Tsar Nicholas II?

[Orthodox Andrew]

Is he a Saint? I have heard from a man I know who attends a OCA Church, that they honor him. Does anybody know anything about him being canonized?

P.S. Here's a link of Icons of him. http://www.ipmce.su/~cyril/orthodox/tzar/icons.html

 

[Reader Nilus]

Yes they were glorified by the Russian Church on Sunday August 20, 2000.
Jeff the Finn

 

[Orthodox Andrew]

Thank you!

 

[Orthodox Andrew]

Just to take this thread a step further, I shall add another question. How do you guys feel about Nicholas being canonized?

 

[Reader Nilus]

I have a hard time with it, his Army wanted my grandfathers dead, so there is not a great deal of love for him from me. I thought after reading about him he was a terrible ruler, if he had been doing something else Nicholas would have been a good fellow. I think he is a Saint along the lines of Sts Boris and Gleb, because of the way he faced his death.
Jeff the Finn

 

[Philip]

We must remember that "Saint" does not mean "perfect while on earth". Nicholas died a martyr. For that, he is to be honored.

 

[brewmama]

I highly recommend reading An Englishman In The Court of the Tzar, you may feel more empathy for him. It's very sad, both in the lives of the Royal family and that of Charles Sydney Gibbes.

This tells a little about it.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1888212195/qid=1065631740/sr=1-44/ref=sr_1_44/002-3870999-0924058?v=glance&s=books

 

[Orthodox Andrew]

I highly recommend reading An Englishman In The Court of the Tzar, you may feel more empathy for him. It's very sad, both in the lives of the Royal family and that of Charles Sydney Gibbes.

This tells a little about it.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1888212195/qid=1065631740/sr=1-44/ref=sr_1_44/002-3870999-0924058?v=glance&s=books

Thanks for the link.

 

[eleni]

Czar Nicholas is the Key to heaven....

Just because we have history books in school that shows one sided propaganda does not mean we have to believe in it.....

It was prophecied that Tzar Nicholas and his family would be martyred .....
and that after this,that the release of satan will be acting more openly...
The Tzar portrayed in Tv or other media is not the real Tzar that the Russian Orthodox know...
His family life centered around the Orthodox faith....Blessed Archbishop John Maximovitch has written: "Why was Tsar Nicholas II persecuted, slandered and killed? Because he was Tsar, Tsar by the Grace of God. He was the bearer and incarnation of the Orthodox world view that the Tsar is the servant of God, the Anointed of God, and that to Him he must give an account for the people entrusted to him by destiny..."

In Orthodox teaching, Tsar Nicholas was the last representative of lawful Christian authority in the world, the last one to restrain the mystery of iniquity (2 Thess. 2:27). (And, indeed, from the time of his martyrdom can be dated the unprecedented lawlessness, godlessness, and apostasy of this final age: the complete unleashing of the forces of darkness, which now threaten to complete ly engulf the world as a preparation for the reign of Antichrist.)

link...

http://www.roca.org/oa/14/14c.htm

 

[CharlieZaRus]

Jeff the Finn, if you are actually Finnish and I have not misread your name, I am sure that the Tsar' wanted no specific harm done to the Finns or anybody else. Bear in mind that there was no war between Finland and Russia ever, until 1939 (but that's the Soviet Union by then) and up until 1917 Finland was basically a self-governing Grand Duchy with the Tsar' as Her Grand Duke. Some years before the Revolution, Finland's autonomy was severely curtailed in the face of revolutionary activity, but there was nothing serious or violent; in fact, despite Finland's closeness to the capital, it was still considered harder to arrest dissidents there than in any other part of the country, so Lenin and his groupies would meet there as a kind of safe outpost. Regardless of what certain military men might have wanted, the Emperor wished the best for all of his subjects, both in the material and the spiritual sense.

 

[pax]

Just a quick question, were other members of the royal family also recognized as saints (Anastasia, etc...)?

 

[Reader Nilus]

Yes
Jeff the Finn

 

[Reader Nilus]

Jeff the Finn, if you are actually Finnish and I have not misread your name, I am sure that the Tsar' wanted no specific harm done to the Finns or anybody else. Bear in mind that there was no war between Finland and Russia ever, until 1939 (but that's the Soviet Union by then) and up until 1917 Finland was basically a self-governing Grand Duchy with the Tsar' as Her Grand Duke. Some years before the Revolution, Finland's autonomy was severely curtailed in the face of revolutionary activity, but there was nothing serious or violent; in fact, despite Finland's closeness to the capital, it was still considered harder to arrest dissidents there than in any other part of the country, so Lenin and his groupies would meet there as a kind of safe outpost. Regardless of what certain military men might have wanted, the Emperor wished the best for all of his subjects, both in the material and the spiritual sense.

That is not what it was like, Russia occupied Finland, and the Finns wanted their freedom, my grandparants were Finnish Nationalists and the Czar's Army did not like that.
Jeff the Finn

 

[CharlieZaRus]

Yes, Jeff, that's exactly what it was like, read about Lenin sometime. Finland was generally more self-governing than any other part of Russia, even though it was part of Russia's political sphere. It had its own Duma and was treated as a separate entity within the empire. You have to realize that Tsarist Russia was not a military state; the armies did not control the Tsar. As such, the Russian armies were nothing more than a tool of the state used either in war or in keeping the peace at home. If Finns were to take part in an anti-government rebellion (the Finnish government having accepted the legal authority of the Russian Imperial government over them), then they SHOULD have been dealt with as criminals, because there are civil and legal ways of doing things that do not include flouting the law. I'm not saying this because I'm Russian, I'm saying it because I recognize a universal code of civics, and rebelling when you have a legitimate governmental authority sensitive to your interests (the Finnish Duma) is wrong. Nothing is wrong with being a nationalist, mind you (I myself am one), it's when that nationalist leaning leads you to break the law--that's when the gov't gets on your case.

It is also important to bear in mind that there was no nation of 'Finland Proper' to speak of, ever, before 1917. There was a Land of Finns much like there was Germania many many years ago, but it represented a series of disjointed and somewhat backward tribes (no offense, the Russians were not especially different). Beginning in the 12th century, the Finnish lands (which the Finnish people had migrated to from what is now northern Russia) were systematically incorporated into Sweden by conquest. In 1581 the Grand Duchy of Finland was established, self-governing under Swedish control. In 1809, Russia trounced Sweden in war and took the Finnish territories as war prize. The Tsarist government showed more grace to the Finns in this regard than to any other incorporated peoples, respecting the [wholly artificial and Swedish-made] government structure already in place, and not superimposing Tsarist ways onto the Finns. The Tsar simply replaced the King of Sweden as the Grand Duke of Finland. It was really through the Swedish and Russians that Finland came to have such a civilized and organized society, and through the nationalist movements of the 19th century that they came to value so much their [allow me to say rich] Finnish heritage and want independence. But you can't exactly blame the Russians for wanting to keep their nation together and not just let a working system collapse; and no one wanted anyone else dead, there's no need to exaggerate like that.
- Grisha

 

[Reader Nilus]

The Finns did not accept Russian Rule, no more than they accepted Swedish Rule, Russian Rule was forced on them by the Czar's Army. Being that I know those who fled to save their lives it is not book learning but lived experience. I would say that the Finns to this day do not like the Russians or for that matter the Swedes. When I became Orthodox, my family did not react to Orthodoxy, but they could not understand the Russian part of it.
Yes China says the same thing about Tibet, there is no nation of Tibet. Yes, but a free Finland was the only east European Country that did not fall to the Soviets and remained free in 1939.

not just let a working system collapse; and no one wanted anyone else dead,

I imagine it may have worked for the Czar I have seen photos of his manison like hunting and fishing lodges in Finland, while the Finns themselves survived. It did not work for the Finns, and they wanted it gone and they finally got their freedom from Lenin and not the Czar.
Jeff the Finn

 

[MariaRegina]

Dear Jeff the Finn:

My husband is possibly Finnish as there is a strong familial resemblance to the Saami people of Finland.

Do you have any information on the Saami people?

Yours in Christ,
Elizabeth

 

[Peter Jon]

Hey there --
I'm jumping into the forum for the first time, and noticed that the Finnish don't seem to like the Swedes...what's not to like about the Swedes? I can understand the Tzarist dilemma, but what did the Swedes do (besides apparently being largely spineless and immoral as a culture?)
By the way Chanter -- thank you for the plug about the Cross Culture Project recently. I hope people are enjoying it!
In Christ,
Peter Jon

 

[Reader Nilus]

The Sami are natives that live in the far north and speak Sami which is different than Finnish. The Sami in Finland. When my grandparents were there it was known as Lapland. Finns themselves are from Central Asia, and can look Mongolian. The blonde hair and blue eyes came from 500 years of Swedish Rule and influence.
Jeff the Finn

 

[Matrona]

Hey there --
I'm jumping into the forum for the first time

Welcome!

 

[CharlieZaRus]

*Sigh*. First of all, it's shame that there exists any animosity between the Finns and Russians; hatred and mistrust are the antithesis of Christianity. However, you are incorrect.
The Finnish nation did NOT exist prior to Swedish occupation of territory. It is quite different from Tibet, because Tibet existed as a legitimate recognized nation with a government prior to Chinese invasion. While I'm not saying that Finns don't have a right to self-determination, I'm also saying that you are taking this out of context.
Finland gained nothing from Lenin except belly-aching and fear of disease from rotting corpses of those butchered by the Soviets at Kronstadt. They declared their indepence from the Provisional Government in 1917, as did Ukraine, another previously nonexistant state. This is not to say that, like the Ukrainians, the Finns were not really their own ethnic group; they were. But to say that the Tsarist State was their ,,oppressor" is to skew the facts.
Of all minorities, the Finns had the least to fear from the Tsar's government (I still don't understand your fixation with 'armies', it's illogical and bears no accuracy to history), and only those who engaged in illegal revolutionary activities had to run for their lives. And considered that the death penalty was outlawed in Tsarist Russia except for only the greatest of crimes (like trying to kill the Tsar, feat. Alexander Ulyanov).
While Finland may have wanted to be independent of the Tsar and may well have deserved to be, you cannot say that Tsarist Russia left them either backward or handicapped in any way. It was nationalism that led the Finns to move for full autonomy, not anti-monarchic political ideology: they invited a German prince to come and being their King before Germany was defeated.
My point remains this: the Finnish people did NOT lead an oppressed and underdog life in pre-Revolutionary Russian Finland. As a matter of fact, thousands of patriotic young Finnish men volunteered to fight for the Tsar in WWI. Most importantly, Tsar Nicholas II was a compassionate Christian Emperor who cared for ALL of his subjects and wanted the best for every corner of his empire without exception. Unless you have a serious grievance with that statement, there is no reason to waste space on this forum with any more of our [largely pointless] debate.