin with the Barrymores when we were kids, and he was a forbidding character, especially in his refusal to die at the hands of his assassins. Yet one must remember that it was not uncommon for newborns to be immersed in freezing water in Russia, and Rasputin was of remarkably hearty peasant stock if the heavy bone structure of his brow is the least indication. The Tsarina’s emotional reliance on Rasputin’s intervention is understandable and their association can in no way be a reflection on her character any more than Saint Joan of Arc’s bodyguard, Gilles de Rais, a serial child rapist and murderer, can be a reflection on the Maid of Orleans’ sanctity.

Mystic nun, Sister Saint Pierre, as documented in Radio Rosary pamphlets, gave a real-time detailed account of Marx and his cohorts as their work progressed to subvert Russia. Richard Wurmbrand was a friend of Archbishop Sheen, and wrote a tremendous book, Marx & Satan. In it Wurmbrand, himself a political prisoner tortured at the hands of the Soviets, quotes the demonic writings of Marx and other early Communists, and convincingly shows they were literally Satanists. This parallels the BBC documentary on the secret rites under Hitler as being anything but Christian as alleged; indeed, they were patently Satanic rituals.

Our Lady of the Rosary’s intervention in her appearances at Fatima and afterwards, seeking to unite Russia, is worthy of the Spouse of the Holy Spirit. “Pray the daily Rosary for peace.” --Our Lady of the Rosary, Fatima, Portugal.

 

[Alexander_Roman]

Excellent and interesting points!!

The Anastasia claimant(s) have been proven to be fakes, even though there are those who still cling to fond beliefs.

The remains of Anastasia and Alexis were separated from their family and they are contained in a reliquary in Belgium (I believe).

The Bolsheviks, fearing any possibility of a cult in honour of the Russian imperial family, even through the bodies of their servants on top of them and otherwise tried to “mix” the remains to prevent this.

It was the Russian TV producer, Avdonin, who found the remains of the imperial family and kept them in his house until such time as he could reveal them and have them forensically examined by experts, such as the professor from Southeast Florida University (whose name I forget - sorry, it’s with age) who reassembled the skeletons.

There was a woman who claimed to be Anastasia (in the U.S., I believe?) who married an American. She was cremated after her death, but a hospital had a piece of her colon taken from an operation she needed. Scientists carefully tested those remains and found that she had no connection to ANY royal family whatsoever. Yet, there are those who dispute the findings. The findings were sufficient for the ROC to clear the way for the imperial family’s canonization as Royal Passion-Bearers (and yes, the ROCOR did glorify them earlier as Royal Martyrs).

alex

 

[Aramis]

Anastasiia and Alexis were found to have been buried within throwing range of the rest of the family. The DNA tests are pretty conclusive.

But, even now, there are those who fervently wish for a direct descent relative of Nicholas II to show up and claim the russian throne, even if only as a figurehead… some even to the point of self-delusion. Many of these would accept a direct male-line descent relative of Alexander II… some would accept distaff (female-line) descent, but it’s always angered people.

 

[Halyna]

I am very much aware of Nicholas II and his family and the situation at that time (being my own family was persecuted for their faith.)

Nicholas, Alexandra, and their children were NOT persecuted for their faith and did not die as martyrs for their faith but for political purposes

Alexandra’s relationship with Rasputin lays questions regarding her faith.

Though I sympathize with the Romanoffs, they did not shed their blood for their faith, thus are not martyrs.

 

[Cecilianus]

Though I sympathize with the Romanoffs, they did not shed their blood for their faith, thus are not martyrs.

Neither did St. Maximilian Kolbe, however, who is called a “martyr”.

Hence the appropriateness of the term “Passion-Bearer” instead.