Canonization of the royal family

• 1917 - February Revolution and the abdication of Nicholas II .
• 1918 - the execution of the royal family .
• In 1928, the imperial family was counted among the holy martyrs by the Catacomb Church .
• In 1938 ^[1] canonized by the Serbian Orthodox Church ^[2] (this fact is disputed by Alexei Osipov ^[3] ). The first news of the conversion of believers to the Synod of the Serbian Church with a petition for the canonization of Nicholas II dates back to 1930 ^[4] .
• In 1981, the royal family was glorified by the Russian Church Abroad .
• October 1996 - The Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints of the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) regarding the glorification of the Royal Martyrs presented its report.
• On August 20, 2000, the Russian Orthodox Church was counted among the saints of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, manifest and undetected .

Memorial Day: July 4 (17) (the day of execution), and also among the Council of the New Martyrs - January 25 ( February 7 ), if this day coincides with Sunday, and if it does not, then on the next Sunday after January 25 (February 7) )

Execution

On the night of July 16-17, 1918, the Romanovs and their servants were shot in the basement of the Ipatiev House by decree of the Ural Regional Council of Workers, Peasants and Soldiers' Deputies, headed by the Bolsheviks ^{[note 1]} .

List of victims:

"Elemental" veneration

Almost immediately after the announcement of the execution of Nicholas II and his family , moods began to arise in certain groups of believing layers of Russian society, which eventually led to canonization ^{[5] [6]} .

Three days after the execution, on July 8 (21), 1918, during a service at the Kazan Cathedral in Moscow, Patriarch Tikhon said a sermon in which he outlined the essence of the Tsar’s spiritual achievement and the church’s attitude to the question of execution: “A terrible thing happened the other day: I was executed former Tsar Nikolai Alexandrovich ... We must, in obedience to the teachings of the word of God, condemn this matter, otherwise the blood of the executed will fall on us, and not just on those who committed it. We know that he, having abdicated, did this, bearing in mind the good of Russia and out of love for it. After renunciation, he could have found safety and a relatively quiet life abroad, but did not do this, wanting to suffer along with Russia. He did nothing to improve his position, meekly submitted to fate ” ^[5] . In addition, Patriarch Tikhon blessed archpastors and pastors to make requiems for the Romanovs.

According to the Russian Orthodox Church, the reverential respect for the anointed one, the tragic circumstances of his death at the hands of enemies and the pity that caused the death of innocent children - all these became integral parts, from which the attitude towards the tsar’s family gradually grew victims of the political struggle, but as a Christian martyr. As Metropolitan Juvenal of Krutitsy and Kolomna noted, “the veneration of the Imperial Family, begun by Tikhon, continued - despite the prevailing ideology - for several decades of the Soviet period of our history. Priests and laity offered 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 ” ^[6] . There is no statistics on how widespread this veneration is.

In the emigrant circle, these moods were even more obvious. For example, in the emigrant press there were reports of miracles performed by the royal martyrs (1947, see below: The miracles of the royal martyrs announced). Metropolitan Anthony of Sourozh in an interview in 1991, which characterizes the situation among Russian emigrants, pointed out that “many people abroad venerate them as saints. Those who belong to the patriarchal church or other churches make memorial services in their memory, or even prayers. In private, they consider themselves free to pray to them, ”which, in his opinion, is already a local veneration ^[7] .

In 1981, the royal family was glorified by the decision of the Council of Bishops of the Russian Church Abroad . This event increased attention to the question of the sanctity of the last Russian Tsar in the USSR ^[8] .

In the second half of the 80s, in connection with Perestroika, political activity increased in Soviet society, and it became possible to discuss previously forbidden topics. One of these issues was the canonization of the royal family. On July 16, 1989, people began to gather in the wasteland, where Ipatiev’s house once stood. The first time openly sounded folk prayers to the Royal Martyrs. On August 18, 1990, on the site of the Ipatiev House, the first wooden cross was erected, near which believers began to pray once or twice a week, read by akathists ^[9] .

In the 1980s and in Russia, voices began to be heard about the official canonization of at least executed children ^[10] , whose innocence does not raise any doubts. Mentioned are icons painted without church blessing, in which only they were depicted, without parents ^[11] . In 1992, the sister of the empress, Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna , another victim of the Bolsheviks, was counted among the saints. Nevertheless, there were many opponents of canonization.

Russian Orthodox Church Abroad

Various emigrant organizations insisted on the canonization of Nicholas II from the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (ROCOR) already in 1920-1930. Thus, turning to the Second All-Diaspora Council in 1938, the Tsar’s Bulletin wrote: “Honest archpastors and fathers! Son, we pray you to fulfill this greatest work of your earthly life. Indeed, if you do not glorify the Tsar the Redeemer, then all who have been tortured will rise from their obscure graves and glorify Him! ”However, these initiatives met the restrained attitude of the highest hierarchs of the ROCA. Metropolitan Anthony explained his opinion that the canonization of Nicholas II is premature:

I hope and even have confidence that the Lord has accepted His soul into His Kingdom of Heaven, but from here it is still far from glorifying Him as a saint. True, there have been cases when the innocent death of the righteous was in itself accepted by contemporaries as the basis for its glorification. Such was the death of the holy noble princes Boris and Gleb at the hands of the fratricide Svyatopolk. However, this event was taken as evidence of their sanctity after when their burial began to be accompanied by numerous healings of the sick, etc., with obvious miracles. <...> If the Lord, more than his aspirations, deigns to glorify Tsar Nikolai Alexandrovich, the meekest and most humble in heart, then your pious desire will probably be fulfilled.

The metropolitan noted that the following conditions must be fulfilled for canonization: “either the relics of the deceased were examined as incorruptible, or legends about miracles performed by his prayers to God were collected and verified. The church, of course, takes this matter very seriously and verifies extremely strictly the tales of the healings performed by the righteous or about his manifestations after his death. ” However, in the letters of the Second All-Diaspora Council of 1938, Nicholas II is already called a martyr ^[12] .

In the 1940s, the self-consciousness of the ROCA began to change, criticism of the Moscow Patriarchate became tougher, and there was a perception of itself as "the Church of the intact, the bearer of the ideas of Holy Russia." The new Metropolitan Filaret no longer objected to the glorification of new saints, in 1964 John of Kronstadt was canonized ^[12] .

The Bishops' Council of the ROCOR of 1967 decided in all commemoration to call the emperor "the murdered Tsar-martyr" ^[13] .

The Bishops' Council of ROCOR in 1971 instructed the Synod of Bishops to begin collecting materials on the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, led by "Tsar Martyr and the Royal Family" ^[12] .

In 1981, the ROCOR Bishops' Council numbered Saints Nicholas and the entire royal family and their servants. Before this, there has been a debate over the reign of Nicholas II in Russia abroad for several years ^[8] . There were suggestions to exclude the whole family of Nicholas II from the list of glorified new martyrs, or to glorify only children, or to exclude only Alexandra Fedorovna (the latter opinion was expressed especially often ^[14] ). On the issue of canonization, the opinions of two hierarchs of the ROCA — Archbishop Anthony (Bartoshevich) and Bishop Nektariy (Kontsevich) also clashed. Anthony insisted that the tsar should not be given a special place and that during the service his name should be mentioned in the troparion to the new martyrs after the names of the hierarchs. Nectarios believed that the spiritual revival of Russia depends on the canonization of Nicholas II as the head of all new martyrs, that when believers on Russian soil begin to turn to him in prayers, then God at the request of Nicholas II will be able to perform a miracle, “having removed from the conscience of the Russian People the grave sin of regicide , by the breath of His mouth, he can blow off the yoke and all the impurity of the atheistic power from the face of the Russian Earth. ” The ROCOR Cathedral in 1981 took the side of Archbishop Anthony, however, according to historian I.V. Semenenko-Basin, "this could not shake those who were convinced of the special, mystical role of Nicholas II in the fate of the world" ^[14] . Simultaneously with the imperial family, Russian new martyrs and confessors who were injured during the Soviet regime were canonized. Archimandrite Kiprian (Pyzhov) painted the corresponding icon, on which the family of Nicholas II is placed in its center, which corresponded to the monarchical ideals prevalent in the ROCA.

Russian Orthodox Church

The Russian Orthodox Church last raised the question of the canonization of executed monarchs (which, of course, was connected with the political situation in the country). When considering this issue, she faced the example of other Orthodox churches, the reputation that those who had perished in the eyes of believers long ago began to use, and the fact that they were already glorified as locally revered saints in the Yekaterinburg , Lugansk , Bryansk , Odessa and Tulchinsky dioceses ^[2] .

In 1992, by the decision of the Council of Bishops from March 31 - April 4, the synodal commission for the canonization of saints was instructed "to study the exploits of the new martyrs of Russia to begin research on materials related to the martyrdom of the Tsar’s Family" ^[6] . From 1992 to 1997, the commission, headed by Metropolitan Juvenal , devoted 19 meetings to the discussion of this topic, between which members of the commission studied in depth the life of the Tsar’s family. At the 1994 Council of Bishops’s report, the chairman of the commission stated his position on a number of studies completed by then ^[11] .

The results of the commission’s work were reported to the Holy Synod at a meeting on October 10, 1996. Based on the report, further steps were possible.

Abstracts of the report:

• Canonization should not give rise to arguments in a political struggle or worldly confrontation. 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 ... Glorifying the saint, the Church does not pursue political goals ... but testifies already reverend the righteous people of God, that the ascetic canonized by her really pleased God and stands before us the Throne of God, regardless of what position he held in Oei earthly life " ^[6] .
• The Commission noted that in the life of Nicholas II there were two periods of unequal length and spiritual significance - the time of the reign and the time of imprisonment. In the first period (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 it focused its attention on it.

Based on the arguments taken into account by the Russian Orthodox Church, as well as thanks to petitions and miracles, the commission concluded:

For the many sufferings suffered by the Tsar's Family over the past 17 months of life, which ended with the execution in the basement of the Yekaterinburg Ipatiev House on the night of July 17, 1918, we see people who sincerely sought to translate the gospel commandments into their lives. In the sufferings endured by the Royal Family in captivity with meekness, patience and humility, in their martyrdom, the light of the Christian 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 precisely in understanding this feat of the Tsar’s Family that the Commission, with complete unanimity and with the approval of the Holy Synod, finds it possible to glorify the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in the face of the martyrs of Emperor Nicholas II, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatyana, Mary and Anastasia. ”

In 2000, at the Bishops' Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, the imperial family was canonized as part of the Council of New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia, manifest and undetected (totaling 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 adopted unanimously ^[2] . The only hierarch in the church who spoke out against the canonization of the tsar’s family was Metropolitan Nikolai of Nizhny Novgorod: “... when all the bishops signed the canonization act, I marked beside my list that I was signing everything except the third paragraph. In the third paragraph came the king-father, and I did not sign his canonization. ... he is a traitor. ... he can be said to have authorized the collapse of the country. Otherwise, no one will convince me ” ^[15] . The rite of canonization was performed on August 20, 2000 ^[16] .

From the Acts on the Cathedral Glorification of the New Martyrs and Confessors of the 20th Century Russian:

To glorify the Tsar's family as empress martyrs and confessors of the Russian Tsar: Emperor Nicholas II, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, and Grand Dukes Olga, Tatiana, Mary and Anastasia. In the last Orthodox Russian monarch and members of his Family, we see people who sincerely sought to translate the commandments of the gospel in their lives. In the sufferings endured by the Royal family in captivity with meekness, patience and humility, in their martyrdom in Yekaterinburg on the night of July 4 (17), 1918, the light of the Christian faith conquering evil was revealed, just as it shone in life and death million Orthodox Christians who suffered persecution for Christ in the 20th century ... Report the names of the newly glorified saints to the Primate of the fraternal Local Orthodox Churches for their inclusion in the holy calendar " ^[11] .

Background

In ROCOR, the holiness of the imperial family was elevated almost to the point of dogma of faith ^[17] . So, before the unification of the ROC and the ROCA , the priests of the ROC, when moving to the ROCA, had to separately mention the recognition of this holiness in the standard text of repentance ^[17] .

When the question arose of uniting the churches, the recognition of the holiness of the imperial family was designated by the hierarchs of the ROCA as a necessary condition for reconciliation with the ROC ^[17] . The unification eventually took place seven years after the canonization of the Russian Orthodox Church of the imperial family in 2007.

The reasons for canonization

• The circumstances of the death - physical, moral suffering and death at the hands of political opponents.
• Widespread veneration of the royal sufferers served as one of the main grounds for their glorification in the face of saints ^[2] .
  • “Appeals of individual clergy and laity, as well as groups of believers from different dioceses with support for the canonization of the Imperial Family. Under some of them are the signatures of several thousand individuals. Among the authors of such appeals are Russian emigrants, as well as clergy 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. A number of church and public organizations expressed the idea of ​​the speedy glorification of the Sovereign and the Royal Martyrs. ” For three years, 22,873 appeals were received for the glorification of the royal family, according to Metropolitan Juvenal ^[18] .
• “ Testimonies of miracles and gracious help in prayers to the Royal Martyrs. We are talking about healings, uniting separated families, protecting church property from schismatics. The evidence of myrrh-streaming icons with images of Emperor Nicholas II and the Royal Martyrs, fragrance and miraculous appearance on the iconic faces of the Royal Martyrs of blood-colored spots is especially abundant. ”
• Personal piety of the Tsar: the emperor paid great attention to the needs of the Orthodox Church, generously sacrificed for the construction of new churches, including outside of Russia. Deep religiosity distinguished the Imperial couple among representatives of the then aristocracy. All its members lived in accordance with the traditions of Orthodox piety. Over 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 , Germogen of Moscow , Pitirim of Tambovsky , John of Tobolsk ).
• “The church policy of the Emperor has not gone beyond the framework of the traditional synodal system of church administration. However, it was during the reign of Emperor Nicholas II until two centuries ago that the church hierarchy, officially silent on the question of convening the Council, got the opportunity not only to widely discuss, but also practically prepare the convocation of the Local Council. ”
• The activities of the empress and the great princesses 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 he was born. Having accepted his cross in the same way as the biblical righteous man, he endured all the trials sent to him firmly, meekly and without the shadow of a murmur. Именно это долготерпение с особенной ясностью открывается в последних днях жизни Императора. С момента отречения не столько внешние события, сколько внутреннее духовное состояние Государя обращает на себя наше внимание» ^[6] . Большинство свидетелей последнего периода жизни Царственных мучеников говорят об узниках Тобольского губернаторского и Екатеринбургского Ипатьевского домов как о людях страдавших и, несмотря на все издевательства и оскорбления, ведших благочестивую жизнь. «Их истинное величие проистекало не из их царского достоинства, а от той удивительной нравственной высоты, на которую они постепенно поднялись».

Доводы против

•  

  Ружейный залп на Дворцовой площади 9 января 1905 года . Фотография Карла Буллы
  Православный историк Д. В. Поспеловский в качестве аргумента против канонизации указывал на свидетельство знавших государя офицеров о его «удивительно безучастном» отношении к массовым человеческим жертвам в Первой мировой войне : «такие ли ещё погибали, обойдемся с другими, ещё хватит» ^[19] . По комментариям опубликовавшего дневники императора историка К. Ф. Шацилло , убийство очередной кошки (истреблением которых Николай II развлекался в отсутствие более подходящей для охоты живности), было для Николая важнее, чем рассказ вернувшегося с Русско-японской войны приближённого ^[20] .
• Д. В. Поспеловский в качестве довода против канонизации ссылался на «колоссальный удар по народной вере в царя и сакральность монархии» и отождествлявшейся с ними «государственной Церкви» вследствие жестокости царя в подавлении революции, расправах с рабочими беспорядками, крестьянскими бунтами и пр ^[21] .
• Митрополит Нижегородский и Арзамасский Николай (Кутепов) последовательно и принципиально выступал против канонизации Николя II, считая его государственным изменником, поскольку, по мнению митрополита, император обладал всей полнотой власти, включая применение силы «вплоть до лишения жизни», чтобы усмирить восставших, но не сделал этого, чем способствовал распаду страны. А на Архиерейском Соборе 1997 года Кутепов заявлял, что считает Николая II ответственным за смерть российских новомучеников , поскольку тот «в здравом уме и твёрдой памяти» отрёкся от престола. ^[22] .
• Гибель императора Николая II и членов его семьи не была мученической смертью за Христа, а лишь политической репрессией ^[23] .
• Неудачная государственная и церковная политика императора, в том числе такие события, как трагедия на Ходынке , Кровавое воскресенье и Ленский расстрел и крайне неоднозначная деятельность Григория Распутина .
• Активное движение за канонизацию царской семьи в 1990-е годы носило не духовный, а политический характер ^{[3] [24]} .
• Профессор МДА А. И. Осипов : «Ни святой Патриарх Тихон , ни святой митрополит Петроградский Вениамин, ни святой митрополит Крутицкий Пётр, ни святой митрополит Серафим (Чичагов) , ни святой архиепископ Фаддей , ни святой архиепископ Иларион (Троицкий) , который, без сомнения, вскоре будет причислен к лику святых, ни другие ныне прославленные нашей Церковью иерархи, новомученики, знавшие значительно больше и лучше, чем мы теперь, личность бывшего Царя — никто из них ни разу не высказал мысли о нём, как святом страстотерпце (а в то время об этом ещё можно было заявить во весь голос)» ^[3] . По его мнению «религиозность царской четы при всей её внешне традиционной православности носила отчетливо выраженный характер интерконфессионального мистицизма» ^[3] .
• По мнению Д. В. Поспеловского подобно тому, как призыв Карловацкого собора в 1921 году к восстановлению на престоле дома Романовых привел к расколу в Зарубежье ^{[ уточнить ]} , решение о канонизации могло способствовать разделению Церкви по образовательному признаку: интеллигенция (включая часть духовенства) — по одну сторону, менее грамотные слои — по другую ^[25] .

Опровержение доводов против

• Вину за События 9 января 1905 года нельзя возлагать на императора. Петиция о рабочих нуждах , с которой рабочие шли к царю, имела характер революционного ультиматума, что исключало возможность её принятия или обсуждения ^[26] . Решение о недопущении рабочих на площадь Зимнего дворца принял не император, а правительство во главе с министром внутренних дел П. Д. Святополк-Мирским . Министр Святополк-Мирский не снабдил императора достаточной информацией о происходящих событиях, а его сообщения носили успокоительный характер ^[27] . Приказ войскам об открытии огня также отдал не император, а командующий Санкт-Петербургским военным округом великий князь Владимир Александрович . Таким образом, «исторические данные не позволяют обнаружить в действиях Государя в январские дни 1905 года сознательной злой воли, обращённой против народа и воплощённой в конкретных греховных решениях и поступках» ^[6] . Тем не менее император Николай II не усмотрел в действиях командующего предосудительных действий по расстрелу демонстраций: он не был ни осуждён, ни отстранён от должности. Но он усмотрел вину в действиях министра Святополк-Мирского и градоначальника И. А. Фуллона , которые были отправлены в отставку сразу после январских событий.
• Вина Николая как неудачливого государственного деятеля не должна рассматриваться: «мы должны оценивать не ту или иную форму государственного устройства, но место, которое занимает конкретное лицо в государственном механизме. Оценке подлежит, насколько то или иное лицо сумело воплотить в своей деятельности христианские идеалы. Следует отметить, что Николай II относился к несению обязанностей монарха как к своему священному долгу» ^[6] .
• Отречение от царского сана не является преступлением против церкви: «Характерное для некоторых противников канонизации Императора Николая II стремление представить его отречение от Престола как церковно-каноническое преступление, подобное отказу представителя церковной иерархии от священного сана, не может быть признано имеющим сколько-нибудь серьёзные основания. Канонический статус миропомазанного на Царство православного государя не был определён в церковных канонах. Поэтому попытки обнаружить состав некоего церковно-канонического преступления в отречении Императора Николая II от власти представляются несостоятельными» ^[28] . Даже наоборот, «Духовные мотивы, по которым последний российский Государь, не желавший проливать кровь подданных, решил отречься от Престола во имя внутреннего мира в России, придаёт его поступку подлинно нравственный характер» ^[29] .
• Согласно заключению синодальной комиссии по канонизации: «В отношении с Распутиным присутствовал элемент человеческой немощи», однако видеть в них «признаки духовной прелести, а тем более недостаточной воцерковленности — нет никаких оснований» ^[6] .

Лик святости

В православии существует очень развитая и тщательно проработанная иерархия ликов святости — категорий, на которые принято разделять святых в зависимости от их трудов при жизни. Вопрос, к какому именно лику святых следует причислить царскую семью, вызывает немало споров среди различных течений Православной церкви, по-разному оценивающих жизнь и кончину семьи.

• Страстотерпцы — вариант, избранный Русской православной церковью. В традиции (житийной и литургической) Русской церкви понятие «страстотерпец» употребляется применительно к тем русским святым, которые, «подражая Христу, с терпением переносили физические, нравственные страдания и смерть от рук политических противников. В истории Русской церкви такими страстотерпцами были святые благоверные князья Борис и Глеб (1015), Игорь Черниговский (†1147), Андрей Боголюбский (†1174), Михаил Тверской (†1318), царевич Димитрий (†1591). Все они своим подвигом страстотерпцев явили высокий образец христианской нравственности и терпения» ^[6] .
• Мученики — несмотря на отнесение смерти царской семьи к разряду мученической (см. выше определение Архиерейского собора), для причисления к данному лику святости необходимо пострадать именно за свидетельствование своей веры в Христа, в то время как от царской семьи никто не требовал отречения от Бога и Церкви ^[30] . Несмотря на это РПЦЗ в 1981 году прославила царскую семью именно в этом лике святости. Причиной этого стала переработка традиционных принципов канонизации в лике мучеников бежавшим из СССР протоиереем Михаилом Польским , который, исходя из признания «советской власти» в СССР по существу антихристианской, полагал «новомучениками российскими» ^[31] всех православных христиан, убитых представителями государственной власти в Советской России. Причём в его трактовке, христианское мученичество смывает с человека все ранее бывшие грехи ^[32] .

• Благоверные — наиболее распространённый лик святости для монархов. В России этот эпитет даже выступал частью официального титула великих князей и первых царей ^[33] . Однако традиционно он не применяется для святых, канонизированных как мученики или страстотерпцы. Другая важная деталь — в лике благоверных прославляются лица, имевшие статус монарха в момент смерти. Николай II, отрёкшись от престола, по мнению профессора Московской духовной академии Алексея Осипова , создал соблазн для верующих, не претерпев, по слову Евангелия, до конца ( Мф. 10:22 ) ^[3] . Осипов считает, что при отречении от престола произошло отречение и от благодати, полученной, по учению Церкви, при миропозании в момент венчания на царство . Несмотря на это, в радикальных монархических кругах Николай II почитается и в лике благоверных.
• В некоторых радикальных монархических и православных кругах в отношении Николая II употребляется эпитет « искупитель ». Это проявляется как в письменных обращениях, направленных в Московскую патриархию при рассмотрении вопроса о канонизации царской семьи ^[3] , так и в неканонических акафистах и молитвах: «О пречудный и преславный царю-искупителю Николае» ^[34] . Однако на собрании московского духовенства патриарх Алексий II однозначно высказался о недопустимости подобного, заявив, что «если он увидит в каком-нибудь храме книги, в которых Николай II именуется Искупителем, то будет рассматривать настоятеля этого храма как проповедника ереси. У нас один Искупитель — Христос» ^[35] .

Канонизация слуг

Together with the Romanovs, four of their servants were executed, following their masters in exile. The ROCz canonized them together with the royal family. And the Russian Orthodox Church points to a formal mistake made by the Church Abroad during the canonization against custom: “it should be noted that there is no historical analogy in the Orthodox Church, the decision to include among the canonized people who accepted the martyr’s death with the Tsar’s Family, the royal servant of the Roman Catholic Aloysius Yegorovich Troupe and the Lutheran gooflectrissa Ekaterina Adolfovna Schneider ” ^[6] .

As the basis for such canonization, the Archbishop of Los Angeles Anthony (Sinkevich) argued that “these people, being faithful to the tsar, were baptized with their martyred blood, and thus deserve to be canonized with their Family” ^[36] .

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 suffered martyrdom, it would be legitimate to raise the question of their canonization . ” In addition to the four people who were shot in the basement, the Commission mentions that this list should include the “killed” in various places and in different months of 1918, Adjutant General I. L. Tatishchev , Marshal Prince V. A. Dolgorukov , “uncle” of the Heir K. G. Nagorny , children's footman I.D. Sednev , maid of honor of the Empress A.V. Gendrikov and goofle-electress E. A. Schneider. Nevertheless, the Commission concluded that it “does not seem possible to finally resolve the issue of the existence of grounds for the canonization of this group of lay people who, along with their court service, accompanied the Tsar’s Family”, since there is no information about the widespread prayer commemoration of these servants by the faithful, besides , there is no information about their religious life and personal piety. The final conclusion was: "The Commission concluded that the most appropriate form of veneration of the Christian feat of the faithful servants of the Royal Family, who shared her tragic fate, today may be the perpetuation of this feat in the life of the Royal Martyrs" ^[6] .

In addition, there is another problem. While the tsar’s family was canonized in the faces of the sufferers, it’s not possible to add to the faces of the endured servants, because, as a member of the Synodal Commission Archpriest George Mitrofanov stated, “the rank of sufferers from ancient times applies only to representatives of the princely and royal families” ^[37] .

Miracles

Criticism

MDA professor Alexei Osipov writes that when evaluating reports of miracles associated with the royal family, it should be borne in mind that such "facts alone do not at all confirm the holiness of those (people, faiths, religions) through whom and where they are performed, and that such phenomena can occur both by virtue of faith - “according to your faith be it unto you” ( Matthew 9:29 ), and by the action of a different spirit ( Acts 16: 16-18 ), “to deceive, if possible, the elect “( Matthew 24:24 ), and, possibly, for reasons that are still unknown to us” ^[3] .

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

• the church’s 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. For most of the miracles described related to royal martyrs, there is no such evidence;
• declaring someone a saint without the blessing of the ruling bishop and the conciliar decision is an uncanonical act, and therefore all references to the miracles of the royal martyrs until their canonization should be skeptical;
• the icon is an image of the ascetic canonized by the church, therefore miracles from the icons written to the official canonization are doubtful ^[3] .

The canonization of the imperial family eliminated one of the contradictions between the Russian and Russian foreign churches (which canonized them 20 years earlier), noted in 2000 the chairman of the department of external church relations, Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad ^[44] . The same point of view was expressed by Prince Nikolai Romanovich Romanov (chairman of the Association of the Romanov House ) ^[45] , who, however, refused to participate in the canonization act in Moscow, citing the fact that he was present at the canonization ceremony, which was held in 1981 in New York ROCOR ^[46] .

Andrei Kuraev : “the image of the reign of Nicholas II was canonized, but the image of his death ... XX was a terrible century for Russian Christianity. And you can’t leave it without summing up any results. Since this was the century of martyrs, there were two ways to go in canonization: try to glorify all the new martyrs (...) Or canonize a certain Unknown Soldier, honor one innocent shot by a Cossack family, and with it millions of others. But this path for church consciousness would probably be too radical. Moreover, in Russia there always existed some kind of identity “king-people” ” ^[10] .

According to Archpriest George Mitrofanov , a member of the Synodal Commission for the Canonization of Saints ^[47] :

I have no doubt in the sanctity of the last king, Nicholas II. Critically evaluating his activities as an emperor, I, as the father of two children (and he was the father of five!), I can not imagine how he could maintain such a firm and at the same time non-malignant state of mind in custody, when it became clear that they would all die. His behavior at this moment, this side of his personality evokes my deepest reverence.

We glorified the royal family precisely as martyrs: the basis for this canonization was an innocent death, accepted by Nicholas II with Christian humility, and not political activity, which was rather contradictory. 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 from the Jews trained."

In 2006, Metropolitan Sergius (Fomin) spoke disapprovingly about the rally of the nation-wide “collegiate repentance of the sin of regicide”, carried out by a number of near-Orthodox circles: “The canonization of Nicholas II and his family in the guise of the martyrs does not satisfy the new-born zealots of the monarchy ” ^[48] , and called such monarchical predilections “ heresy of the kingdom ”.

Temples and Monasteries

• Church on the Blood in the name of All Saints in the Russian land shone on the site of the Ipatiev House in Yekaterinburg ( 2003 ).
• Monastery in honor of the Holy Royal Martyrs on Ganina Pit near Yekaterinburg at the burial site of the slain ( 2000 ).
• Domninsky in the name of the Holy Royal Martyrs of Emperor Nicholas, Empress Alexandra, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana, Mary and Anastasia Convent of Kostroma and Galich diocese ^[49]
• A chapel-monument to the deceased Russian emigrants, Nicholas II and his august family was erected in a cemetery in Zagreb ( 1935 )
• Chapel in memory of Emperor Nicholas II and the Serbian King Alexander I in Harbin ( 1936 )
• Church of the Royal Martyrs at the entrance to the city of Ryazan from Moscow.
• Church of the Royal Martyrs in the Tver Monastery of Christ .
• Church of the Holy Royal Martyrs in Kursk
• Temple of Tsarevich Alexy in the city of Sharya, Kostroma region
• Church of st. Tsar-martyr and St. New Martyrs and Confessors in Wilmuason , France ( 1980s )
• Church of the Holy Royal Martyrs and All New Martyrs and Confessors of the 20th Century, Mogilev , Belarus
• Church of the Sovereign Icon of the Mother of God, Zhukovsky
• Church of st. Tsar Martyr Nicholas, Nikolskoye
• Church of the Holy Royal Martyrs Nicholas and Alexandra, pos. Sertolovo
• Church of the Royal Martyrs in Mar del Plata (Argentina)
• Temple of the Royal Martyrs, Dnepropetrovsk (railway Igren), Ukraine.
• Church in the name of the Holy Royal Martyrs, Saratov, Russia.
• Church in the name of the Holy Royal Martyrs, p. Dubki, Saratov district, Saratov region, Russia.
• Temple in the name of the holy martyrs Tsar Nicholas and Tsarina Alexandra at the St. Petersburg State Pediatric Medical Academy.
• Temple of the Martyr Tsar Nicholas pos. Chkalovsky (Schelkovo district, Moscow region)
• Church of the Holy Royal Martyrs (Martyrs), Izhevsk , Russia ^[50] .
• Temple under construction in the name of the Holy Royal Martyrs, Moscow, Voikovsky district
• Aisle of the Kazan Cathedral of the Diveevsky Monastery (2008)
• Church of the New Martyrs and Confessors of Russia in the Parthian region, the village of Yurievo (February 19, 2017).

The Optinsky elder Anatoly (Potapov) prophesied in 1916: "The fate of the tsar is the fate of Russia ... There will be no tsar - there will be no Russia."

In the Urals, the veneration of the Holy Royal Passion-Bearers (Tsar-Passion-bearer Nicholas II, Tsaritsa Alexandra Fedorovna, Tsarevich Alexy, Grand Duchesses Olga, Tatiana, Mary and Anastasia) began long before their glorification.

In 1991 , Archbishop Melchizedek blessed the installation of the Poklonniy Cross in the tract Ganina Yama at the site of the destruction of the remains of the Royal Family. In 2000 , during a visit to the Urals, His Holiness Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II blessed the creation of a monastery on this site in honor of the Holy Royal Martyrs.

On the territory of the monastery 7 churches were built (2000-2003). One of them is the Temple in honor of the Holy Royal Martyrs.

The remains of the Holy Royal Martyrs made this place especially revered, sanctified by their ashes and ashes. Today the monastery on the Ganina Pit is a symbol of the repentance of our people in the sin of apostasy, a symbol of the revival of Orthodox Russia.

- From the pamphlet: Monastery in honor of the Holy Royal Martyrs. - Yekaterinburg: Ganina Yama, 2004. - With the blessing of His Eminence Vincent, Archbishop of Yekaterinburg and Verkhotursky.

King's days

Every year, since 2002, in Yekaterinburg on July 16-17, the Tsar’s Days are held, to which Orthodox pilgrims come from all over Russia. The main events of this festival of Orthodox culture are the night Divine Liturgy and the 21-km repentant Royal procession from the Church on the Blood to Ganina Yama , repeating the path taken by the murdered Royal Martyrs. In 2017, more than 60,000 believers took part in the Royal Days ^[51] .

Iconography

There is a collective image of the whole family, and each of the members individually. In the icons of the “foreign” sample, the canonized servants join the Romanovs. Passion bearers can be portrayed both in contemporary clothing of the beginning of the 20th century, and in robes that are stylized as Ancient Russia, reminiscent of royal robes with parsons in style.

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

• Myrrh-streaming icons
  • Myrrh-streaming icon in Butovo
  • The Nadym icon of Sovereign Nicholas II, revered as one of the main shrines of the Siberian Cossack army of the Union of Cossacks of Russia ^[52]
  • Myrrh-streaming icon in the church of St. Nicholas the Wonderworker in Biryulev ^[53]
  • Мироточивая икона Олега Бельченко (первое сообщение о мироточении в доме писательницы А. В. Дьяковой 7 ноября 1998 года, то есть до момента канонизации царской семьи) ^[54] , находится в храме святителя Николая в Пыжах ^[55]
• Кровоточивая икона
• Благоухающая икона

Might

Патриарх Алексий в преддверии занятий Архиерейского собора 2000 года, который совершил акт прославления царской семьи, говорил о останках, найденных под Екатеринбургом: «У нас есть сомнения в подлинности останков, и мы не можем призывать верующих поклоняться лжемощам, если в будущем они будут признаны таковыми» ^[56] . Митрополит Ювеналий , ссылаясь на суждение Священного синода от 26 февраля 1998 года («Оценка достоверности научных и следственных заключений, равно как и свидетельство об их незыблемости или неопровержимости, не входит в компетенцию Церкви. Научная и историческая ответственность за принятые в ходе следствия и изучения выводы относительно „екатеринбургских останков“ полностью ложится на Республиканский центр судебно-медицинских исследований и Генеральную прокуратуру Российской Федерации. Решение Государственной комиссии об идентификации найденных под Екатеринбургом останков как принадлежащих Семье Императора Николая II вызвало серьёзные сомнения и даже противостояния в Церкви и обществе» ^[57] ), докладывал Архиерейскому собору в августе 2000 года: «Захороненные 17 июля 1998 года в Санкт-Петербурге „екатеринбургские останки“ на сегодняшний день не могут быть признаны нами принадлежащими Царской Семье» ^{[6] [58]} .

Из-за такой позиции Московской патриархии, которая не претерпела с тех пор изменений, останки, идентифицированные правительственной комиссией как принадлежащие членам царской семьи и захороненные в июле 1998 года в Петропавловском соборе, церковью в качестве святых мощей не почитаются.

Почитаются как мощи реликвии, обладающие более ясным происхождением, например, волосы Николая II, остриженные в трёхлетнем возрасте. ^[59]

Учение о царе-искупителе

С конца 1990-х годов, ежегодно, в дни, приуроченные к годовщинам рождения «царя-мученика Николая» некоторыми представителями клира (в частности, архимандритом Петром (Кучером) ), в Тайнинском ( Московская область ), у памятника Николаю II работы скульптора Вячеслава Клыкова , совершается особый «Чин покаяния в грехах русского народа» ^{[60] [61]} ; проведение мероприятия было осуждено священноначалием РПЦ (Патриархом Алексием II в 2007 году ^[62] ).

Среди части православных имеет хождение концепция «Царя-искупителя», согласно которой Николай II почитается как «искупитель греха неверности своего народа» ^{[63] [64]} ; критики именуют эту концепцию « цареискупительской ересью ». ^[65]

В 1993 г. «покаяние за грех цареубийства от лица всей Церкви» было принесено патриархом Алексием II , писавшим: «Мы призываем к покаянию весь наш народ, всех чад его, независимо от их политических воззрений и взглядов на историю, независимо от их этнического происхождения, религиозной принадлежности, от их отношения к идее монархии и к личности последнего Российского Императора» ^[66] . В XXI веке по благословению митрополита Санкт-Петербургского и Ладожского Владимира ежегодно стал проводиться покаянный крестный ход из Санкт-Петербурга в Екатеринбург к месту гибели семьи Николая II . Он символизирует покаяние за грех отступления русского народа от соборной клятвы 1613 года на верность царственному роду Романовых ^[67] .

• Канонизированные РПЦЗ Мученики Алапаевской шахты (Великая княгиня Елизавета Фёдоровна , инокиня Варвара, Великие князья Сергей Михайлович , Игорь Константинович , Иоанн Константинович , Константин Константинович (младший) , князь Владимир Палей ).
• Царевич Дмитрий , погибший в 1591 году , канонизирован в 1606 году — до прославления Романовых был хронологически последним представителям правящей династии, причисленным к лику святых.
• Вопрос о канонизации Ивана Грозного
• Соломония Сабурова (преподобная София Суздальская) — первая жена Василия III, хронологически предпоследняя из канонизированных.
• Процесс канонизации новомучеников
• Монархизм в России
• Местночтимые святые

• Волобуев П. В. , Шацилло К. Ф. Кого считать святым? // Московские новости . — 1996. — № 3 .
• Десницкий А. С. Священство и царство в российском общественном сознании (из истории одного архетипа) // Континент : журнал. — 2000. — Т. 104 .
• «Он всех простил…». Император Николай II. Церковь о Царской Семье. (Житие и страдания Святых Царственных страстотерпцев Николая II и Его Семьи. Материалы Синодальной Комиссии по канонизации святых Русской Православной Церкви). — 2003. — ISBN 5-7654-2293-4 , ISBN 5-94846-051-7 .
• Поспеловский Д. В. Вопрос о канонизации Николая II и Александры Федоровны // Вестник русского христианского движения . — 1997. — № 2—3 (196) . — С. 243—255 .
• Дневники императора Николая II / Общ. ed. и предисловие д. и. n К. Ф. Щацилло. — М. : Орбита, 1992. — 734 с. — ISBN 5-85210-024-2 .

• Доклад о работе Комиссии Священного Синода по канонизации святых // Православная Газета, № 21 (55), 1996
• Материалы к канонизации Государя Императора Николая II и Царственного Семейства
• Осипов А. И. О канонизации последнего русского царя . Единственный из православных авторов, последовательно и до конца выступавших против канонизации.
• Благоверный царь Николай Александрович и его семья на на православие.ру , Молитвы , Храмы
• The Royal Martyrs Of Russia . Каталог ссылок на Greek Orthodox Resource.

Иконография

• Иконография образа «Царственных Страстотерпцев» на православие.ру
• Иконография чутко реагирует на состояние церковного сознания. (Церковный вестник. Официальное издание Русской Православной Церкви)
• Галерея на rus-icons.narod.ru
• Об иконе "Собор Святых покровителей охотников и рыболовов
• Мироточивая икона в храме в Бирюлево
• ОСНОВАНИЯ ДЛЯ КАНОНИЗАЦИИ ЦАРСКОЙ СЕМЬИ ИЗ ДОКЛАДА МИТРОПОЛИТА КРУТИЦКОГО И КОЛОМЕНСКОГО ЮВЕНАЛИЯ, ПРЕДСЕДАТЕЛЯ СИНОДАЛЬНОЙ КОМИССИИ ПО КАНОНИЗАЦИИ СВЯТЫХ