The coronation of the Holy Royal Passion Bearer Czar Nicholas II
The Infant God
5 hours ago
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
St. John of San Francisco
Orthodox Information & Resources
Orthodox Blogs
-
-
-
-
-
-
A Clear Vision of Eternity3 weeks ago
-
-
Stories2 months ago
-
-
Non-Orthodox Blogs
-
Little Jesus, Wast Thou Shy?37 minutes ago
-
-
The Word Became Flesh, What to Do?2 hours ago
-
-
Guéranger on the Mystery of Christmas3 hours ago
-
-
-
-
Greatness. . .5 hours ago
-
Politics Economics Culture & Miscellaneous Blogs
Don't blame me... I voted for George (the Third)
-
Who Invented the Ukulele?56 minutes ago
-
The morning read for Tuesday, Dec. 242 hours ago
-
-
The Biggest Math Story of 20247 hours ago
-
Festive Us: 192220 hours ago
-
Jane Austen’s Christmases1 day ago
-
-
-
-
Escaping the News Encourages Tyranny4 weeks ago
Miscellaneous Sites of Interest
The Blog Yard
Where the best blogs go when they die...
Gone But Not Forgotten
-
-
-
-
A Dozen Years5 years ago
-
-
Moving day6 years ago
-
-
MY FELLOW AMERICANS8 years ago
-
Ten Years is a Long Run…9 years ago
-
Atom / RSS
5 comments:
Splendid pictures, Eric-John. Thank you so much for sharing.
I can well appreciate venerating Nicholas for the trials he and his family endured; but is he to be held unaccountable for his own actions that contributed to the catastrophe, specifically his call for conscription in 1914 (which was a domino that, had it not been tipped by him, would have stop others from tipping), as well as the abdication itself?
Stephen,
Saints are not usually canonized for their politics. In the case of St. Nicholas II he is venerated for the sanctity of his personal life and the Christian humility with which he bore the sufferings of his last days.
As for his politics, military conscription had been a fact of life in Russia for centuries. It was instituted by Czar Peter the (not so) Great. I do not believe there has ever been a time in modern Russian history where there was not military conscription.
His abdication was controversial, but given the times it might have been for the best except of course that the manner in which it was done was illegal. He attempted to bypass his son in the line of succession.
In ICXC
John
Sorry, I meant to say mobilization, not conscription. That he ordered the mobilization was one of a very few actions of which it could be said "if that wasn't done, there would have been no WWI at that time". He could have prevented Russia's involvement in the war, and saved his people and his land. Strange how he is held so unaccountable for this. He may have endured his suffering admirably, but to have brought such suffering on his wife, children and nation is less than saintly. And, while some saints are not canonzied for their politics, their canonization can certainly be political, and have huge political ramifications. Such as his, as you know, which obfuscates his guilt for the war, and the blood on his hands of his family and of All the Russias.
Post a Comment