Alexander Palace Forum

Discussions about the Imperial Family and European Royalty => The Imperial Family => Topic started by: Joanna Mayer on April 25, 2004, 02:06:52 PM

Title: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Joanna Mayer on April 25, 2004, 02:06:52 PM
I was just curious about the religious feeling of the members of this site. I've noticed some bible quotations and I wondered if any members here are Russian Orthodox?  Please dont feel that I'm prying...I'm not going to ridicule anyone-- I am simply interested...

Joanna Mayer
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: LisaDavidson on April 25, 2004, 02:32:40 PM
There are Orthodox Christians that post here. My husband and I are Episcopalian & Lutheran. We also have some Jewish posters. Many others here - I have no idea what their religion is or if they are irreligious. My guess is - we are a mixed bag.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Joanna Mayer on April 25, 2004, 02:50:23 PM
 JM
Thanks.
I am actually looking for some information regarding Russian Orthodoxy. Any ideas about easy to understand info on the web?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: bookworm8571 on April 25, 2004, 02:51:45 PM
I think understanding the Russian Orthodox Church is probably a good way to understand what truly motivated the Tsarina. I don't see why a question about that would be off limits at all.

I'm new here and probably not representative, but I was raised Roman Catholic. Now I'm probably best described as a cafeteria-style Catholic. I see a lot of similarities between Catholicism and Orthodoxy when I read about Imperial Russia.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Anastasia on April 28, 2004, 12:43:11 AM
Hi Joanna,
I'm an Orthodox Christian. If you are interested in finding out more about the church try this website: http://www.orthdoxinfo.com or if you wanted to read a book I would recommend The Orthodox Church by Timothy [Kallistos] Ware. That covers the basic history and doctrine of the Church [if you're that interested]. Are you looking for answers for specific questions? I'd be happy to help in any way.
-Anastasia  :)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Kyriaki on July 04, 2004, 09:27:29 PM
Hello all - this is my first post
Perhaps you might want to check out www.goarch.org
go to the online chapel
then look at the first column and look at today's saints
look for the complete list
then click on Holy Royal Martyrs of Russia

today, July 4th, is their "Saint's Day" in the Greek Orthodox Church

Kyriaki
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: elisa_1872 on July 05, 2004, 05:44:30 AM
Hello Kyriaki :)

Thanks very much for the link, and for sharing that in the Orthodox Church, July 4th is the saints day of the Romanovs.
May God Bless them - remembering+
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: ptitchka on July 05, 2004, 11:17:36 AM
May God bless our Greek Orthodox brothers and sisters!  

In churches that follow the Julian calendar the feast day of the Holy Royal Martyrs falls on the date in history on which they were slain, July 17th -- which is July 4th on the Old Calendar.  I wonder why the New Calendar puts their feast day on July 4th and not July 17th?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: masha on July 07, 2004, 12:10:28 AM
Welcome, Kyriaki!

www.goarch is a very good site & a very active one too, with lots of information that's well organized and up-to date.

Here are a few more authoratative Orthodox sites to look at.

http://www.pravoslavie.ru

http:// http://www.russianorthodoxchurch.ws/english/index.html

http://www.mospat.ru/e_startpage

http://aggreen.net/orth_links/orthlink.html

bye for now - Masha









Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Sunny on July 08, 2004, 07:18:02 PM
Rskkiya, While I am not Russian Orthodox, I enjoy the books of  Frederica Mathewes-Green. If you haven't already read her book "At the Corner of East and Now: A Modern Life in Ancient Christian Orthodoxy",  I think you will find it helpful. She is warm, funny, and real.

Frederica is also an occasional commentator for National Public Radio, and this is her site: www.frederica.com

Sunny
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Reed on July 13, 2004, 11:00:37 AM
According to the Father Serfes site, that has a link on the main page here, they are called the Holy Royal Martyrs.  However, I have read them as the passion bearers as well.  Officially I believe they are classified as martyrs.  
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Coldstream on July 13, 2004, 11:11:00 AM
I am presently attending a Russian Rite (Byzantine) church which uses the Russian Orthodox liturgy and musical forms, although in union with the Holy See in Rome.  Therefore, I cannot say that I am an expert on the Russian Orthodox Church.  However, I may be able to clear up the matter of who is a "passion bearer," according to the Orthodox usage.

A "passion bearer" is one who allows himself or herself to be killed without offering any resistance in order that a higher good may come out of one's self-sacrifice.  Saints Boris and Gleb are an example of this type of saint.  On the other hand, a "regular" saint is one who has spent at least part of their life in conformance with the will of Almighty God in all things.  St. Elizabeth Feodrovna (Romanov) is an example of the latter type.  The Russian Church had no problems with her, but had reservations about Nicholas II because of some of his actions while emperor.  They had to admit that he was personally pious and a good family man, and that the family did accept their fate in a Christian manner thus earning the designation as "passion bearers" and worthy of veneration.  I hope this clears up some questions regarding the designations.  As I said before, I am not an expert and I am sure there are those who can clarify the matter even more.

Coldstream (AKA Bill McCaughey)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Kyriaki on July 13, 2004, 09:39:15 PM
try this to answer the question of how the Orthodox Church regards the IF and Elizavata & Varvara

[url]
http://goarch/en/chapel/saints.asp?contentid=108

http://goarch/en/chapel/saints.asp?contentid=2343

name day for IF July 4
name day for Eliz. and Var. is July 5

the website gives the reason for their ranks as martyrs in the Orthodox Church; the church also recognizes martyrdom for
GD Serge, the Princes John, Constantine, Igor and brethren and Prince V. Paley and Theodore Remez.
prayers are offered in their names on July 5th.

You can refer to a previous reply of mine on this thread as well as the links provided by another kind poster.  I tried to look on the ROCOR sites for saint links but could not find any.  The above links for goarch are the Gr. Orthodox Church's.

I am so new to this so forgive me if the links don't work as I have typed them.  I tried to figure out the directions on this forum, but I am confused! :(

btw - who is Theodore Remez?

thank you

Kyriaki
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: AnBhanfhaidh on July 22, 2004, 03:02:31 PM
Quote
PLEASE lets stay on topic...


Could someone orthodox help us understand the current position of the O Church towards the IF...Are they martyres, passion bearers, saints? Is there a difference?

thanks
R.  


Part of the confusion comes from the "flavors" of Orthodoxy. The Russian Church in Exile (sometimes, also referred to as the Synodal Church, although I think I heard they had a split recently(???)) canonized the Imperial Family and other Romanovs as martyrs of the Revolution sometime in the 1980s I think. The OCA (my flavor) and the Patriarchal Church (one aligned with the Patriarchate of Moscow) (this is from the American point of view, by the way) canonized the Imperial Family in 2000 as Passion Bearers.
So, you WILL see them referred to differently on different websites. And some members of the Romanov family are considered saints by one flavor, but not by another. Although, now, all the members of the immediate family (N II et al) are considered saints by all branches of Russ. Orth. The only difference is in degree.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Guest on July 24, 2004, 06:00:18 PM
Fyodor Remez was the secretary of Grand Duke Sergey Mikhailovich. He chose to stay with the Grand Duke in Alapaevsk and was murdered with him, GD Elizaveta, Sister Varvara and Princes Ioann, Konstantin, Igor and Vladimir.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: rskkiya on August 27, 2004, 03:09:16 PM
I am looking for suggestions-- any simple but good books on Russian Orthodoxy for people interested in converting, or for people who want more information about the faith... and when I say basic I really mean basic!

love
R
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: ptitchka on August 27, 2004, 10:00:29 PM
Dear rskkiya:

My God-father recommended to me  The Orthodox Church and The Orthodox Way, both by Timothy Ware (now Fr. Kallistos), and The Law of God, by Fr. Seraphim Slobodsky.

God bless you!  I hope this helps.

Elizabeth
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: AnBhanfhaidh on August 28, 2004, 04:49:17 AM
I second Pravoslavnaya's recommendation of The Orthodox Church and The Orthodox Way.

They seems to be standard issue for Cathecumans.

I've been wondering how your search has been going, Rsskiya. Good luck...Tanya
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: RealAnastasia on May 16, 2005, 08:53:09 PM
I'm a Catholic, but I'm (of course) very interested in Orthodox Faith. May you tell me the differences between Catholics and Orthodox, and some little differences between Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox and Armenian Orthodox? I'm I great stupid in this subjetc !  ;D

RealAnastasia.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Dasha on May 16, 2005, 09:07:06 PM
Quote
I'm a Catholic, but I'm (of course) very interested in Orthodox Faith. May you tell me the differences between Catholics and Orthodox, and some little differences between Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox and Armenian Orthodox? I'm I great stupid in this subjetc !  ;D

RealAnastasia.


Hello RealAnastasia,
I may only be able to answer a part of your inquiry, but I will give it a go nontheless.  Orthodoxy allows priests to get married, however, that has to be done before they get ordained.  Russian and Greek Orthodoxy is basically the same, safe for the language of the Liturgy.  Armenians are not Orthodox.  I was told in my history classes that they are Gregorians, which is most likely a different sect of Christianity.  In Orthodoxy one is able to recieve Holy Communion after his/her Baptis, and the act of Confirmation occurs in the form of Chrismation, which is the anoiting the newly Baptized with special Holy Oil.  We also use a different calendar, and our Easter comes later then that of Catholics or Protestants.

I'm sorry that I'm not able to give you more information, but I'm new to Orthodoxy myself, having been Baptized into the faith at the end of February of this year.  I do hope I helped you at least a little bit.  
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: PssMarieAmelie on May 17, 2005, 04:46:11 AM
I am a Roman Catholic but I am very interested in the Greek and Russian Orthodox religions. I even live right near an greek orthodox church!! I am especially intersted in the Greek and Russian Orthodox saints..:)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Elizabeth on May 17, 2005, 01:16:12 PM
I had to "jump in" here, since I'm Orthodox, and thought I'd join the discussion.  (I've already visited the other thread on Orthodoxy, but I think RealAnastasia wants to know the "basic" differences, not a major theological discussion -- am I right?).

I converted to Orthodoxy over 10 years ago, having been a Roman Catholic for all of my life (25+ years).  I think studying the IF helped me know that there was such a thing as the "Orthodox Church," but it was through a series of fortunate events that I became a member of the faith (too long of a story to tell here!).

Anyway, the first thing to remember when introducing yourself in an Orthodox Church, is to say that you are an "Orthodox Christian."  If you say you're "Russian Orthodox," "Greek Orthodox," etc., those who are "cradle Orthodox" (born into the Church) will look at you like you have TWO heads!  Basically, it's ALL the same church -- the only difference is the LANGUAGE.  (My church is the "Antiochian Orthodox Church" -- originally from Antioch, Syria where St. Peter was their first Bishop).  I've been to RUSSIAN and GREEK churches when I travel, and the Liturgy is IDENTICAL to mine, except for the language (Greek or Russian, but mostly English).

Dasha gave a LOT of great information!  We just finished celebrating Easter on May 1 - the week before was Holy Week (with services each evening -- more beautiful than the one before!).  Orthodox Christians greet each other at Easter (and after!) with "Christ Is Risen!  Indeed He Is Risen!"  (I could say this in Russian, but don't have the Russian alphabet on my computer -- let me know if anyone wants it phonetically).

Yes, Orthodox priests can marry (before their ordination), and those who don't usually go on to either serve in monastic communities or take leadership positions (Archanmandrite, Bishop, Archbishop, etc.) in the Church.  My priest is married and has two lovely teenage children.

The Divine Liturgy is held every Sunday morning (no Saturday evening masses like the Catholics or others, although we do have Vespers on Saturday, which is actually the "start" of the liturgical cycle).  We only have ONE Sunday service (so everyone can celebrate together).

The Divine Liturgy was written by St. John Chrysostom (Bishop of Constantiople), so it's ENTIRELY different than the Roman Catholic mass.  99% of the prayers are sung (either by the Priest, Deacon or Choir, along with congregation), and there is no piano or organ (some Orthodox churches DO have an organ - our's does not -- all acapella).

Um, what else . . .?  
We celebrate X-mas at the same time as everyone else.  Our greeting at X-mas is "Christ is Born! Glorify Him!"

We have all the same sacraments as in the Roman Catholic Church -- baptism, communion, confession, confirmation (called "Chrismation"), marriage, holy unction ("Last Rites" in the Catholic Church) -- I think I left something out.  

When a child is baptised, he also receives his First Communion and Confirmation ("Chrismation").  Unlike Catholics whose children don't get to have their First Communion until they are 7-8 years old, Orthodox babies can receive Communion beginning at their Baptism.

I would urge anyone who lives near an Orthodox Church to go and visit.  All of the Orthodox web sites in the US have search engines that allow you to type in your city, state or zip code and are able to tell you the closest church.  THEN, it would be great if you "report back" and tell us your thoughts, impressions, etc.

Here are some web sites in the US.  The majority of these churches have services in English AND the native language.

Greek Archdiocese: www.goarch.org

Orthodox Church of America (Mainly Russian): www.oca.org

Antiochian Orthodox Archdiocese: www.antiochian.org

P.S.  I invited a friend of mine to attend Divine Liturgy a few months ago.  Later, he thought it was "nice, but long" (about 1 1/2 hours, but that's with over 500 people going to communion!).  Don't let that scare you off!

Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Elizabeth on May 17, 2005, 01:50:36 PM
Greetings, Dasha!
Voistinu Voskresii!  Hope you had a beautiful and blessed Pascha (is it your FIRST?).  

Don't worry about "remembering" everything - my Fr. Confessor has told me that I will "keep learning" things about Orthodoxy for the rest of my life!   :)

Oh, some other things I forgot to say earlier (for the rest of you . . .) ;D

Orthodox make the sign of the cross from right to left (unlike Roman Catholics, who make it left to right) -- so you touch your forehead, touch your chest, touch your right shoulder, touch your left.

There's no holy water font when you enter an Orthodox church (again, unlike Roman Catholics -- do they still have those)?  There's an icon on a stand when you enter, you make the sign of the cross, and venerate (or kiss) the icon (if you don't feel comfortable doing this, just bow from the waist before the icon).  The icon in our church usually shows the feast we are celebrating (right now, it's the Resurrection!).

Also, when you enter an Orthodox Church and sit down, you don't genuflect (again, like Roman Catholics) -- go down on one knee.  Just go to a seat and do what everyone else does (that's the BEST way!).

Also, during this past Lent (the season leading up to Easter), we FASTED every day -- no meat, no dairy -- until Easter.

MAJOR difference between Orthodox and Roman Catholics -- Orthodox do not believe in the infallibility of the Pope (meaning, that we think he's a good man, but NOT that he's perfect when it comes to his teachings -- the CHURCH is perfect, not a human being).  

Also, there are some other issues that are REALLY deep, theological arguments.

I'll keep thinking of things (STOP me if you anyone gets bored!).  

E--
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Dasha on May 17, 2005, 01:57:49 PM
Hello Elizabeth,
Thank you for your Paschal greetings, and yes it was my first one.  There are no words to describe what I felt, but it was absolutely beautiful.  You have made some good points again, and I believe that Orthodox use three fingers of their right hand to cross themselves.  Also, each country has its' own Patriarch (head of the church), unlike in Roman Catholicism where there is one Head of the Church, the Pople.  I will leave the rest up to people who have a little more knowlege then me, but if I think of any more information I will definitely come back here and post it.

Thank you again, Elizabeth.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: matushka on May 17, 2005, 04:02:23 PM
Thank you Elizabeth. I have more time now, I can add something too. Of course, there is only ONE orthodox Church, the tittle indicate location, local tradition and languages. About the differences with Catholic faith, RealAnastasia, I can add some elements:
The first difference, the difference who made that we are separated, is the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. The Orthodox Church teach that Holy Spirit procede from the Father, the Catholic Church add "filioque", "from the Son too". It touch the heart of the faith, and I would disagree with those who say that it is not so important. It was important in the past, it is still.
Second, of course, as Elisabeth said, the doctrine of Church, the place of the Roman Pope.
Third, some "new" dogmes as the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption. The Orthodox Church teach that the Holy Mother of God was born as every human being, with the original sin. If not, there is no sense in the Cross. The Assumption (the Mother of God is not dead, she was elevated with body and soul in the Heaven) is a consequence of the first dogmat, and is not accepted. For the orthodox tradition, the Mother of God died very quite in God, gave his soul to the Father, as she fall asleep. But then her body was elevated.
That are the great and important differences. All the rest, married priest (I am myself wife of priest), genuflexion, is local tradition. There were a lot of difference before the separation, but all were unite. There is a lot of differences betwenn Antiochian and Russian (for example) but we are unite, orthodox. These differences are not so important. ANd I think they could stay, even if the 2 Churches unify one very far of us day (unfortunetly very far).
Elisabeth, I do not think the catholic mass and our liturgy are different in there roots. Remember, the shema is the same, the origin is the same. No, the difference is really in the theology, indeed. And in the spiritual life.
But I must go. Good night!
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: bluetoria on May 18, 2005, 10:51:04 AM
Elizabeth, what do you think are the possibilities of Orthodoxy & Catholicism ever being reunited (which was, I believe, one of John Paul II's dearest wishes)?

I heard, but do not know the whole story, that when the Pope (J-P) wished to visit Russia, he was refused by the Patriarch of Moscow (I think) who was greatly put out by the number of Catholic churches opening in Russia & claimed that the Catholics were 'pinching' the Orthodox congregations??

It was good to see Orthodoxy so well represented at the Pope's funeral & the inauguration of his successor, & to know that the last Pope apologised to the Orthodox Church for the injustices of Catholicism towards it in the past.

It seems such a terrible shame to me that the two - with many similar beliefs & a common foundation - cannot achieve a full reconciliation, even if this allows for the variations in rites & some beliefs.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Elizabeth on May 18, 2005, 11:21:08 AM
Hi, bluetoria -
Glad you joined this thread, and thanks for the question (are you the same "bluetoria" who wrote the recent book on GD Elisabeth?).

I've thought about this question a LOT esp. since the death of Pope John Paul II (lots of tears were shed by my family and me at his death -- esp. when we watched the documentaries on his life that were being shown when he was younger and SO energetic!).  What a magnificent human being!  He's in a far BETTER place now, and the sufferings he went through over the past few years make it a blessing.

Honestly, I don't hold out much hope for unification of the two churches, at least in my lifetime (I'm in my 40's, so there's -- God willing -- still some time to go!).  While there are a GREAT amount of similarities, there are some major issues that I don't think the Orthodox - or the Catholics - are ready to "give in" on:  

The infallibility of the Pope; the filioque clause (see Matushka's post above); the issue of the Theotokos (Virgin Mary) being born "without sin"; married priests.  Speaking for myself, I'm not ready - as an Orthodox Christian - to deny the teachings of Orthodoxy (since they were the ORIGINAL teachings of the Church -- and all of these "dogmas" in the Roman Church came in over the past few centuries).

On the issues of the Russian Orthodox Church not permitting Pope John Paul II to come to Moscow, there are some MAJOR issues there as well (Matuska can help me out here).  Here are just a couple that come to mind:

1.  The issue of the Roman church converting Orthodox to the Roman Catholic faith.  There have been some "aggressive" tactics employed by the Roman Catholics to convert Orthodox, esp. in the Ukraine.  As you might have seen at JP II's funeral, the priests who were invited up to the coffin (singing "Christ Has Risen" in Greek) were NOT Orthodox BUT Eastern Rite Catholics -- they have the same services as Orthodox, but "are in communion with Rome" (i.e., teachings of the Pope, etc.).  The "real" Orthodox (Patriarch Bartholomew, who sits in Constantiople) were seated in the front row, but did not participate in the service.

Several books that I've read had the Roman church coming into the Ukraine (and other areas of Russia) and "converting" the Orthodox -- basically saying, "You can keep your liturgy and married priests, but . . ."

2.  This next thing is a VERY BAD issue.  You may want to read "Hitler's Pope" (I don't subscribe to the overall premise of this book, but on the Orthodox issue, there are some publications out there that support this).  These events happened in Serbia during World War II against Orthodox Christians by the Nazis (who were supported by the Croats - who were Roman Catholic).  It's too brutal to go into here -- it makes my stomach turn - but someone (maybe me!) needs to write a book about it.  Just one of the horrors - Orthodox priests and their families were made to dig their own graves while Roman Catholic leaders in the community stood cheering next to the Nazis (who of course machine gunned the Orthodox to death)!  There were MANY Orthodox Christians who were killed in the Holocaust too, so when Pope John Paul II made his apologies a few years ago to a number of groups who were persecuted over the centuries by the Roman church, I was hurt when I realized that he didn't mention these atrocities!

3.  Oh, and then there's a LOT of chalices, liturgical items, Orthodox art, etc., that's in a MUSEUM in Venice (my dad visited it a few years ago) that was taken from Constantiople, Jerusalem and other Orthodox churches during the Crusades.  However, it WAS nice that JP II gave back the relics of St. John Chrysostom and St. Gregory Palamus (I think) to Patriarch Bartholomew -- it's a start, um?

Sorry to blabber on - as you can tell, I'm passionate on this subject.   :)

E--
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: bluetoria on May 18, 2005, 11:43:42 AM
Thanks for you reply, Elizabeth.

These divisions are really heart breaking. I know that the R.C. Church has much to answer for, though I was unaware of the atrocities you have just described.
I studied theology/divinity for my degree & recall thinking at the time that so many finer points of doctrine were really quibbles over words. Though I know it is important that the creed of a Church is clear and unequivocal, I cannot help but wonder how many Catholics or Orthodox people have a clue about or any real interest in such matters as the filioque clause. It seems to drift so far from the Christianity that Christ intended....but it was ever thus, I guess.

It has always seemed to me, too, that many of our 'differences' are primarily rooted in culture & that many of these obstacles could be overcome. Of course, though, as you write, the Papacy isn't going to yield its power, nor would Orthodoxy accept it. That's a pretty major obstacle!

If we cannot be totally united, then I sincerely hope that we can become closer to one another & recognize & respect each other's value. In the past 50 years or so the divisions between Catholicism & the Protestant Churches have vanished to the point where we celebrate many services together. In my local area there is a 'Council of Churches' in which several denominations unite to do good for the community & to participate in joint services. We can retain our separate beliefs & practices, while respecting those of people of other denominations.  I truly sincerely hope that this will come about too between Orthodoxy & Catholicism. I do think that that was what Pope John Paul's hope was.

(yes, I am the same bluetoria. I 'borrow' one of your saints, too!  ;) Would that she were one of ours!!)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: RealAnastasia on May 18, 2005, 09:26:49 PM
Matushka and Elizabeth:

                                            I'm grateful to your kind and caring mesaages to me and Laura Mabee. I agree with you, Church is perfect, but Her members are not. I apologize to be so dissapointed. I promiss you to keep going to my church.  ;D

                                            As for bluetoria stands about an eventual reunion of all Christian Churchs, I don't think it's time to do so. It's nothing bad to be separate faiths. Difference is not bad, and be different to other churches doesn't mean that we hate each other. It's like patriotism. I love my country deeply...but that doesn't mean that I hate other countries! As a believer myself, I love other believers in wathever Faith in the world, even if it is not mine. As a patriot, I like people from other countries would be patriots too. I love people who understand other people, even if they aren't like us.

                            A little question to orthodox believers here: Do you have Holy Water in Orthodox churchs? Elizabeth wrote that there isn't any in the entry of Orthodox Churchs. How do you christen a baby, then? There is some Holy Water there, or you christen people with Holy Oils?  ???

RealAnastasia.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: matushka on May 20, 2005, 08:50:08 AM
Dear RealANastasia, yes, of course, there is holy watter in the Orthodox Church, as in the Catholic Church. It is used in every day life, for example when you wake up in the morning, you pray, eat a "prosphora" and trink holy watter. Or for all the blessings, as in the Catholic church, to sanctify a place, an icon, a medal an so on. The fact there is water in the entry of a catholic church is a beautiful tradition, I like it.  In fact, there is something similar in orthodox churches (in Russia, I do not know how it is in other place). You can take Holy Watter, but not to make the sign of cross, just for trinking.
For baptism, we use simple water, and in the time of the service, the priest blesses it with cross and little special rite. Then, whole the baby or the whole adult is 3 times... how to say that in english, well, the entire body go in water 3 times (of course, in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit).
Elizabeth, you gave a very good answer about unity, I would support all your words, from the beggining to the end!
Bluetoria, I add 2 or 3 things, just from myself. I think often about this shame, that the tunique of Christ is still not repaired. It was, it is one of the greatest pain of my life. But when I see the situation with open eyes, I am afraid, that we are more far and far. All these centuries of "separated life" make our spiritualities quite different. And you know, some questions as filioque stay very important even for simple people in Russia. And I think it is good. When you see the history of Church, you can notice, that in those first centuries, people was ready to death, but not to let an heresy live in the Church. They could not stand it. And it is a good example for us. Frankly speeking, and I am sorry if it sound not very kind, I am not so happy when I see common services betwenn catholics and protestant. I would say, I am sad. I am happy that we stay friends, that we can speak about our faith, but I can not understand how we can forget, just a minut, those big differences, and, forgoting the canons of Church, pray together, or having the same communion. And last of all, the fact that simple people do not care about dogmas is not a reason> the bishops exist to be the defensors of faith, of her integrity, even if the people forgot about it (the contrary can be also right, as it was sometimes in the history).
Something else. I have a great admiration and love to Pope John Paul II, I hope he will proclamed saint for your Church. He was a so great man and christian, a real temoin of the Christ. But I stay a little bit sceptic about his efforts for the Unity with Orthodoxy. In the same time he wrote his beautiful "Ut unum sint" (I read it), the efforts to convert the orthodox to catholicism in Ukraine became stronger... I believed not in these facts, I thougt all these stories came from silly people, or that these efforts are some isolated facts... before I saw the tactic from my own eyes. And I was very shoked. I think that John Paul II defended very good the Catholic Church and admire him actually for that, not for his meatings with other religions. Yes, Patriarch Alexis did not say "yes" to a visit of the Roman Pope in Russia, and I think his arguments are good. As he said, such a visit, such a meeting is something too great, to important, to be only a protocol. We sould not shake our hand before camera and as the same time carry on the same politic as it was. Such a meeting must be the result of a big ecclesiastical and theological work.
I must go! I hope I made noone sad, and hope too that I can come back today evening!
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: bluetoria on May 20, 2005, 09:54:10 AM
Matushka, thank you for your very thoughtful response my post! Have no fear! The services I mentioned between Catholic & Protestant congregations did not involve either Church compromising their beliefs. They are services such as shared Gospel readings & walking together in procession on Good Friday. Also, members of other Churches are invited so jubilees etc. in our parish.
I do not know WHY the Catholics should want to convert people from Orthodoxy. I do not understand why there is a need to do so.
There are many things in my Church which I find difficult to understand or accept but I believe that the most important thing for ALL Christians must surely be to be 'united' in following the messages that Jesus taught (& I do not find many of these theological differences in the Gospel....) But then I suppose, tradition is viewed as equally important.
The fact that people died in 'fighting heresy' is very difficult to take, too. People were killed for being heretics? Is that Christian?
I am glad we can stay friends, too!! I hope my post doesn't in any way cause offence to you, Matushka, or to Orthodoxy. (I'm sorry I'm not a very good 'defender of the (Catholic) faith' ) :)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: lexi4 on May 20, 2005, 06:17:35 PM
I have a question. Are women allowed to be priests in the Orthodox churches?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: RealAnastasia on May 20, 2005, 07:59:59 PM
Hi, Matushka, and Bleutoria:

                                               Thank you for your explanations about Holy Water. Now, I understand.  :)

                                                And be sure: I'm not of these catholics who wants to convert Orthodox people to our faith. You are christians, like us, and there is not reason to force anyone to be as they wanted NOT to be. And I'm a little sceptic too to the former Pope efforts to the Unity. I agree with all the Patriarch Alexis arguments .

                                                 To answer lexi4, I think there are not women priest in Orthodoxy. But now I have another question: there are nuns in Orthodox Church?  ???

                                                   RealAnastasia.

P.S: And what are burial traditions in Orthodoxy? I read something about them, but I don't understand them very much.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Elizabeth on May 23, 2005, 12:06:46 PM
Greetings, RealAnastasia -
Sorry I didn't respond sooner (for some reason, my server is not "alerting" me to new messages).

Going back to several posts earlier - yes, there DEFINITELY is "holy water" in the Orthodox church - just not in a "font" at the entrance of the church (like Roman Catholics).  Of course, I've only attended Orthodox churches in the USA (OCA/Antiochian/Green), so don't know if there are other "traditions" in other countries regarding a "font" at the entrance.

Actually, the baptismal font should be in the "Narthex" (the entrance to the church - sort of like a lobby).  In the ancient Orthodox tradition, it was where "non-Orthodox" stood and watched the service (they were not permitted to enter).  So it was with unbaptized children - the baptismal font was in the Narthex, they were baptized in the Narthex, and then welcomed into the church.  (Our church has the baptismal font in front of the iconstasis - not theologically correct, but no one wants to move it!)

No, women are not permitted to be priests in the Orthodox faith.  

And, as a follow up to that, yes, there are nuns in the Orthodox church.  However, they're NOT like the nuns in the Roman Catholic faith (in that they don't teach in schools, minister in hospitals, etc.).  The nuns in Orthodoxy are MONASTIC - they live in "monasteries" and their work involves not only prayer, but sometimes making of liturgical garments, prayer ropes, iconography, etc.  

There are TWO nice-sized monastic communities that I've visited here in the United States - one in Rives Junction, Michigan (the Dormition of the Mother of God Monastery) and in Ellwood City, Pennsylvania (the Holy Transfiguration Monastery).  I'm sure there are a number of others in the US (and definitely MORE overseas) - they're just not within driving distance of where I live.

Oh, and burial traditions - maybe Matushka can help out more on this, but I'll try to answer as best I can:

In my church, the deceased (we refer to it as someone who has "fallen asleep") is placed in the funeral home for visitation (usually 1-2 days depending on the family's wishes).  On the last night before burial, Trisagion (pronounced "Tree-sag-ee-on") prayers are read and/or chanted by the priest and choir at the side of the casket.  They're quite beautiful - praying for the soul of the departed - and ending with the chant, "Memory Eternal!"  After this, the priest, who is holding a cross that has been by the coffin, blesses the body and those in attendance, and each person comes up to venerate the cross.

The next morning, the family comes back to the funeral home - with the priest - and Trisagion prayers are read and/or chanted once again at the side of the coffin.  The body is then taken to the church, where the choir (or chanters) is waiting.  The priest - who has made it back to the church before the coffin - greets the coffin - with the family - at the doors of the church and leads the coffin up the main aisle.  The coffin is placed before the iconstasis, and, if the body is able to be presented, the coffin lid is raised and the entire service takes place with the coffin open.  

Again, absolutely GORGEOUS prayers - chanted and read - about the resurrection of Christ, the falling asleep of the deceased, etc.  The final act is the priest blessing the body and annoiting the forehead with holy oil).  The coffin is then closed for the last time.

Then, the coffin is taken to the cemetery, additional prayers are read and sung at the grave site, and that's it.  

There's usually a "mercy meal" back at the church hall that the parishioners of the church prepare for the family and other friends and relatives (like an Irish wake!).  

Of course, this is what I've witnessed in the Antiochian archdiocese.  I've also sung at a funeral that was in the EVENING, which took place after visitation (the coffin stayed in the church the whole time - visitation and all).  The coffin stayed in the church throughout the night (I think various chanters stayed with it and said prayers throughout the evening), and then the family came back the next morning to the church - more prayers - and then on to the cemetery.

Also, not to confuse things further, but after the burial, there are memorial services for the deceased at certain intervals (can you help me out here fellow Orthodox?).  A 10 day, 1 month, 6 months, 1 year and then each year on the date of death after that.  Holy wheat is offered (and prepared by a member of the church) - the wheat represents the Gospel where Christ says something about wheat and how it falls to the ground and decays (referring to us as human beings).

Okay - now I've made EVERYONE confused (including myself), but I think that answered the question. ::)

E--  
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: RealAnastasia on May 23, 2005, 06:39:49 PM
Hi, Elizabeth:

                       Thank you again...No; your answer was not confusing at all. At least, for me. I understand perfectly what you wanted to said.

                         I found I really LIKE Orthodoxy. It seems to be so mystical...and I'm myself a mystical person.

                           I'm very grateful to you, to Dasha and to Matushka, for you explained so good your faith for me to understand. God Bless you.  :)

RealAnastasia.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Iskenderbey on May 24, 2005, 05:14:43 PM
Hello Everyone,
I figured I could add my two cents worth if you don't mind, since I am also an Orthodox Christian.

Since I saw posts speaking about Holy Water and Baptism, below is a site from the Greek Orthodox Church detailing how the Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople, blesses the holy water used for baptisms, which is then sent around the world to all the Orthodox Churches.

http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8420.asp


Since no one dealt with in depth about the relationship of the various Patriarchs, you will permit me to go into this.

As someone already posted, we do not have an "infallible" leader, such as the Catholic Pope.
We have spiritual leaders, but not all powerful, "monarchical" leaders such as the Catholic Popes.
The Ancient Patriarchs of Orthodoxy (which by the way, also includes the Roman Patriarch, i.e., the Pope) were Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem and Alexandria.
Among all of these, the Patriarchate of Constantinople, came to pre-eminence among the others, as this city was the capital of Byzantium, or the Eastern Roman Empire.  Till this day, the Patriarch of Constantinople is considered the SPIRITUAL leader of all Orthodoxy.  He is "Primer-Inter-Pares", first among equals.However, the Patriarch does not have administrative leadership over the various Orthodox churches, only of the churches that fall within his jurisdiction.
Today, the list of leaders of the various churches has grown from the initial 4 to 20 some odd???? hhaha


We believe in a "democratic" form of solving theological questions, that is, all the leaders, all the Patriarchs, all the archbishops, of the various Orthodox Churches must come together in a Synod to decide questions of theology or other relevant issues.  The Patriarch of Constantinople is the chair of such synods.
The theory is that a single person cannot be in control of church doctrine, as a single person is bound to make errors.  An Ecumenical Council (Such as which adopted the Nicene Creed all those centuries ago) will not make errors.  

There hasn't been a full Ecumenical Council in centuries.  Orthodoxy only remembers the first 7.  Here we disagree with Vatican II of the Catholics, as it is not considered an Ecumenical Council.

Our union does not revolve around a single person, but we are united by our faith.  Christ is our only head and the only true leader of the church.


For instance, as we speak, for the past two days, a Pan-Orthodoxy Synod is taking place in Constantinople, in regards to Orthodoxy's stance to the scandal rich issue of the Jerusalem Patriarchate and Patriarch Irinaeus of Jerusalem.

Some other differences, the Greeks and the Patriarch of Constantinople follow a different calendar from most other Orthodox, that is, the Greeks and Constantinople follow the Western Calendar while the rest of Orthodoxy follows the old-Calendar which is, I believe, 12 days or so behind the western calendar. HOWEVER, Easter must fall on the same day for all Orthodox.  

Also, for Orthodoxy, the main holiday of the Church Calendar is Easter, or holy Pascha, because it celebrates the resurrection Christ.  Most other Christians, including Catholics, put emphasis on Christmas.  (At least in our consumer rich world it does!)

Well If I think of anything, I'll add some stuff.
Hope I also provided some useful information.

Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: RealAnastasia on May 24, 2005, 07:52:57 PM
Thank you isekenderbey. You, orthodox believers are really great! I like very uch the way you explain your faith, to people who knew anything about it...Like me.  ;D I understand every day more about Orthodoxy, and certainly, I'm very tempted to be one of yours.  ::) But, of course, I must think very carefully about it.

  As for catholics , I think that Easter is also the more important celebration in our church as it is in all christian churches, but Western believers are now, very far from their religious concivtions, and it's just for that, that some people seems to believe that Christmas is more important than Easter. As television in Christmas time speaks all time about purchasing things and EAT; EAT; EAT, DRINK-DRINK-DRINK  ;D, people got influenced and simply purchases gifts, eats and drinks, rather than go to the church and so...I certainly goes to the church in Christmas and always said to my family and friends that it is a RELIGIOUS celebration and not a profane one. I love to prepara delicious meals myself this beatiful night, but not for the simply fact of eating, but to show to my family, my deep love to them. Some people confounds Christmas Eve with the New Year's night, and just got a great party to enjoy themselves...Bad enough.  >:( :-/ But be sure, not al catholic people acts like this.

  As for my brother, he became a protestant lutheran after marrying a german girl, and they are much more religious in Easter and Christmas than we catholics uses to be.

RealAnastasia.
Title: Cousin Marriage
Post by: cimbrio on July 28, 2005, 01:14:16 AM
I'd like to know why does the Orthodox Church forbid frst cousin marriages (i.e. Ducky-Kyrill) but for example allows cousin-second cousin once removed (i.e. Sergei-Ella) and second-cousin marriages (Nicholas-Alexandra F., Elena V.-Nicholas, Paul A.-Alexandra, etc)? Does the Orthodox Church allow them with the Patriarch's permission for instance(in the Catholic Church you need to ask the Pope's permission to marry a relative who is abviously not an ancestor, a descendant or a sibling)? I know several countries forbid cousin marriages, and some states in the US do as well, while other countries do it repeatedly... intermarriage I mean... any help?  ???
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: Georgiy on July 28, 2005, 05:57:10 PM
I think it is because they are just too closely related. A lot of those prohibitions go back to Old Testament times. Also marriage to people who you are closely related to spiritually (IE through a Godparent relation) can't marry - I think this applies through several generations.

BTW, for special marriage circumstances, you don't have to go to the Patriarch for permission - your local Bishop or Archbishop is the one who you appeal to. A Patriarch is after-all the same as a Bishop - with broader responsibilities, but there are only 3 types of Clergy: the Diaconate, the Presbyterate and the Episcopal.
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: grandduchessella on July 28, 2005, 07:30:18 PM
There used to be a lot of societal/religious restrictions that were mostly ended by law later on. You didn't used to be able to marry a brother or sister-in-law. QV had once thought Beatrice could marry the widowed Louis of Hesse and I think this was when she supported the repeal of that restriction. I think it was what Henry VIII used to try to argue his way out of his marriage to Catherine of Aragon (the first wife) since she'd previously married his elder brother who died on their honeymoon.
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: cimbrio on July 29, 2005, 05:28:32 AM
When Henry VIII was trying to annull his marriage to Catherine, his brother's widow, the Pope would have dispensed his dispensation to allow the marriage, sicne there is a passage in the Bible (deuteronomy I think) where t says Thou shall not take your brother's widow. I think Queen Victoria just dropped the idea of marrying Beatrice to Ludwig IV because of the age difference, and moreso because she wished to keep Beatrice by her side. Besides, it would have seemed a bit awkward, can you imagine Beatrice being the foster mother of Victoria, Ella, irene etc? It seems odd that the Churhc would revert to the Old Testament since Adam and Eve's descendants HAD to go through intermarriage (and indeed, haven't we all, from a Christian point of view?) Besides, I think Ella's and Sergey's marriage was almost as "incestuous" as a cousin marriage, so I don't understand why the Orthodox Church allowed them to marry and not Michael A. and his cousin beatrice... But then again, maybe someone else knows..keep the posts coming :)
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: bluetoria on July 29, 2005, 06:14:08 AM
Queen Victoria was very annoyed about the church's objections to Beatrice marrying Louis of Hesse & even suggested they should change the church rules!
Ella and Serge were not first cousins: - Serge was Ella's father's cousin. The rule about not marrying cousins applied on to first cousins which is why they were permitted to marry.
It is ironic that Henry VIII decided to quote from Leviticus about not being allowed to marry your dead brother's widow....a little further on in the Old Testament is a contrary rule which says that a man must marry his brother's widow if she dies childless. Henry VIII just used the argument to suit his own ends.... ::)
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: Linnea on July 30, 2005, 06:13:36 AM
It´s maybe alittle bit off topic, but it has to do with marriage: Would it have been possible for a Grand Duke or Prince of Russia to marry a catholic princess? ???
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: jehan on July 30, 2005, 10:34:25 AM
Quote



I think QV was wrong to even suggest for the church to change their rules just to suit her own needs and I thought she didn't even want Beartice to get married anyway...I do think that an in-law should be able to get married to each other but only if the previous marriage was childless such as the case with Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon and I think marrying your own uncle/niece or aunt/nephew is a bit disgusting which is what the most of the Hapsburgs practiced


Well the church did change the rules eventually, didn't it?  And it had nothing to do with Queen Victoria.

It has happened several times in my distant family past (in rural Finland) that a man has married his deceased wife's sister, or a woman her husband's brother.  But why should childlessness of the first marriage be an issue?  Surely a biological uncle or aunt would usually (there are always exceptions!)  be a  very loving stepparent- moreso than a stranger in many cases- after all they would have a blood tie to the children.

I think that ONE of the impetuses for changing the law in England was after WW!, when so many men were killed in the war- there were many younger (presumably) brothers who wanted to marry their sisters-in-law and adopt their late brother's children.  One factor among many , I'm sure, but the law was changed in the early 1920s.
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: grandduchessella on July 30, 2005, 10:51:44 AM
Quote
It´s maybe alittle bit off topic, but it has to do with marriage: Would it have been possible for a Grand Duke or Prince of Russia to marry a catholic princess? ???


I'm pretty sure they would've been able to--AIII and MF wanted Nicholas to consider Helene of Orleans as a bride. The Catholic church disapproved mightily of marrying non-Catholics though it did happen. Helene would've had to convert if she married the heir, but a regular GD or Prince, no. Considering the enmity that exists between the Orthodox and Roman branches it could've been an uncomfortable position though.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Tania+ on September 13, 2005, 05:03:53 PM
I'm proud to share, I'm baptised Russian Orthodox, as is my husband Armenian Orthodox and daughter. Our faith has seen us through many issues of life, [as it did our birth families] and we are ever grateful for holding on to our faith, and prayers, for all humankind, and ourselves.

Should you wish to gain more basic information on the subject of the Russian Orthodox faith, etc. I believe Elizabeth has already posted to share with you.

Posted by: Pravoslavnaya Posted on:
"Aug 27th, 2004, 10:00pm

Dear rskkiya:

My God-father recommended to me  The Orthodox Church and The Orthodox Way, both by Timothy Ware (now Fr. Kallistos), and The Law of God, by Fr. Seraphim Slobodsky.

God bless you!  I hope this helps.

Elizabeth"

In the Name and Blessings of God, for you and yours,
I remain most
Respectfully,

Tatiana [Tania]
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: matushka on September 22, 2005, 04:41:57 PM
rskkiya,
I do not know do you know some other ideas of books. Kalistos Ware is very good. Very basic is also "The Mystery of the faith" by bishop Hilarion (Alfeyev). NOt basic, but really interesting and deep the book of Vladimir Lossky, but I do not know is there an english tranlation. As an orthodox believer, I would say that the best introduction (and this introduction can continue all the life!) to Orthodoxy are the orthodox church services. Attending to them, reading or listening to the text, praying with them help us going into the mystery of Christianity. Another very good introduction for people thinking about convert or not convert is trying to live something of the orthodox spiritual life: fasting, reading prayers and so on. Orthodoxy (I would say Christianism in general) is not a philosophy you agree with or not, but... something else, tranfiguring your life and... obliging you transform your life.
Sorry, quite difficult to explain in english for me!
I hope I shocked noone ;)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Nastya on September 29, 2005, 09:00:29 PM
you know how alexandra had to change her name when she changed to russina orthodoxy, well im 14 and my mom gave me a choice of my religion because i havent been baptised yet. and i was wondering would i have to change my name if i become a russian orthodox? and is ukranian orthodox the same as russian orthodox ? becuase thats what i have in town. and if i do have to change my name what would it change to ? my name is Aylenna!
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on September 29, 2005, 09:34:28 PM
Hi Aylenna,
I will try to answer your questions briefly. First, yes you would have to have a Baptismal, or Christian name. You would be named in honour of an Orthodox Saint, who is an intercessor in Heaven for you. Your Priest might select one who he feels may be suitable for you. A lot of converts, if their name is thta of an Orthodox Saint keep their given name, e.g: Grand Duchess Elizabeth Feodorovna when she became Orthodox took the name of St Elizabeth the Righteous, mother of St John the Forerunner and Baptist.

Going by your name, it might be nice to choose St Helen (in Russian Elena). She was the mother of St Constantine the Great, who converted the Roman Empire to Christianity. St Helen was very pious and devout, and went to Jerusalem and among other things, discovered the Cross that Christ was crucified on. In fact just last week we had the Feast of the Elevation of the Cross which commemorates that event.

Next. You ask is the Ukrainian Orthodox Church the same as the Russian Orthodox Church. Yes. The Orthodox Church is the Orthodox Church wherever you go. There are Greek, Serbian, Arabian, Japanese, Romanian, Bulgarian Orthodox Churches and many others beside, which all share the same beliefs, doctrine etc. HOwever, you need to be sure it is a Canonical Orthodox Church. In the Ukraine itself, there has been a breakaway group which has a self-proclaimed Patriarch. That particular church, whilst calling itself Orthodox, is orthodox in name only as it has severed itself and is uncanonical. Find out if the Ukrainian Church in your town is under the Moscow Patriarchate. If it is a 'Unia' Church, then it is not Orthodox at all, but Roman Catholic, but retaining Orthodox forms of liturgical worship.

Finally, please, please, please do a lot of soul-searching and read as much as you can about the Orthodox Church before you get baptised. In some ways it is better not to have become Orthodox than to end up throwing the gift of Orthodoxy away at a later age. Orthodoxy is serious Christianity. There is rigorous fasting for extended periods of the year. We have Confession where you examine your soul and all your actions minutely, but the Kingdom of Heaven is taken by the forceful. It is not the 'I'm baptised and Orthodox now, so I am saved!' type of Faith. It is serious and hard work. Through our lives here we attain our salvation, but everyday is a struggle to cleanse ourselves and to fight for the salvation of our souls against those that war against us (and not only the demons on their own, but devils working through other people.)

Orthodoxy is a beautiful, intensely spiritual Faith, and like anything worth attaining you have to work hard for it, but the 'rewards' are well worth the struggle. I recommend you look at the articles on the www.fatheralexander.org website.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Tania+ on October 27, 2005, 01:32:14 PM
Were the crosses worn by their IF members, a cross that is designed as crosses of that depicted as the Orthodox cross ?

I don't think I have ever seen any picture of any IF family member with their cross visible. Is there a picture available as such?

Tatiana
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on October 27, 2005, 03:26:34 PM
I would imagine that even if the outer shape was that of (say) the Byzantine cross, the carving (for want of the correct word) showing the crucified Christ would have Him on a Russian Style cross, with the usual inscriptions and the skull of Adam under the Cross. My Baptismal Cross is shaped Russian Style, but I have another one in Byzantine style, but the cross thereon is Russian style.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Azarias on December 04, 2005, 05:40:28 PM
No. There is no basis or precedent, and it's likely to never happen.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Azarias on December 05, 2005, 01:23:49 PM
Quote
No. There is no basis or precedent, and it's likely to never happen.


Very sorry... it seems my answer fell out of sequence in things. I was referring to the question of women priests.

This is in no way to be taken as an offense to women. Certainly the Orthodox do respect women. The Virgin Theotokos holds a position of the highest esteem. The question of women priests is not about equality of the sexes or keeping any one down. St. Mary Magdalen has been given the title "equal-to-the Apostles" a rare honorific for the Orthodox.

The question has more to do with the mystical differeces between the sexes, their respective natures, and the way in which they both function in the worlds - not just the physical.

Perhaps it should also be pointed out that a priest who looses his right hand can no longer function. I point this out to show that there can be restrictions on men as well, but it is much more than a question of body parts. Although there is no official ruling that I am aware of I would think that a transgendered F to M would also be unacceptable. Again, it is not a question of body parts but of higher mystical nature.

I hope I am not opening up a can of worms.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Tania+ on December 05, 2005, 02:40:21 PM
Why should it 'open a can of worms' to state anything of what is a requirement anywhere? It has been this way for thousands of years, at least for the Russian Orthodox Church and nothing seems contrary to have changed 'what is'. It's just a fact of life. If you don't believe, you don't believe. That's that !

Those of us, who are inclined to be fully involved in that of the Church's doctrine, follow it day in, day out. Those who do not, go where they feel most comfortable. Many faiths have church law and that's the way their faith is followed. It's the same with the Dali Lama, sorry, Buddhists, Mormons, Catholics, Coptics, Greek Orthodox, etc.

But there's only one God, imho...


Tatiana
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Azarias on December 05, 2005, 03:07:25 PM
Many thanks for that posting Tatiana. I was hoping that my posting would be followed by the opinions of an Orthodox woman. You are entirely correct in what you say.

On a subject like women priests it would be too easy for me to get beaten up by the ladies. It's not as if anything discussed here will change the policies or theology of the church anyway. It is not about putting any one down or making converts.

I only hope to shed some light on the forum as to the Orthodox Church in the hope that it makes for a larger understanding of all things Russian. That is the purpose of this discussion board, isn't it?  :)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: matushka on December 06, 2005, 03:33:01 PM
Azarias, you are certainly right and an other orthodox woman will here support your opinion!!
I would like to add that being a priest is not a right, as some western women want us to believe. Being a priest is a service and the Church call some of her member for it. For others services the Church call other members, men or women. Let us remember the apostol Paul, about all the way one can serve in the church, according to his talents and vocation.
As said Tania, it has always been that way. This argument is not so stupid as it sounds: it is the tradition, the Holy tradition which is the old and wise experience of hundreds of christian before us about this central question: will we saved and how is that better to do to be saved, as we have part to our salvation.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Marlene on December 09, 2005, 10:15:58 AM
As a cradle Lutheran, I can assure that Lutherans - like Roman Catholics and Orthodox - which follows very much the same liturgy -- do not believe that Christmas is more important than Easter.   Easter is the most important of holy days.  

Quote
Thank you isekenderbey. You, orthodox believers are really great! I like very uch the way you explain your faith, to people who knew anything about it...Like me.  ;D I understand every day more about Orthodoxy, and certainly, I'm very tempted to be one of yours.  ::) But, of course, I must think very carefully about it.

   As for catholics , I think that Easter is also the more important celebration in our church as it is in all christian churches, but Western believers are now, very far from their religious concivtions, and it's just for that, that some people seems to believe that Christmas is more important than Easter. As television in Christmas time speaks all time about purchasing things and EAT; EAT; EAT, DRINK-DRINK-DRINK  ;D, people got influenced and simply purchases gifts, eats and drinks, rather than go to the church and so...I certainly goes to the church in Christmas and always said to my family and friends that it is a RELIGIOUS celebration and not a profane one. I love to prepara delicious meals myself this beatiful night, but not for the simply fact of eating, but to show to my family, my deep love to them. Some people confounds Christmas Eve with the New Year's night, and just got a great party to enjoy themselves...Bad enough.  >:( :-/ But be sure, not al catholic people acts like this.

   As for my brother, he became a protestant lutheran after marrying a german girl, and they are much more religious in Easter and Christmas than we catholics uses to be.

RealAnastasia.

Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Azarias on December 10, 2005, 05:13:27 PM
Thank you Marlene.

For the Orthodox if it were not for Pascha (Easter) there would be no point to all the rest.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Gud_bevare_Tsaren on December 11, 2005, 02:03:21 PM
Religion is an interesting thing especially when it comes to Russia since the Russian Orthodox Church suffered so badly. Lenin and Stalin sure did their best to annihilate christianity even if they didn't destroy it completely, afraid as they were that it would cause a reaction that not even the mighty KGB would be able to control.

In 1990, only 20% of the russians considered themselves as religious. In 1992, they were 52%. Amazing and a healthy sign. I wonder how it is today.

In my life christianity is very important. God and Family, nothing else matters.  :)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: matushka on December 11, 2005, 02:59:24 PM
Yes, today more than 52 pro cent russian considered themseleves as believers. But only 4 pro cent of the population is regular church goer. Unfortunetly.
And, about the prosecutions, do you know, there is a very common opinion in the orthodox world: the prosecutions were the result of inside church problems, there were lots of saints and wonderfuls monasteries. There were also plenty of half-believers priest, bad nuns and monks, bishops looking only at carrier and politic. A lot of sins inside of the Church. There were plenty of deep believers. And also plenty of people who did not trust the Church any more. A lot of us, at the moment, see the prosecutions of Lenin and Stalin as something paradoxally coming from God. It made a sort of purification  and renaissance in the Church.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Gud_bevare_Tsaren on December 11, 2005, 03:59:31 PM
Zdrastvujte, matushka !  ;)

Yes, I think you have a point although I believe the communists are to blame. The bad quality of priests and other church officials were a result of the communists taking control of the church. Young and intelligent men were banished from theological education and the education in itself were kept at the lowest possible level. Many of the priests were forced to work as informants reporting directly to the KGB so the confidence people had in the church and their officials were very low. The church still received visitors but these were the old and the poor, in other words the harmless.

God and the Bible were simply replaced by the Communist Party and Lenin.

If, for example, a young man wanted to be baptized and went to a priest, the priest would inform the KGB and the young man would loose his place at the university, and thereby loosing all possibilities for a higher education, and his parents would at the same time be forced to leave their apartment.  :(

The leader of the Russian Orthodox Church, I believe he is called Aleksej II or something similar, took two very important decisions when the Evil Empire collapsed. First, he divided Russia into 100 districts which enabled him to appoint a lot of new bishops and those he appointed were young and talented men that had nothing to do with the now crumbling KGB. Second, he traveled to all these new districts and held masses, making himself more visible than any other russian archbishop ever before. All this was very important and helped your church to regain atleast a little of the strength it once had.

I've been to an ortodox mass in St Petersburg once. It was an amazing experience with all the people, smoke, large icons and astonishing clothes. It was truly great and very different from the very modest church meetings we have in Sweden. One felt connected to Him in a way I haven't experienced before.

Sincerely
Gud bevare Tsaren (= God save the Tsar)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Azarias on December 12, 2005, 01:49:31 AM
After reading the last couple of postings I guess we could say that the ikon of the prerevolution church has been smashed forever by communism. Everyone reacted in different ways according to what they could or knew best. Opportunism in human nature can exist on all levels. Perhaps that's what some choose.

What is important now is that a new era has begun and the Russian people have an oppurtunity to create a new a vibrant ikon of their church which hopefully is rooted in the past and with an eye to the future!
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: doug__h on December 12, 2005, 08:52:55 AM
Recently, I was lucky enough to be in St. Petersberg fo 2 weeks. During my visit I attended many weekday morning masses. I was astounded at the fervour I witnessed, by worshipers of ALL ages. By comparison, weekday masses draw very few in Italy.
The most spectacular religious event I have ever been to was on the feast day of ALexander Nevsky....3 hours of glorious choral and congregational singing, colourful and splendid robes, the swinging open and closing of thee main gates (I forget the actual name.)
After that everyone...probably about 1000 people (This was a Thursday morning!) processed outside where another mass of 1 1/2 hours was held. Probably there was another "Service" when the relics were taken back into the church. An amazing...and moving day.
Two small questions:
1. Any Orthodox church I have been in (here in Toronto, Paris, Russia) there are no chairs or pews. (The above described ceremony was, of course, with everyone standing the whole time!) An earlier post seemed to suggest this is not the case in the USA.
2. Probably a dozen churches in St. Petersberg were called cathedrals. Is the use of the term cathedral different than in the Catholic church where a cathedral is the seat of a bishop? Or are there simply many, many bishops in ST. Petersberg?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: M_Breheny on December 12, 2005, 06:48:56 PM
When I was in Russia and the Ukraine in July, I was amazed at the number of people - both young and old - I saw worshipping in the Orthodox churches.  This was a far cry from what I had encountered when I visited the Soviet Union in the late 1970s.  

There are two church visits that are especially memorable for me.  The first was the Church of Our Savior in Moscow.  This magnificent cathedral has been lovingly rebuilt, thanks to contributions from all over the world.  Stalin had the original church blown up to make way for a special Hall of Soviets, or something similar, which, incidentally, never was built.  When I was in Moscow in the 1970s, this site contained a huge swimming pool!  Today, however, the the Church of Our Savior is full of the faithful (and we happened to be there on a Wednesday afternoon, not a Sunday or a holy day).  

The other church visit that impressed me was in Kiev at the Caves/Monasteries.  Granted it was a Sunday morning as well as July 17, the date of the Romanov's murders, but the lines of worshippers waiting to get into the several churches of the complex were astonishingly long.  There must have been over 1,000 worshippers waiting outside of the churches that morning.  A very moving experience, especially seeing many of the faithful carrying ikons of the Imperial Family.  

I came home with the distinct feeling that Orthodoxy is alive and on the come-back in Russia and the Ukraine.

Mary
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Tania+ on December 12, 2005, 09:05:41 PM
Hi Mary,

I've not been back to Russia since the 70's due to very serious health conditions, but as you described your visit, I am taken back to the many who attended services in the many cities of Russia we visited, both young and elderly. (At one city we had a very trying schedule, and I wore slacks. When we came to the church, I was admonished even before leaving the transport services, that I could not enter the church without wearing respectful clothes. A kerchief was found, and a skirt to put over my slacks. Only then was I permitted to enter.) I'm of course Russian Orthodox, but I'd been told by many here in the US, religion was dead. What a surprise to find it was indeed, well and alive, and that was before communism had fallen!

I am heartned to read your post and that of our new poster Gud_bevare_Tsaren, and Welcome to you :),and many others who state so many positive things are more and more transpiring in Russia for the good of Orthodoxy, and the Russian people to worship freely.

By the way, Gud_bevare_Tsaren, thank you so much for sharing so much of what transpired to the good christian peoples in Russia, under communism, and to our church leadership, etc. I don't think too many know of the trials they were forced to go through short and long term, as well their families.

As a side note, I want to tell you that here on the west coast of the United States, in most of our orthodox churches, there are no pews. Youth to elderly stand throughout every service. There are a few chairs here and there, but I would say those are taken by those whom are truly disabled and unable to stand for any length of time.

Thank you all again for your generous input.

Tatiana


Quote
When I was in Russia and the Ukraine in July, I was amazed at the number of people - both young and old - I saw worshipping in the Orthodox churches.  This was a far cry from what I had encountered when I visited the Soviet Union in the late 1970s.  

There are two church visits that are especially memorable for me.  The first was the Church of Our Savior in Moscow.  This magnificent cathedral has been lovingly rebuilt, thanks to contributions from all over the world.  Stalin had the original church blown up to make way for a special Hall of Soviets, or something similar, which, incidentally, never was built.  When I was in Moscow in the 1970s, this site contained a huge swimming pool!  Today, however, the the Church of Our Savior is full of the faithful (and we happened to be there on a Wednesday afternoon, not a Sunday or a holy day).  

The other church visit that impressed me was in Kiev at the Caves/Monasteries.  Granted it was a Sunday morning as well as July 17, the date of the Romanov's murders, but the lines of worshippers waiting to get into the several churches of the complex were astonishingly long.  There must have been over 1,000 worshippers waiting outside of the churches that morning.  A very moving experience, especially seeing many of the faithful carrying ikons of the Imperial Family.  

I came home with the distinct feeling that Orthodoxy is alive and on the come-back in Russia and the Ukraine.

Mary

Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on December 18, 2005, 05:40:22 AM
(http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/3820/76186219pd.jpg)

Russian Orthodox Christians attend a Christmas Liturgy in the giant Christ the Saviour cathedral in Moscow, early Friday, Jan. 7, 2005. Christmas falls on Jan. 7 for Orthodox Christians in the Holy Land, Russia and other Eastern Orthodox churches that use the old Julian calendar instead of the 16th-century Gregorian calendar adopted by Catholics and Protestants and commonly used in secular life around the world. (AP Photo/Str)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on December 18, 2005, 05:56:41 AM
(http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/5303/73802757cf.jpg)

(http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/8080/73208937vo.jpg)

Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexy II conducts a Liturgy in Christ the Saviour Cathedral in Moscow, Thursday, June 10, 2004. Patriarch Alexy II celebrated 14 years as leader of the country's dominant faith and his 75th birthday - belatedly - with an elaborate service Thursday at the grandiose Christ the Savior Cathedral near the Kremlin. (AP Photo/ Misha Japaridze)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on December 18, 2005, 06:41:20 AM
Quote
I am an atheist. Am I very controversial?


Ida
I'm orthodox but I want to say something I heard from an Elder in my country [Romania] that my interest you. Sometimes atheists can have a better understanding of God than some of the faithful.

Here is a citation from the Mystagogia of St. Maximus the Confessor:

“May God guide our every word and thought, He the only sense of those who think or of the objects of their thought, the sole reason for speakers and their subjects, the life of the living and of those who receive life, who is and will become all to all, for the sake of things present or yet to be; on His own account, He neither is nor will become anything in any sense whatever of all things presently existing or still to come, as His nature is not of the same order at all as the things we say exist. For this reason it could be rather more suitable to say He does not “exist”, because His mode of existence is so superior. It is very important to perceive the true difference between God and creatures; the mode of existing of the Supreme Being must be denied of existing things; and the mode of existence of existing things is not that of transcendent being; the real meaning of both “existence” and “non-existence” must be considered in relation to the Supreme Being, and then neither can be affirmed. Both can be said validly: the term “existing” is apposite to God as the cause of existence; but the term “existence” as it applies to the transcendent cause of being, is totally to be denied of all creatures. But then, neither term is precisely applicable to God, as neither expresses the really essential mode of existence natural to the essence in question. Nothing existent or non-existent, no existing thing that we know of, or non-existent thing unknown to us, can come reasonably close to that to which nothing at all is linked of its nature as a cause (for He is uncaused, absolutely free and independent). His existence is simple, unknowable, and inaccessible to all, completely inscrutable, beyond description by any of our affirmative or negative language."

So, from an orthodox point of view, there is no philosophy, concept or even "theology" that can "catch" the "existence" of God.

However some may receive the gift of faith, that goes beyond any philosophy, and can pray to the paradoxical God of Abraham.

[There is a whole discussion about the unknowable "essence" and the knowable "hypostasis" of God -but it would be too much for this thread]

We speak about God [with affirmative or negative language] only as a continuation of prayer. For the Orthodox Church theo-logy makes sense only as prayer. If the Orthodox Church has dogmatic "theology" it is only so as to keep open the possibility of the "right" faith, and as a medicine for those with "little" faith. This is why the Liturgy is more important than theology in the Orthodox Church, and why St. Maximus writes about the Liturgy in his "Mystagogy".
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Azarias on December 18, 2005, 06:07:22 PM
Wonderful piece, thank you Palimpsest!

I would also like to add (for Ida) that in our Orthodox theology God is knowable in His energy but never in His essence. It is also far easier to say what He is not, than to ever try to define what He is.

Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on December 18, 2005, 07:38:08 PM
:)


we should also remember that the use of these terms like "essence", "energies", “existence”, “hypostasis” etc. come from Ancient Greek philosophy but that they receive a totally different meaning and "spirit" in orthodox "theology". And to understand them you have to "live" the tradition of the church rather than "philosophize" or "theologize" over them. The fathers of the church had no other choice but to express their faith in the language they had available. They really managed a “transfiguration” of it.



[have some post been deleted on this thread? why?
I remember posting on the third page, what happened?]
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Tania+ on December 18, 2005, 09:36:57 PM
I am so very glad that this thread is available. The Russian Church, and Church Leaders have gone through so many, many hardships and unbelieveable difficulties. To see that Russia, and Russian Orthodox Believers in Russia are returning once again to the church is very uplifitng, and allows many of us here outside Russia to gain confidence that our religion is still 'alive and well'.

Russian Orthodoxy has been for countless centuries the center of life for many Russian Christians. It's so lovely to see its full return and support. I have especially enjoyed the many pictures shared from Russia, to do with Orthodoxy. Thank you for your kindness in sharing.

Tatiana

Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on December 20, 2005, 12:13:52 PM
Anyone interested in “things” orthodox can look up the following threads on this forum:



Imperial Russian History   //   discussion about Orthodoxy (2)

http://hydrogen.pallasweb.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=history;action=display;num=1121353312;start=0



Balkan Royal Families   //   The Byzantine Empire

http://hydrogen.pallasweb.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=balkans;action=display;num=1114076649



The Windsors   //   Prince Charles - Mount Athos / Orthodox Church

http://hydrogen.pallasweb.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi?board=Windsor;action=display;num=1118807488
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on January 06, 2006, 11:25:09 PM
(http://img270.imageshack.us/img270/2848/91935982fv.jpg)

The head of Russia's Orthodox Church Patriarch Alexy II holds candles during a Christmas Liturgy in the giant Christ the Saviour cathedral in Moscow early Saturday, Jan. 7, 2006. Christmas falls on Jan. 7 for Orthodox Christians in the Holy Land, Russia and other Eastern Orthodox churches that use the old Julian calendar instead of the 16th-century Gregorian calendar adopted by Catholics and Protestants and commonly used in secular life around the world. (AP Photo/Mikhail Metzel)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on January 06, 2006, 11:41:39 PM
(http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/6121/76185928ps.jpg)

The head of Russia's Orthodox Church Patriarch Alexy II holds a Christmas Liturgy in the giant Christ the Saviour cathedral in Moscow early Friday, Jan. 7, 2005. Christmas falls on Jan. 7 for Orthodox Christians in the Holy Land, Russia and other Eastern Orthodox churches that use the old Julian calendar instead of the 16th-century Gregorian calendar adopted by Catholics and Protestants and commonly used in secular life around the world. (AP Photo/Str)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Versoix on January 10, 2006, 07:17:30 PM
Dear Community,
   I'm a new member here, and I'm what they call "cradle Orthodox," meaning that I was born into the church. My family tradition is the Russian, but I'd like to make it very clear that Orthodoxy is not really a national thing, it's a universal church that expresses itself through particular nations and peoples. All Orthodox Christians believe the same things and worship the same way.
   Anybody who may have questions about Orthodoxy, please feel free to ask, and I will answer as best I can. And if I cannot answer a question, I'll say so.
   Light and Life! (a traditional Orthodox motto).
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Versoix on January 10, 2006, 07:34:16 PM
As I recall, the House of Romanov had a particular devotion to an icon known as the Feodorovski Mother of God. This goes way back in Romanov history. I searched the archives here and found nothing about it. Can anyone tell me anything about this icon? Did it survive the Revolution? Are there any photos or renderings of it extant?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on January 10, 2006, 09:25:10 PM
Welcome Versoix!

I see you are from New York. Isn't the famous St. Vladimir Theological School somewhere around New York?

"Versoix" and "Nihil sine Deo" reminds me of the Romanian Royal Family. Is there any connection or just a coincidence?

Thank you!
palimpsest
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Versoix on January 12, 2006, 07:45:29 PM
Quote
Welcome Versoix!

I see you are from New York. Isn't the famous St. Vladimir Theological School somewhere around New York?

"Versoix" and "Nihil sine Deo" reminds me of the Romanian Royal Family. Is there any connection or just a coincidence?

Thank you!
palimpsest


Dear Palimpsest,
   Thank you for the warm greeting. Yes, St. Vladimir's Orthodox Theological Seminary (Orthodox Church in America) is in Crestwood, a town about 15 miles north of New York City. And yes, you're right about my user name and motto. I have great admiration and respect for the Romanian royal family.
Best wishes,
Alec
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on January 13, 2006, 12:47:34 PM
I know the church and the school by reputation only, I've never been to NY.

You both must have seen the grand exibition at the Metropolitan Museum on Byzantium, "Faith and Power", two years ago. I wish I could make the trip and see it! :-/

http://www.metmuseum.org/special/Byzantium/byzantium_splash.htm [cool !!!!!!!!!!!!]

http://www.metmuseum.org/explore/Byzantium/byzhome.html



Some other interesting links about Orthodoxy and Byzantium:



http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/byzantium/index.html

http://www.byzantium.ac.uk/index.htm

http://www.doaks.org/Byzantine.html

http://www.ec-patr.gr/




http://www.imperiobizantino.com/byzantium.htm

http://www.mcah.columbia.edu/byzantium/index2.html [cool !!!!!!!!!!!!]  


http://www2.arch.uiuc.edu/research/rgouster/
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on January 16, 2006, 09:08:37 AM
(http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/8404/71930332ue.jpg)

A Byzantine lamp hangs in the center of the room surrounded by other artifacts on display during a preview of a new exhibit at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, "Byzantium: Faith and Power," at the museum in New York, Monday, March 15, 2004. The exhibit, which showcases more than 350 masterpieces of Byzantine art from some 30 nations, opens March 23. The hanging lamp dates from the 13th century and normally resides in the Monestary of Xeropotamou in Mount Athos, Greece. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Sarushka on January 17, 2006, 10:05:55 AM
Has anyone ever seen a picture showing OTMA's baptismal crosses? In so many of the formal shots of the girls, I can see the chains around their necks, but the crosses themselves always seem to be hidden in the bodice of the dress...

Any info appreciated!
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: ChristineM on January 17, 2006, 11:26:05 AM
I do not recall ever seeing a photograph of the children wearing their baptismal crosses.   Such a photograph would have been destroyed.   In the days of the imperial children, Orthodox practice was to wear a cross - concealed - a testament to one's faith and beliefs.  

The baptismal cross is not an item of adornment or jewellery and should not be visible.

tsaria
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Caleb on January 17, 2006, 09:55:36 PM
Quote
Thanks for all the wonderful messages.  I DO think this Romanov site is a marvelous site to discuss the Orthodox faith, since it was such a very important part of the IF's daily life.

Regarding some earlier posts, thank you, and God bless you, Matushka, for all the information.  Yes, the roots of the Roman Catholic Church and Orthodoxy are the same, but the Divine Liturgy has some noticeable differences (Little Entrace, Great Entrance, etc.).  Of course, the most important part -- the Sacrament -- is the same (thank God!).

RealAnastasia - I second Matuska's statements about not giving up on your church.  She is correct in that the "people" in the churches are "corrupt," but the CHURCH (with a BIG "C") is CHRIST, and Christ is perfect.  If you are uncomfortable in your individual church, are there others in your area (of the same faith) that you could attend (I don't mean to get personal here).  I was a Roman Catholic for years and left THAT church -- not due to corruption (the priest scandal hadn't "come out" yet), but because it wasn't meeting my needs.  

Oh, and Matuska, that absolutely WONDERFUL quote from St. Seraphim of Sarov (who, of course, was a favorite of the IF's) was  "Acquire the spirit of peace, and a thousand souls around you shall be saved." (It's one of my favorites!)

BACK to the Imperial Family -- I've been reading Greg & Penny's book "The Fate of the Romanovs" (again!), and have been thinking how HARD it was for them to not have regular church services, ESP. during Holy Week and Easter (which - in my opinion - is the most magnificent of the entire church year!)  Any thoughts?  (I might this question over in that thread!)

I've been raised in an Evangelical church & while I'm happy where I'm at spiritually, I do find the Eastern Orthodox Church interesting. There actually is an Orthodox church a few blocks down, across the railroad tracks. (I think it's called St. Josephs & I'm not sure if it's Greek or Russian Orthodox) I do have to agree that there are churches that have problems. There was even an elder at my church, who resigned after admitting to an extra-marital affair. The major issue is that, we, as humans, are led into sin offered by the devil. We are not perfect, tracing back to Adam & Eve in the Garden of Eden. But that is why Jesus Christ was sent. One should also know that HE is returning someday soon to take HIS church Home to heaven to be with him for eternity.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on January 17, 2006, 09:58:12 PM
Behold, the Bridegroom cometh in the middle of the night.

We should always be prepared. What state will our souls be in when He returns, on the awesome day of Judgement?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on January 19, 2006, 05:20:54 AM
Isn't it beautiful and right to hear the magnificent poetry of the holy texts of the Church?

For me this poetry has more truth than any logical argument. Such richness of possible meaning!

Indeed, we should always be ready for the Last Judgment! In a way it is already here, at this very moment... In another way it is still to come...

You even descended in hell, O Lord! Where shall we sinners escape?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Kevin From Australia on February 17, 2006, 05:34:58 AM
I thought I might attempt at starting a new thread.

On September 9, 1883 the Russian Chapel (St. Alexander Nevsky) in Copenhagen was consecrated in the presence of the Emperor Alexander III, the Empress Marie, the King and Queen of Denmark, the King and Queen of Greece, the Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Louise of Denmark, the Princess of Wales, the Duke of Cambridge, Prince Waldemar of Denmark, Princess Marie of Hanover, Prince Wilhelm and Prince Hans of S-H-S-Glucksborg.  The papers also mention that the children of the Danish royal family were present too.

Baron Mohrenheim was the founder of the chapel, he had previously been Russian Ambassador in Copenhagen  but was then based in London.

The Empress's Father Confessor, assisted by chaplains from the Russian Embassy and the Imperial Yacht  Derjava, performed the ceremony.

After the consecration a luncheon was held on board the Derjava.  

Sources: Dansk Hof-og-Stats Kalendar - 1884 & the London Times September 10, 1883
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Tania+ on February 17, 2006, 10:51:14 PM
Welcome to the Forum Kevin ! :)

Do you or does anyone have a picture of St. Alexander Nevsky Chapel in Copenhagen ? I love so very much to view the many Russian Churches around the world.

Again, Welcome !

Tatiana+
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on February 19, 2006, 03:02:03 PM
Tania - it is a beautiful Church, with mosaiced floors and golden cupolas. There is a miraculous icon of the Theotokos Mary there. I have attended Vigil at that Church when I was in Copenhagen a few years ago, but have no digital photos of it. There is a nice mosaic of St Elizabeth Feodorovna, and a bust of Empress Maria Feodorovna (the latter being in the Church yard). It is just down the road from Queen Margrethe's palace, near the (so-called) Marble Church.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on February 22, 2006, 01:56:59 PM
I fond this with google:

(http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/5387/dmk1c1299lt.jpg)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: palimpsest on February 22, 2006, 02:01:57 PM
And these:

(http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/2449/a150843197mw.jpg)

(http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/2394/aa150847176zo.jpg)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: L. on February 28, 2006, 12:20:44 PM
  Who was religious in Russian imperial family like Alexandra Feodorovna and Nicholas Alexandrovich ???
I know that Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrovna (daughter of Alexander II) was very religious. I read that in her childhood St. Seraphim of Sarov saved her of death. Is there some similar stories?
What do you know about icons that was in possesion of imperial family (like icon of Mother of the God Feodorovskaya) ???
Can somebody post some photos of imperial icons,  or some photos related with this issue, please ???

  God bless you! All the best!
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Margarita Markovna on February 28, 2006, 01:00:18 PM
I don't have any closeups, but here's a picture of Alexei's room with the icons.

Alexei's Room (http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a262/margaritamarkovna/Romanov%20Photos/alekbed2.jpg)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: imperial angel on March 01, 2006, 11:03:22 AM
All the Romanovs had strong ties with the Orthodox church officially. Many of them had strong ties with it personally as well, especially the Last Romanovs.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: L. on March 08, 2006, 07:02:04 AM
  Can somebody help us with this issue ???
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: jenjen on March 14, 2006, 03:44:35 AM
I hava always been interested on what is the difference between the two.  When watching Nicholas and Alexandra, I noticed they make the sign of the cross backwards from Roman Catholics (which I am).  Roman catholics make the cross: up, down, left, right.  In Russian it is: up, down, right, left.  Why is this and what other differences are there?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: grandduchessella on March 14, 2006, 07:59:40 AM
A major difference too is that Orthodox priests (at least in the Greek version) can be married while this is strictly forbidden in the RC religion. I don't think Orthodox priest can marry once they've taken orders.

Also, they don't have a figure equal to the Pope in the RC religion. From an Orthodox article (written by an Father Michael Azkoul, an Orthodox priest and sanctioned by St. Nectarios American Orthodox Church--and actually gets several parts of the RC side wrong but I'd hope he'd get the Orthodox side correct  :) ) "The Orthodox Church teaches that all bishops are equal. To be sure, there are different ranks of bishops (patriarch, archbishop, metropolitan, bishop); nevertheless, a bishop is a bishop. Such differences apply to the administration of a church or group of churches, not to the nature of the bishop. The president of a synod of bishops is called archbishop (Greek custom) or metropolitan (Russian custom). "

Roman Catholics speak of "Confirmation" and the Orthodox of "Chrismation." "Confirmation" is separated from the Baptism and is performed by the bishop and not the priest; but "Chrismation" is performed with Baptism by a priest who has received "chrism" from the bishop. The Orthodox Church links Baptism, Chrismation and Holy Communion, first the threefold immersion into sanctified water whereas they are 3 separate steps to RCs taking place several years apart (First Communion--which my Drew is preparing for in May--takes place around 2nd grade, while Confirmation is generally around age 12).

Also according to the above article, Orthodoxy doesn't recognize Original Sin. Because of this they also don't recognize the Immaculate Conception of Mary--so named because she was born without the stain of Original Sin.

"Icons are more than sacred pictures. Everything about them is theological. For example, they are always flat, flat so that we who inhabit the physical world will understand that the world of the spirit where Christ, His Mother, the angels, the saints, and the departed dwell, is a world of mystery which cannot be penetrated by our five senses. Customarily, Roman Catholicism has historically employed statues in its worship. The statues are life-like and three-dimensional. "

There are other minor differences between the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholicism.

The Orthodox do not fast on Saturday (except Holy Saturday) or Sunday. Roman Catholics experience no such restriction.

Orthodox do not kneel on Sunday; Roman Catholics do.

Orthodox have no "Stations of The Cross;" Roman Catholics do.

Orthodox worship towards the East; Roman Catholics, not necessarily.

There are no orders of Orthodox monks (male and female) as there is among Roman Catholics (Jesuits, Dominicans, Benedictines, Cistericans, etc.). More recently, many Roman Catholic monks and nuns have put away their traditional habits.

Orthodox clergy wear beards; RC clergy are can beither either bearded or beardless.

There are also some deeper theological divides much as separates other versions of Christianity.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: reashka on March 14, 2006, 08:05:18 AM
Welcone jenjen! :D
The sign of the cross of the two religions is only one of the many differences between the two, Orthodox and Catholic sign of the cross used to be up, down, right, left like the orthodox until there was the splitting of the two. (wait I'm Catholic too ;D) This has actually also been discuss on other threads of this forum. :)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Marlene on March 14, 2006, 08:54:34 AM
It should be noted that making the sign of the Cross is not restricted to the Orthodox or Roman churches.  It is also done in the Lutheran and Anglican/Episcopalian traditions  
Quote
A major difference too is that Orthodox priests (at least in the Greek version) can be married while this is strictly forbidden in the RC religion. I don't think Orthodox priest can marry once they've taken orders.

Also, they don't have a figure equal to the Pope in the RC religion. From an Orthodox article (written by an Father Michael Azkoul, an Orthodox priest and sanctioned by St. Nectarios American Orthodox Church--and actually gets several parts of the RC side wrong but I'd hope he'd get the Orthodox side correct  :) ) "The Orthodox Church teaches that all bishops are equal. To be sure, there are different ranks of bishops (patriarch, archbishop, metropolitan, bishop); nevertheless, a bishop is a bishop. Such differences apply to the administration of a church or group of churches, not to the nature of the bishop. The president of a synod of bishops is called archbishop (Greek custom) or metropolitan (Russian custom). "

Roman Catholics speak of "Confirmation" and the Orthodox of "Chrismation." "Confirmation" is separated from the Baptism and is performed by the bishop and not the priest; but "Chrismation" is performed with Baptism by a priest who has received "chrism" from the bishop. The Orthodox Church links Baptism, Chrismation and Holy Communion, first the threefold immersion into sanctified water whereas they are 3 separate steps to RCs taking place several years apart (First Communion--which my Drew is preparing for in May--takes place around 2nd grade, while Confirmation is generally around age 12).

Also according to the above article, Orthodoxy doesn't recognize Original Sin. Because of this they also don't recognize the Immaculate Conception of Mary--so named because she was born without the stain of Original Sin.

"Icons are more than sacred pictures. Everything about them is theological. For example, they are always flat, flat so that we who inhabit the physical world will understand that the world of the spirit where Christ, His Mother, the angels, the saints, and the departed dwell, is a world of mystery which cannot be penetrated by our five senses. Customarily, Roman Catholicism has historically employed statues in its worship. The statues are life-like and three-dimensional. "

There are other minor differences between the Orthodox Church and Roman Catholicism.

The Orthodox do not fast on Saturday (except Holy Saturday) or Sunday. Roman Catholics experience no such restriction.

Orthodox do not kneel on Sunday; Roman Catholics do.

Orthodox have no "Stations of The Cross;" Roman Catholics do.

Orthodox worship towards the East; Roman Catholics, not necessarily.

There are no orders of Orthodox monks (male and female) as there is among Roman Catholics (Jesuits, Dominicans, Benedictines, Cistericans, etc.). More recently, many Roman Catholic monks and nuns have put away their traditional habits.

Orthodox clergy wear beards; RC clergy are can beither either bearded or beardless.

There are also some deeper theological divides much as separates other versions of Christianity.

Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: jenjen on March 15, 2006, 12:54:33 AM
Interesting stuff.  The icons are like the staues in catholocism.  They are symbolic, but not worshipped.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Caleb on March 15, 2006, 09:41:20 PM
I find this interesting because I was raised in an Evangelical Christian church & both of my parents were raised Baptist.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on March 16, 2006, 06:24:17 PM
There are a couple of long threads about Orthodoxy in the culture section. If you are interested, I would recommend looking at fatheralexander.org as it has a wealth of information about the Orthodox faith. It is very different from Roman Catholicism. An ingteresting aside, the Roman Church also crossed themselves the way the Orthodox Church still does up until about the time of the last Crusade.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Azarias on March 18, 2006, 06:24:03 PM
In many ways the difference between the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic would be like going to the movies with a friend. While you both attend the same shared event, the perspectives afterwards can be entirely different or to some degree similar. Of course since you sat in separate chairs even the view is the same and yet different.

Orthodoxy is slow to change or evolve, if at all. It maintains it's traditions as they always were. Roman Catholicism can be and is different from itself according to which era you are speaking about. Roman priests did not become celibate until 300 years after the Great Schism.

It was pointed out above that the Roman Church separates Baptism from Communion from Confirmation, whereas all 3 are given at the same time to Orthodox infants. I know that 80 years ago or so, the RC gave Pennance, Communion, and Confirmation all at the same time, or at least over the same weekend.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: anabel on April 13, 2006, 09:54:30 AM
I have a question concerning this topic: Would a marriage between an Orthodox and a Catholic be possible? Wasn´t Maximilian of Leuchtenberg catholic, while his wife Gds Maria Nicholaievna was (of course) Orthodox? :-?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Emilia on April 14, 2006, 01:56:13 PM
Quote
I have a question concerning this topic: Would a marriage between an Orthodox and a Catholic be possible?

According to Conti, there was a sort of secret contract between the Austrian and the Russian Imperial Families, that granted each Austrian (hence catholic)/Russian (hence Orthodox) Princess to keep her religion in the case of an marriage between those two houses. An example might be the marriage between Grand Duchess Alexandra Pavlovna of Russia and Palatine Joseph, an Hungarian Habsburg.  
 
So marriages between Catholic and Orthodox Christians might be difficult, but not impossible.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: pookiepie on April 17, 2006, 09:30:38 PM
i don't even think it's difficult, at least not today. my parents did it and from what i know, there was no problem. to get married in an orthodox church, 1 of the people has to be orthodox, and it can only be to another christian, and even then, the non-orthodox one would have to be one of the christian religions that believe in the trinity and not all christians believe that.

an interesting website is www.orthodoxphotos.com

it's mostly pictures but it has some articles too.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: joye on May 02, 2006, 06:34:44 PM
Can anyone explain the Russian Cross?

refer http://romanovfundforrussia.org/family/ekaterinburg.html


The Russian Cross has 3 crosspieces; 1 in the usual position, a shorter crosspiece above, and to my mind the most interesting feature, a slanted crosspiece at almost the base.

Can anyone give an explanation? please.


Signed  HRH

Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on May 02, 2006, 10:17:47 PM
The bar on the top is where they nailed the sign Jesus of Nazareth King of the Jews, the middle crossbar is of course for the arms, and the bottom bar is the platform where the feet were nailed. The slanting angle of it can make the viewer contemplate in which direction s/he is heading. Often under the cross, you will also see a skull and crossbones depicted. This is Adam's skull, as Golgotha (place of the skull) is traditionally where Adam was buried. Significantly, Christ is often referred to as the New Adam.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: pookiepie on May 15, 2006, 11:32:23 AM
i heard something else for the slanted bar in sunday school. it shows where the robbers on either side of him were going.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Slava Bogu! on August 11, 2006, 06:11:31 PM
What was the IF's role, if any, in the 1903 canonization of Serafim Sarovskii? Also, I remember reading somewhere that it was something of a controversial canonization ... can anybody shed some light on why this was so?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Laura Mabee on August 11, 2006, 10:17:16 PM
Also, in A Lifelong Passions there is this interesting tidbit -

A year before Philippe had worked upon the imagination of the Empress that she and all around her were convinced that she was with child, until the illusion was exposed by the Empress's doctors.
Philippe explained what had occurred by her lack of faith and falling into a trance prophesised anew that the wish of the Empress to have a son would be gratified if she asked for the protection of St Serafim of Sarov. The saint was unknown in the Orthodox calendar. The Emporer ordered the Holy Synod to canonize Sarafim without delay. Pobedonostsev, The Head of the Synod, tried to explain that a man could not be proclaimed a saint by Imperial order, but he was told by the Empress Alexandra herself: The Emperor can do anything. Serafim was canonized at Sarov with great pomp in the presence of Nicholas and Alexandra. By the order of Philippe, the Empress bathed at the dead of night in the spring, which was said to have been blessed by the saint. The promised miracle had been preformed. [From V. Poliakov's biography of Empress Marie]
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on August 11, 2006, 10:31:30 PM
St Seraphim of Sarov is now one of the most popular and well-loved of the Russian Saints. The Empress was right to insist on his glorification (canonisation) - he was long venerated by the masses and not exactly unknown.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Slava Bogu! on August 12, 2006, 11:19:20 AM
I totally agree, Georgiy ... I guess that's why I asked in the first place. It should have been quite a straightforward case but apparently it wasn't at the time. (He's very easy to love ... I'm Catholic but I definitely have room in my heart for "poor Serafim"  :))
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Helen_Azar on August 14, 2006, 01:51:30 PM
Feodorovsky Cathedral founded by Nicholas II and Alexandra in Tsarskoe Selo was partially dedicated to Serafim. His image is above its entrance:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v225/helenazar/sarov6gg.jpg)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Tania+ on October 07, 2006, 10:30:12 AM
For most Russian Orthodox families, and individuals, I am sure the Imperial Family, I know their faith meant much to them, daily.
I wanted to receive from readers a measure of feed back of stories, and factual understanding of what faith meant to the parents,
but to the Imperial children.

Are there any stories shared from the Russian Orthodox Church that can be share here as well on the Imperial Family ?

If you can also offer special biblical verses they enjoyed most, this would be very kind of you to share. Thank you in advance.

Tatiana+
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Sarushka on October 17, 2006, 08:41:21 AM
I don't have any specific anecdotes to share, but I've always been intrigued by the different ways in which Olga & Tatiana approached their faith. Both were devoted to Orthodoxy, but while Tatiana was very religious in an almost practical sense, Olga seems to have been far more spiritual. Tatiana read and stuided her religion (the list of books she took into exile will support that claim) and practiced its rituals dutifully, but according to many accounts it was Olga who carried the deepest feeling about her faith. Before going to work each day in the lazaret, for example, she would walk alone to chapel and pray.

I don't recall much information about the religious devotion of the Little Pair. I suspect that their faith became more significant to them in exile, though. In their letters, Anastasia in particular refers more often to God than she had previously. The IF often signed their letters to one another with some form of "God bless you" or "God keep you" but in exile, Anastasia mentions God's protection and comfort in the body of her letters to her parents more than once. (Incidentally, some first hand accounts say that the revolution arrested Anastasia's intellectual and emotional development, but I think her letters from exile disprove that notion. She did do some growing up near the end of her life, IMO.)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Holly on October 17, 2006, 01:17:24 PM
I agree with Sarushka. Anastasia's letters from Tobolsk don't seem to show any arrest in her emotional development. Anastasia's faith obviously meant a lot to her. I remember in one of her letters from 1918, she said, "Dear ones, in our thoughts we are with you all the time. It is terribly sad and empty; I really don't know what possesses me. The baptismal cross is with us, of course, and we got your news. So. The Lord will help and does help." Also some other quotes where she mentions the Lord are: "For now, good-bye. I wish you the best, happiness, and all good things. We con¬stantly pray for you and think, Help us Lord. Christ be with you, precious ones. I embrace all of you tightly and kiss you. A.", "For the moment, thanks be to God, we're living well". There was a letter by Maria that said the two of them went to pray in Alexei's room and Maria said that Anastasia mananged to pray right under her nose, or something along those lines. But, I don't think Anastasia's emotional developement was halted and from her letters it seems as if she was just depressed. And she did have a great faith in God, you can see it in her letters and things.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Tania+ on October 17, 2006, 01:40:38 PM
imho, faith comes from those who develop it in those who are young and need a course to carry them through life. For the IF, faith was the compass that chartered all their lives. In their darkest hours they clung to it like nothing else, and could feel that it allowed them to rise above their persecutors. Their care of one another, and even to those who professed to not like them, turned their heads to think again, of why they had to maintain that hate inside of them. The children it seems, always felt and lived their faith, and I know that it helped them transend issues even you and i would think were impossible. To read their letters, and to see their dear faces, i know inside, that these were very very brave and courageous children. It has been a priviledge to read and know about their short lives. They are heroes for eternity !

Tatiana+
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: s66405h on December 22, 2006, 09:54:45 PM
Here's a link to a picture of the Ipateivsky Monastery where the Romanov Dynasty began.

http://www.fotolia.com/id/412965/partner/15225
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Isabella on May 26, 2007, 03:37:39 PM
I'm a Christian, and am a member of a Church of England church, where I go every Sunday, but I don't feel restricted to worshipping in one denomination. At the moment (at home), I perform various rituals from several different churches, and the Orthodox church is one of these. Would this be considered right? Do you have to be baptised an Orthodox Christian to worship the Orthodox way?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: pookiepie on May 30, 2007, 03:12:31 AM
This can get tricky. It would be helpful to know specifically what rituals. Participating in mass is another thing. There are different ways of participating. You can join the congregation in singing the prayers, you can listen to the priest, you can join hands when saying the Our Father (if you’re in a Catholic church), etc…  What I know for a fact, though, is that in you aren’t allowed to take communion if you are not of that religion. So yes, you do have to be a baptized orthodox to take communion at an Orthodox church. Same with Catholicism. Religion is a very serious matter and has many rules. I think it’s better to be cautious and do some homework first, like maybe talking to a priest or something, to see what is allowed and what isn’t. Things that don’t seem like a big deal to us laypeople usually are a big deal.  But I’m pretty sure that “mixing religions” is frowned upon by most clergy of all denominations for the reason stated above. I know it’s not politically correct but that’s not what religion is about. Hope this helped :)
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: carl fraley on August 12, 2007, 10:03:24 PM
The Tsar was SUPREME head of the Church in Russia, regardless of the degree of kinship, IF the Sovereign approved or sanctioned the marriage, it had the full validity of the law.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Ilias_of_John on July 30, 2008, 06:00:48 AM
I'm a Christian, and am a member of a Church of England church, where I go every Sunday, but I don't feel restricted to worshipping in one denomination. At the moment (at home), I perform various rituals from several different churches, and the Orthodox church is one of these. Would this be considered right? Do you have to be baptised an Orthodox Christian to worship the Orthodox way?

I just stumbled on to this thread and started reading and the hair on my arms has been standing up for the last 20 minutes. I am an Australian of Greek decent and Orthodoxy plays  a major role in my life, and I would love to ensure that this thread continues. The separation and schisms from True Christianity have been more political and economically based rather than divine inspirations,and it gladdens me that people throughout the world can discuss and ask questions as to the differences without having screaming matches!
Please contimue!

Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: nena on July 30, 2008, 12:20:37 PM
True is, IF were very religious, they believed they had to give their lives, if needs, to save their country, and I adore them because of this.
It says they were full of love to their people, and country. OK?
(http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x139/nemanjapr/Romanov/Ceremonije/th_tihamisa1913.jpg) (http://i185.photobucket.com/albums/x139/nemanjapr/Romanov/Ceremonije/tihamisa1913.jpg)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Ivan Gurlov on September 03, 2008, 01:55:00 PM
Having just returned from a fabulous week in St Petersburg I am currently working my way through Helen Rappaport's compelling book Ekaterinburg - which includes a photograph of an icon of the Romanov family as the 'Holy Passion Bearers'. Has anyone any idea where this icon can be acquired? For those who haven't been a visit to the Peter & Paul Cathedral is a must
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Jebediha on November 24, 2008, 01:44:01 AM
Is there anybody on this board who belive the Romanovs are saints. And prays to them for miricals ?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Jebediha on November 26, 2008, 06:21:53 PM
I am not really in any religion, But my belief is close to those of Hinduism and Buddhism.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on December 01, 2008, 03:54:02 PM
Of course, Orthodox Christians believe they are Saints.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Jebediha on December 01, 2008, 04:47:36 PM

Well what about peopel that are not Orthodox Christians  ?

Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Rodney_G. on December 01, 2008, 06:02:19 PM
I pretty much believe the IF are saints. I'm certainly not Orthodox Christian so the Orthodox Church's criteria for sainthood are not that important to me. And I wouldn't think of praying to them for miracles. But I guess in the most general sense of the word "saints' I think they are. And martyrs too .
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: XJaseyRaeX on December 01, 2008, 09:32:33 PM
I believe they are saints...im not orthodox...im catholic and i still believe they are
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Ally Kumari on December 02, 2008, 01:29:58 AM
I´m not an Orthodox and I´m not a catholic, I´m from Christian society and we do not pray to saints. Still I believe IF are saints - people, who we look up to as to an example of how not to loose our faith in God, even under very difficult circumstances. I do not pray to them, but I have a really serious respect for them and their martyrdom.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Lalee on December 02, 2008, 02:33:37 AM
I personally believe that it is not exactly the right thing to pray to saints, but only God. I know that the Imperial Family did believe and have faith in God, and that they were good people, but I actually really don't think of them to be saints.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on December 02, 2008, 08:14:18 PM
To clarify about prayer to Saints - one asks the Saint to pray to God - to intercede for us. Just as one might ask a Faithful or Holy person here on Earth to pray for us, the Faithful who are with God are also able to pray for us and intercede on our behalf. We don't ask the Saint to do God's work, but ask them to pray to God for us.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: imperial angel on December 02, 2008, 09:43:10 PM
I believe that Ella was a saint. My friend prays to Ella in the way you describe, Georgiy. I don't pray to Ella or the other Romanovs in that way, since I'm not Russian Orthodox or Catholic etc.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: David Pritchard on December 02, 2008, 10:55:27 PM
I believe than in Orthodox parlance that Emperor Nikolas II and his immediate family are referred to as Holy Martyrs rather than saints, that is believers who were murdered for their faith. On the other hand I believe that Grand Duchess Ella (and please correct me if I am wrong) is a both a Holy Martyr and a Saint with documented miracles.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on December 03, 2008, 01:45:48 PM
Holy martyrs, Passion Bearers, Unmercenaries etc etc are all Saints  in the Orthodox faith.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Jebediha on December 04, 2008, 01:52:57 PM
I believe than in Orthodox parlance that Emperor Nikolas II and his immediate family are referred to as Holy Martyrs rather than saints, that is believers who were murdered for their faith. On the other hand I believe that Grand Duchess Ella (and please correct me if I am wrong) is a both a Holy Martyr and a Saint with documented miracles.

There are stories that the Imperial family have done miricals but i don`t know if they have been documented.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Ally Kumari on December 04, 2008, 02:24:44 PM
Here you can read about Maria´s miracle:

http://www.serfes.org/royal/miracleofmaria.htm
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: nena on December 04, 2008, 03:33:45 PM
I am Orthodox, and I believe they are Saints --- Thanks Ally for the link -- as I said, I have read accounts by some people with miracles of IF.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Romanov_Fan19 on December 21, 2008, 11:35:03 PM
What about afterlife anyone  I Say  They are in Heaven !  im Baptist
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: mcdnab on December 22, 2008, 08:36:09 AM
Personally devout certainly but i've always had rather an issue with the suggestion that they died for their faith! True they were murdered by a regime that was entirely secular and that regime was forceful in trying to wean its citizens from their dependance on any religion, but Nicholas II and his family were murdered because of their secular position.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: clockworkgirl21 on December 22, 2008, 05:52:32 PM
I don't understand why NAOTMAA were made saints, either. They died not for their beliefs, but for their position, as has been said. Why not make other murdered family member saints, too, besides Ella?

It's a little strange to me to think of someone as a saint, especially since all they did was die, and didn't even perform the three miracles needed to be a saint(is that just Catholic sainthood rules?).

Oh, and if I offended anyone, my apologies. I tried to word it as carefully as possible.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: nena on December 22, 2008, 07:47:10 PM
I understand pretty well why they are saints,  for Orthodox Church they are Holly Martyrs – reasons: Their murder was first one before milion others in Russa later.

I know it is strange, we see their photos, they are normal people.

And they were. But they deserved to be Saints, because they had love to their country, in that way they gave their lives if needs. It is big love from their sides to their country. Alexandra Feodorovna didn’t want to  leave Russia. Nicholas II too. It is simply love, despite they knew what might be happen to them. Sure.  Aleksei Nicholaievich was only 13 years old!  And perfectly understood who he was, Heir, and believed in God!

Church and Tsar were close, and after all happens in Russia after that sad period, I think really they deserve Sainthood! Understand better? And miracles really happen! And Ella is saint too. For others because they didn't do something more like Ella and IF.
Don’t forget IF did many good things – opened Churches, canonized Serafim Sarovsky, helped homeless, soliders during War,  and many more..... heh, they died for their position as same time as their beliefs. But position could be different, but beliefs -no! 

And no, you don’t offended me.  I only say what I think.

Nena
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: mcdnab on December 23, 2008, 05:51:06 AM
Just a few points:

It the idea that they were the first ones that causes me some annoyance - they weren't the first people to die during the Russian Revolution and Civil War that followed and they were certainly not the first members of the Imperial Family to die. Nicholas and his family died on the 17 July, his brother Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovitch was almost certainly killed a month earlier around June 12/13th at Perm, and the Constantinovitchi and Ella died shortly after the Imperial family I believe.

Please correct me if I am wrong but they were recognised as martyred saints by the Church outside Russia and they were later recognised by the synod of the Russian Orthodox Church as passion bearers - and both decisions have not been without controversy. My understanding is the passion bearer in Orthodoxy is about the way in which an individual faces death in imitation of Christ.

None of the Imperial family wanted to leave Russia - but my understanding is that after the Abdication Nicholas only refused the urgent urgings for him to leave the country straight away because he wanted to be with his wife and children. once reunited they were relatively willing to leave if they could, sadly the chance was missed.

Nicholas II's decisions as Emperor and Autocrat, egged on by Alexandra were both directly and indirectly responsible for the chaos that Russia descended into and the millions that died as a result. It is perhaps unfair to blame Nicholas absolutely as it is debateable given the circumstance whether anyone would have been able to prevent it but a different more intelligent man might have been more willing to embrace the changes that early 20thCentury needed if it was to avoid chaos.

I don't think any would doubt the personal religious devotion of the Imperial couple and the rest of the Dynasty, though Alexandra's obsession, fervency and dependance on the numerous mystics that headed to the Alexander Palace was hardly conventional Orthodoxy (though I accept that there is a streak of mysticisim within the Russian Church).

Its not for me to dictate to the Russian Orthodox Church who they should or shouldn't chose to be martyrs of course and I certainly don't mean any offence to those practising members of the Orthodox Church who share their churches view on the Imperial Family as Martyrs or Passion Bearers.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: nena on December 23, 2008, 02:31:17 PM
Nicholas didn't refuse to leave Russia because he wanted to stay with wife and children -- there was a chance for all members of IF to escape. It is as I said -- love to their country, where was not not important for them if they had to lost lives because of it. -- It is one respecting thing for Orthodox Church.

And as you mentioned mystic, which is really in Russian nature, complicate thing for understand, we can mention one more word -- symbol. IF was symbol of their nation and country, and protected Church. Remember Church during Soviet era was in hard position.

So IF was victims, and how to say, symbol for thousands more later after 1918, in Church view of happens. (This I mean when I said 'first of milions ...') --and things becomes very clear.

You are right, that passion bearer is way of imitation of Christ's death.

And of course NII and Alix made wrongs, all of us make too. But causes of revolution had been discussed on another thread.

And after 80, 90 'dark' years for some Russians of course they deserve Sainthood and Rehabilitation.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Janet Ashton on December 24, 2008, 04:41:55 AM


I don't think any would doubt the personal religious devotion of the Imperial couple and the rest of the Dynasty, though Alexandra's obsession, fervency and dependance on the numerous mystics that headed to the Alexander Palace was hardly conventional Orthodoxy (though I accept that there is a streak of mysticisim within the Russian Church).



I am taking this thread in a sightly different direction here, but just wanted to observe that religion is one of the areas in which Alexandra - typically - gets a rougher ride than Nicholas. We hear a great deal of her "dependence" on mystics, and yet very little of Nicholas's own dabbling with spiritualism and friends in theosophical circles, associations which started well before his marriage. I'd venture to say that the only "mystic" Alexandra showed real "dependence" on was Rasputin. I do not believe that she was responsible for the introduction of Philippe Nizier-Vachod to their household; nor was Petr Badmaev her protege, despite being described in numerous books as "a friend of Rasputin". He was very much more than that and his association with them pre-dated Rasputin by a long time.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: mcdnab on December 29, 2008, 08:18:31 AM
As I am not Orthodox I wouldn't wish to offend those who are - I think that rehabilitation is a different issue to the religious questions personally I do believe that the whole family were victims of Bolshevik repression (I think Nicholas's situation is different because of his status as monarch and he must bear some responsibility for what was done in his name - however he never had any form of trial and therefore technically he was also a victim)

You said -
"Nicholas didn't refuse to leave Russia because he wanted to stay with wife and children -- there was a chance for all members of IF to escape. It is as I said -- love to their country, where was not not important for them if they had to lost lives because of it. -- It is one respecting thing for Orthodox Church. "

On this point it is worth bearing in mind that there were very few opportunities for Nicholas II and his family to escape Russia after his abdication - however the family were not unwilling to leave if the opportunity presented itself. All the male Romanov's who'd not left St Petersburg during the Provisional Government were placed under arrest after the Bolshevik Revolution only one of them - Prince Gavril Constantinovich escaped due to the intervention of Gorky. The Romanov's in the Crimea left (in the case of the Dowager Empress and Grand Duchess Xenia) under considerable pressure by their own entourage and letters from relatives in Denmark and Britain. As to Nicholas II - at Mogilev after the abdication the Empress Dowager was told to try and persuade her son to leave - she was anxious but was told it was vital for his safety that he left immediately and didn't return to Petrograd he was refusing because he wanted to be with the  Empress and his children.  Once he was imprisoned at the Alexander Palace he, his wife and children were very hopeful for the opportunity to leave Russia and were happy to accept the offer to go to England it was really their only chance of escape - however the offer was withdrawn by the British Government under pressure from George V, by the time the news of the withdrawel of the offer reached the British Ambassador in Petrograd, Kerensky had been forced to offer guarantees to the Soviet that the family wouldn't be allowed to leave Russia, with that their last chance of escape was truly gone. I don't doubt the families love for Russia, but had the opportunity presented itself - that the whole family could leave together - historical facts suggest they would have left. Throughout their exile in Tobolsk and then in Ekaterinburg they appeared to remain hopeful of liberation and escape even if that meant leaving Russia.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: nena on December 29, 2008, 08:41:57 AM
Yes, they were victims of Bolshevik repression. You are right. And thank you for presenting some facts about IF during 1917.

But, keep in minds sometimes we can't depend only to facts!  Firstly, Alexandra F. refused from Germans who wanted to rescue them.

Of course they sometimes wanted to escape. Yes, situation was hard. But after long time living in Russia, IF still wanted to stay in Russia -- as head Family in Russian,a s symbol of country. Now we can say it is ethics, honour adorability and love. And many miracles what happened during these 90 years.

And that Church respects, and knew Revolution didn't bring anything good. 

And I think rehabilitation is just formal thing that they had before to do.
Here are several threads about IF's rescuing, and believe me, I want if they escaped. Murder of 11 people is something....Sad.

And I do believe they are Saints.


Sincerly,
Nena.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Felicia on December 30, 2008, 12:03:05 PM
I'm an Orthodox but I'm not very religious and the religion interests me from hystorical point of view. 
I think that they are saints, but I don't pray to them, because of the reason in the sentence before.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Multiverse on January 06, 2009, 10:00:25 AM
I hope this is the proper thread for this.

Wouldn't today (January 6 Gregorian Calendar) be Christmas Day in The Russian Orthodox Church?

My understanding is that The Russian Orthodox Church still uses the "old style" Julian Calendar which is off from the "new style" Gregorian Calendar by about 2 weeks, and certainly in Nicholas II's time they were on The old Julian Calendar. I had always heard that because of this The Russian Orthodox Church celebrates Christmas when those on The Gregorian Calendar are on January 6. Please correct me if I'm wrong but that's what I always heard and read.

If that is true then I guess today is when The Imperial Family would have celebrated Christmas.

So Merry Christmas to them and to all of you.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: imperial angel on January 06, 2009, 10:36:12 AM
In the western world, Jan 6th used to be ( still technically is, but I guess people don't pay attention anymore) the last day of Christmas didn't it? Jan 6th was the last day of the 12 days of Christmas, like the old song. So it's technically the last day of Christmas for us, but it would be interesting if today was the day the Imperial family celebrated Christmas. I believe Jan 5th is 12th night.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: nena on January 08, 2009, 06:12:37 AM
In Orthodox Religion, we celebrate Christmas on Janaury 7th.  ;) . Russia accepted 'new style' -- Gregorian Calendar in 1918 or 1919, I am not sure, but Church still uses 'old style' -- Julian Calendar. Difference is 13 days.

Thank you Multiverse!
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Sarushka on January 08, 2009, 08:18:22 AM
This site will "translate" between old and new style dates:

http://5ko.free.fr/en/jul.php?y=2009 (http://5ko.free.fr/en/jul.php?y=2009)

Just make sure you've clicked on the proper year -- the difference between the calendars has changed over the centuries. (For example, in 1895 Olga was born on 3/15 November, but in the 20th and 21st centuries the date has shifted to 3/16 November.)
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Olga Maria on January 30, 2009, 02:47:07 PM
My conscience always intervenes whenever I read the OTMA say in their letters such things as "God will look over us", etc. So Inspiring.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: RomanovMartyrs on September 15, 2009, 03:17:11 AM
I believe that yes, they were Saints.

It is interesting to read the other comments here, that argue against the case for Romanovs being saints. And I think in historical context, the argument is legitimate; Nicholas the Second was a weak ruler who let unfortunate things happen to some of his citizens. However when looking at Sainthood (martyr-hood, what have you), one takes into account the person's (in this case family's) way of life, whether they believed and followed Christ in their daily lives, whether they were charitable, humble, and kind. I would like to think that for an Imperial family, the last Romanovs were quite unique in their humility. And their clear love of country and people through the good deeds mentioned by others above in this thread, seals the deal, at least for me.

Then again, everyone is entitled to their own opinion; probably I respect Rasputin a good deal more than most as well.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: RomanovMartyrs on September 15, 2009, 06:48:12 AM
Having just returned from a fabulous week in St Petersburg I am currently working my way through Helen Rappaport's compelling book Ekaterinburg - which includes a photograph of an icon of the Romanov family as the 'Holy Passion Bearers'. Has anyone any idea where this icon can be acquired? For those who haven't been a visit to the Peter & Paul Cathedral is a must


I have seen quite a few icons fitting the description you've given. I personally got one off of ebay, direct from St. Petersburg. Here's what it looks like:

(http://i92.photobucket.com/albums/l23/lizziethelezzie/icon.jpg)

Try ebay or http://archangelsbooks.com/proddetail.asp?prod=NTW-0926

Hope that helps!


I love this thread by the way, it's a very interesting read. I'm sad to see it's died down recently.

I have a question for those of you who are Orthodox, or know much about the rituals of visiting relics...I am Orthodox myself, but have never visited relics, so I don't know proper procedure. Are you supposed to follow a more strict practice of fasting beforehand? (Other than the given Weds. Fri.) Thanks in advance, if someone answers.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Mimì on September 15, 2009, 08:26:45 AM
I'm quite doubtful on this point: of course they were murdered because of their social position, but they also represented a concrete example of monarchy with strong religious basis and this may have formed an ideal for the anti-revolutionaries. I think this was the real cause: I don't think Nicholas would have organized a conspiration to have back his power, he always dreamed of a quiet life, and Alexei couldn't be a real danger for the red regime: maybe he would even have died young without children. All the others were women and couldn't inherit the throne. But the imperial family in "prison" could turn into a sort of symbol of oppressed Russian people. This is why they killed them.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: NurseVickie on September 15, 2009, 10:13:27 AM
I believe they are Saints and I am not Orthodox.  I am Mormon.  I believe that they are many that are Saints that we are not aware of.  I believe that they are many many things that we are not aware of.  We must be respectful of each other and our many different beliefs or lack thereof. There are many on the other side of the veil that are working for our good.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Georgiy on September 15, 2009, 09:41:44 PM
I have never heard of any specific rules. Have been blessed to be able to venerate many Relics, and even look after some, but have never fasted outside normal fasting times for this.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: MarshallHowell on May 01, 2010, 09:10:00 PM
Just a question for an Orthodox Christian, do you believe in Salvation as a free gift that is accepted? I suppose what I am trying to say is do you ask Christ to be your personal Lord and Savior or do you believe that heaven is a result of good works?
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Ilias_of_John on May 01, 2010, 10:20:32 PM
Just a question for an Orthodox Christian, do you believe in Salvation as a free gift that is accepted? I suppose what I am trying to say is do you ask Christ to be your personal Lord and Savior or do you believe that heaven is a result of good works?

Both.
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: matushka on June 13, 2010, 02:02:47 AM
Indeed both. In theology it is called "synergy", convergent action of the grace of the Lord acting in the person and the personnal efforts of the individual to let this grace habite him and act in him.
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: violetta on October 18, 2010, 05:29:14 PM
I wonder if GD MIKHAIL PAVLOVICH & GD ELENA PAVLOVNA were first cousins?  didn`t konstantin konstantinovich KR marry his first cousin, i.e.his mother`s niece?
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: Naslednik Norvezhskiy on October 18, 2010, 06:29:51 PM
I wonder if GD MIKHAIL PAVLOVICH & GD ELENA PAVLOVNA were first cousins?
First cousins once removed.

Quote
didn`t konstantin konstantinovich KR marry his first cousin, i.e.his mother`s niece?
No, he and his wife were second cousins.
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: Kalafrana on October 19, 2010, 07:23:12 AM
The Deceased Wife's Sister's Marriage Act 1907 allowed a man to marry his deceased wife's sister. The Deceased Husband's Brother's Marriage Act 1921 then allowed a woman to marry her deceased husband's brother, and the timing does suggest a link with the First World War.

Interestingly, as well as my maternal grandparents being first cousins, not only were their respective mothers sisters, the other two sisters both married the same man!

Ann
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: violetta on February 04, 2011, 06:43:18 PM
GD Ekaterina Pavlovna also married her first cousin Wilhel of Wuerttemberg,didn`t she? I think that Wilhelm was Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna`s nephew? If so, why didn`t orthodox church object?
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: Sara Araújo on February 04, 2011, 07:30:11 PM
Probably because she married two protestant first-cousins. :)
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: violetta on February 05, 2011, 04:19:54 AM
But neither Beatrice of Coburg nor Victoria Melita were orthodox but the Imperial family objected to the marriages. While Victoria Melita`s situation (a divorcee) was quite understandable according to the moral standards of the day, Beatrice was deemed unacceptale as well. GD Mikhail and Beatrice were supposed to part. But in 1816 GD Catherine was allowed to marry Wilhelm of Wuerttemberg.  She was not a heir to the throne due to Salic law and she was to reign in Wuertteberg so the approach towards her marriage wasn`t so strict? I would be curious to have this contradiction explained.
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: Sara Araújo on February 05, 2011, 05:21:13 AM
I don't think the marriage laws were milder to Catherine as her first marriage was actually arranged by her mother and not of her choice. If Beatrice or Melita married Mikhail and Cyrill, they would have to perform the ceremony into the Orthodox Church and it is the Orthodox Church that does not allow the union between first-cousins. On the other hand for Catherine to marry her first-cousin, the ceremony was performed into the Protestant Church and the Protestant Church does not put objections to such a match, so technically there's no problem if a Grand Duchess wants to marry a first-cousin of a different religion, the problem only comes if a Princess of a different religion wants to marry an Orthodox first-cousin. Basically it's not absolutely impossible to a Grand Duke or a Grand Duchess to marry a first-cousin, the Orthodox Church would just not recognize the union... and that would be easier to accept in a woman, who was suppose to submit to her husband's culture, than to the man, who was supposed to be the lord and master of the house.  :)
Title: Re: Cousin Marriage
Post by: Kalafrana on February 05, 2011, 09:35:29 AM
Bear in mind that at the time Mikhail wished to marry Beatrice of Coburg he was Nicholas's immediate heir presumptive. For him to contract a marriage which was not recognised by the Orthodox Church was politically impossible.

Ann
Title: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: Griae on March 14, 2011, 03:56:47 AM
Good morning to you all

I do not know if this question has already been asked, I could not find it anywhere. And if I posted this in the wrong section I apologise.

My question concerns the religion of the Imperial Family and why they usually only married with foreign princesses who were Protestant, rather than Roman Catholic.

I get the impression that the foreign princesses had to convert to Orthodoxy when they married into the Imperial Family.
Is it that Protestants are more likely to convert than Catholics? (I do not know if it is, it is just an idea)
Or is it easier for them to convert because there are more similarities between Orthodoxy and Protestantism than between Orthodoxy and Catholicism?
Or are there other reasons?

Was it completely impossible to marry a Roman Catholic bride, or just unlikely?

Thanks for your answers.

Kind regards, Bettina
Title: Re: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: Kalafrana on March 14, 2011, 11:24:17 AM
I will happily bow to those with greater religious knowledge than me, but I think, generally, there was a greater reluctance among Catholics to convert. The only example I'm aware of where a Catholic was considered as a potential bride for a Romanov was Helene of Orleans with the future Nicholas II. The plan foundered when her father refused to allow her to convert, and a plan for her to marry Albert Victor of Clarence came to nothing for the same reason (though the pair were apparently in love).

Ann
Title: Re: A Question of Marriage and Religion
Post by: Naslednik Norvezhskiy on March 14, 2011, 11:38:19 AM
I will happily bow to those with greater religious knowledge than me, but I think, generally, there was a greater reluctance among Catholics to convert.

One reason for that was probably that Catholics subjected themselves to a rather obstinate Pope, while both the post-Petrine Russian Orthodox and the Protestant Churches were controlled by monarchs who could put state interests before denominational pride.

A rare example of a Romanov (albeit a female one) marrying a Catholic (but she kept her religion) was Grand Duchess Alexandra Pavlovna, who married Archduke Joseph of Austria, Palatine of Hungary. Ironically she was the intended bride of Gustav IV of Sweden, who broke off the engagement upon learning of her refusal to convert.
Title: Re: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: bestfriendsgirl on March 14, 2011, 02:23:16 PM
Actually, only the wife of the Tsarevich or Tsar was required to be Russian Orthodox. Wives of Grand Dukes could retain their religion if they chose. GD Ella did not convert to Orthodoxy from Lutheranism until they had been married for some time, and IIRC, GD Vladimir did not convert.
Title: Re: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: Griae on March 15, 2011, 02:42:53 AM
Thank you all so much for your anwers, it is so much clearer for me now.

Just one question, if the wifes and husbands Grand Dukes and Grand Duchesses did not have to convert, could they (in theory at least) marry a Roman Catholic?

thanks again,

kind regards, Bettina
Title: Re: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: Svetabel on March 15, 2011, 04:09:26 AM
Thank you all so much for your anwers, it is so much clearer for me now.

Just one question, if the wifes and husbands Grand Dukes and Grand Duchesses did not have to convert, could they (in theory at least) marry a Roman Catholic?

thanks again,

kind regards, Bettina

Grand Duchess Alexandra Pavlovna, daughter of Pavel I, married a Catholic, Archduke Joseph.
Title: Re: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: Naslednik Norvezhskiy on March 15, 2011, 04:12:32 AM
Did Maximilian of Leuchtenberg also remain a Catholic after he had married Maria Nikolayevna?
Title: Re: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: Griae on March 15, 2011, 07:38:39 AM
If only the wife of the tsar and the tsarevich had to be (or become) Orthodox, was this because of the laws for the inheritance of the throne? (I am not sure how to put that in correct English, I am sorry)
I read somewhere that a tsar had to have an Orthodox mother and an Orthodox wife, is this correct?

Am I correct to think that if a tsar or a tsarevich would convert to another religion, this would disqualify them as tsar? Being orthodox was, as I understand it, an integral part of being a tsar, you could not be one, without the other.

Were there ever any members of the Imperial Family who converted to another religion?

On the note of members of the Imperial Family marrying people with other religions: Anna Pavlona married King Willem II of the Netherlands, and she kept her Orthodox religion, even had an Orthodox chapel. This was something that was a bit frowned upon by the very Calvinistic Dutch and the Royal family of the Netherlands. They thought it was all a bit too weird, foreign and almost Catholic for their taste, with the candles and icons etc.

kind regards, Bettina

Title: Re: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: bestfriendsgirl on March 15, 2011, 08:22:06 AM
That would be my assumption, since the Tsar is the head of the Orthodox church.  IIRC, in the British royal family, the monarch is required to be a member of the Church of England, but all other British subjects are free to worship as they please.
Title: Re: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: Naslednik Norvezhskiy on March 15, 2011, 08:43:48 AM
Article 63 of the Fundamental Laws of the Russian Empire says:
Император, Престолом Всероссийским обладающий, не может исповедывать никакой иной веры, кроме Православной.
=
The Emperor who occupies the Throne of All the Russias cannot profess any Faith other than the Orthodox.

Part two of the Fundamental Laws, the Statute of the Imperial Family says:

183. На брак каждого лица Императорского Дома необходимо соизволение царствующего Императора, и брак, без соизволения сего совершенный, законным не признается.
=
183. Permission of the reigning emperor is necessary for the marriage of every Member of the Imperial House, and a marriage contracted without such permission is not recognized as lawful.

184. По соизволению царствующего Императора, Члены Императорского Дома могут вступать в брак, как с особами православного исповедания, так и с иноверными.
=
184. With the permission of the reigning emperor, members of the Imperial House can enter into marriage both with persons of the Orthodox Faith and with persons of other denominations.

185. Брак мужеского лица Императорского Дома, могущего иметь право на наследование Престола, с особою другой веры совершается не иначе, как по восприятии ею православного исповедания.
=
The marriage of a male person of the Imperial House who may have the right of succeeding to the Throne with a person of another faith can take place only after she has embraced the Orthodox confession.

The whole original in Russian: Основные Законы Российской Империи. (http://ru.wikisource.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D1%81%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D0%97%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%8B_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%98%D0%BC%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B8#.D0.A0.D0.B0.D0.B7.D0.B4.D0.B5.D0.BB_.D0.92.D0.A2.D0.9E.D0.A0.D0.9E.D0.99._.D0.A3.D1.87.D1.80.D0.B5.D0.B6.D0.B4.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B5_.D0.BE_.D0.98.D0.BC.D0.BF.D0.B5.D1.80.D0.B0.D1.82.D0.BE.D1.80.D1.81.D0.BA.D0.BE.D0.B9_.D0.A4.D0.B0.D0.BC.D0.B8.D0.BB.D0.B8.D0.B8.)

Article 185 was evidently only applied to the heir closest to the throne, the Heir-Tsesarevich.
Title: Re: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: Naslednik Norvezhskiy on March 15, 2011, 09:29:15 AM
Article 185 was evidently only applied to the heir closest to the throne, the Heir-Tsesarevich.

The inspiration/basis for this limited interpretation might be interpreted as coming from Article 35, which deals with the religious requirement should the Throne, upon the extinction of the agnatic line, pass via the cognatic line to another reigning house:

Когда наследство дойдет до такого поколения женского, которое царствует уже на другом Престоле, тогда наследующему лицу предоставляется избрать веру и Престол, и отрешись вместе с Наследником от другой веры и Престола, если таковой Престол связан с законом; когда же отрицания от веры не будет, то наследует то лице, которое за сим ближе по порядку. Там же.
=
When the succession reaches a female branch which is already reigning on another throne, it is left to the person who succeeds to make a choice of faith and throne and, together with that person's heir, to renounce the other faith and throne, if such a throne is tied with a religious denomination; if there is no renunciation of faith, the succession passes to the person next in order.

There is no explicit demand for other members of the IF to profess Orthodoxy or ban against baptism or conversion into another faith, so in theory it was possible, although it would have caused a major scandal and probably would have led to the Emperor issuing an autocratic manifesto or ukase stripping them of membership of the IF, considering that the whole point of the IF was to provide heirs to Throne, whose occupant had to be Orthodox. There was of course also an issue with the oaths of loyalty male members of the IF had to swear to the Emperor, I don't know if they demanded the oath-taker to be Orthodox.
Title: Re: a question of marriage and religion
Post by: Naslednik Norvezhskiy on March 15, 2011, 10:06:52 AM
That would be my assumption, since the Tsar is the head of the Orthodox church.

What a blasphemic thing to say. According to Article 64 of the Fundamental Laws:
Император, яко Христианский Государь, есть верховный защитник и хранитель догматов господствующей веры, и блюститель правоверия и всякого в Церкви святой благочиния.
=
The emperor, as a Christian sovereign, is the supreme defender and guardian of the dogmas of the predominant faith and watches over the purity of Faith and all good order in the holy Church.

Sounds more like a custodian than a pope! :-)
Title: Cherubic Hymn - Liturgical Music listened to by the Imperial Family
Post by: MashkaShvybz4 on April 23, 2015, 04:51:25 AM
I heard the IF particularly liked the Cherubic Hymn, but looking it up on YouTube there are so many different versions, I was wondering if anyone could give me a link to the one they would have listened to? Thanks!
Title: Re: Romanovs and Faith/Orthodox Religion
Post by: Jeremiah on August 06, 2017, 12:33:48 PM
Hi, I wanted to ask you if you know whether I could find on any of the threads the daily program of praying in the Romanov Imperial family. I'm interested in learning about their religious life as whole, not on an individual level. Thanks.