Author Topic: Did Nicholas II Have any Illegitimate Children (Read 113379 times)

AGRBear · « **Reply #30 on:** July 11, 2005, 08:46:10 PM »

Keep the smelling salt handy!

I guess some of you have never heard of the gypsy island in the middle of some St. Petersburg river where the young Nicholas II, his brothers, and cousins visited and sowed their wild oats from time to time.

I bet there is more royal Russian blood lushing around in descendants of the gyspies who entertained the royals and other nobles on that particular island than in most royals today...

AGRBear

Finelly · « **Reply #31 on:** July 11, 2005, 08:51:57 PM »

I heard of it and was actually thinking about just that when I first posted about him having a few flings.........I think it was almost a badge of honor.....

AGRBear · « **Reply #32 on:** July 11, 2005, 09:04:28 PM »

All to often poster today try to build and image around people, like Nicholas II, without really understanding the differences of the time period in which he and others lived.

What was perfectly acceptable in his time is quite different than what is acceptable today in your own personal world.

AGRBear

lexi4 · « **Reply #33 on:** July 11, 2005, 10:38:12 PM »

Bingo Bear.

Georgiy · « **Reply #34 on:** July 12, 2005, 04:26:08 PM »

however, I wonder whether due to his deep Orthodox faith he would have actually done this. It is pure speculation on our behalf. I will not say it is impossible though. Everyone does things from time to time their consience says they shouldn't. If he took Orthodoxy as seriously as he seems to have done however, I would think the possibility of 'wild oat sowing' becomes more and more remote.

Finelly · « **Reply #35 on:** July 12, 2005, 04:27:37 PM »

Well, I think it's safe to say that lots of people with deep faith do things like that......

One has only to look at KR, who lived a solid family life and was deeply religious, yet had that pesky homosexual thing going on on the side......

Georgiy · « **Reply #36 on:** July 12, 2005, 05:19:52 PM »

That's why I say I don't discount the possibility, however I think it is highly unlikely. How discrete he'd have had to have been.

lexi4 · « **Reply #37 on:** July 12, 2005, 07:42:09 PM »

I think it is very likely that Nicholas "sewed wild oats." And I don't see why it is a big deal if he did. Gypsy Island is a good point to make. Plus he did travel with his friends, who knows what happened on those trips. It was acceptable for him to have done so. What difference does this make anyway?

Robert_Hall · « **Reply #38 on:** July 12, 2005, 07:50:59 PM »

gee, it might tarnish his halo, heaven forbid !

Romanov_Fan19 · « **Reply #39 on:** July 12, 2005, 08:23:54 PM »

I Think this story is False

Georgiy · « **Reply #40 on:** July 12, 2005, 08:51:00 PM »

Why is it a big deal? Because in the Orthodox Church that kind of thing is for a husband and wife only. It is in a very real way a binding of souls, because in marriage two people are made into one person. In a very real way, if we 'sleep' with someone, we have become eternally a part of that person.

Now of course there are people, including 'nominally' Orthodox, and probably even fairly sincere Orthodox who have not kept themselves pure until marriage, but that is something that will always be on their consience until it is Confessed.

Whether he did such things or not is irrelevant to his Sainthood, so even if he did it doesn't tarnish his halo. One of the most beloved of all our Saints is Saint Mary of Egypt who became a harlot at twelve, but later repented.

Robert_Hall · « **Reply #41 on:** July 12, 2005, 09:09:36 PM »

I meant that comment tonque in cheek, Georgiy.

Georgiy · « **Reply #42 on:** July 12, 2005, 10:27:04 PM »

Oh, don't worry about that! I am sure that there are people, usually not Orthodox who tend to deify. However, Saints were human. Some lived exemplary lives, others achieved Sainthood through their deaths, some were 'better' as it were than others, but they were all human and were not necessarily always 'saintly' from the start.

lexi4 · « **Reply #43 on:** July 12, 2005, 10:35:41 PM »

Quote

I meant that comment tonque in cheek, Georgiy.

And I appreciate your humor, Robert.

Finelly · « **Reply #44 on:** July 13, 2005, 12:18:28 AM »

He's a saint because of the way he died. Not because of the way he lived.

News: