← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · seq
Thread ID: 4921 | Posts: 7 | Started: 2003-02-11
2003-02-11 03:35 | User Profile
**Orthodoxy riled over 'St. Rasputin' **
By Julius Strauss
LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH
MOSCOW ââ¬â A bitter rift has opened in the Russian Orthodox Church over a campaign to canonize Rasputin and Ivan the Terrible.
The campaign, which leading Orthodox officials have sought to quash, is spearheaded by a growing revisionist movement in the church.
It believes that Grigori Rasputin, a notoriously dissolute Siberian monk who was murdered by two royalists in 1916 because of his growing influence over Empress Alexandra, was the victim of a Jewish conspiracy.
The movement also contends that Ivan the Terrible, who killed hundreds of priests and even his son in the 16th century, was a deeply religious and humble man who showed great mercy to his enemies. . . . Many of them believe that Tsar Nicholas II, who was canonized in 2000, should have his status raised to that of co-redeemer, which would put him on a par with Christ.
The movement is strongly anti-Semitic, a potent force in Russia in the 19th century.
One pamphlet written to popularize the sect talks of Rasputin's "bodily wounds and a ferocious death from the Jews."
In an official statement issued in 2001, Patriarch Alexy II said of the canonization campaign: "This is madness. What believer would want to stay in a church that equally venerates murderers and martyrs, lechers and saints?"
[url=http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030209-5611752.htm]http://www.washtimes.com/world/20030209-5611752.htm[/url]
2003-02-14 00:24 | User Profile
Just wondering does anyone know anything about Grigori Rasputin?
Was Grigori Rasputin a Pervert? Or was it all just lies put out by anti-Rasputinists?
2003-02-14 00:47 | User Profile
TSAR NICHOLAS II AND HIS FRIEND
by Susan Walker
Nicholas II, the last Tsar of Russia, began his reign in 1894 in the midst of nationwide turmoil. The Romanov dynasty, with both good and bad rulers, had been on the throne of Russia since 1613. Nicholas II, son of Tsar Alexander Ill, was heir not only to the Russian throne but also to peasants with a hunger for land. Some, however, were on the verge of bankruptcy. The nobility did not have a clearly defined social role, and the church was ineffective in meeting spiritual needs. All of these internal difficulties, accompanied by foreign alliances with powers such as Germany, could prove disastrous for even the best of leaders.
Nicholas saw himself as unfit for the challenge that lay ahead. Following the sudden death of his father in 1894, Nicholas told a boyhood friend "I am not prepared to be Czar. I never wanted to become one. I know nothing of the business of ruling."(1) Once he had ascended to his rightful place, he continued to dislike the duties his position entailed. However, he did not give up. He upheld the belief that the Almighty God had given him the throne; and therefore, his given duty was to protect it and pass the throne on with the powers intact. Nicholas' thoughts were totally out of character with the twentieth century. He believed that the prosperity and continuance of Russia was hinged upon autocracy, the unlimited power of the Tsar. He had total faith in the age-old formula which "reduced the essential elements of the Russian empire to three: Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality."(2) These sacred beliefs left little, if any, room for the development of new ideas or Russian progress. Nicholas' close minded and weak nature was, in essence, the beginning of the downfall of himself, his family, and his nation.
Nicholas was married in 1894 to Alix of Hesse-Darmstadt, also called Alexandra. She and their five children were a constant source of happiness to Nicholas. The first four children were daughters, and although they were loved deeply, the Imperial couple longed for a male heir. Finally, in 1904, the tsarevich Alexis was born. However, when the child was six weeks old, he was discovered to be a hemophiliac. Any bruise the child received caused almost uncontrollable bleeding and terrifying pain. The health of young Alexis was kept a secret from the outside world. It was this secret that brought to the Imperial family what was most likely the signing of their own death warrant: Rasputin.
Rasputin was an illiterate Siberian peasant. To some, he was a pervert who would bring about the downfall of the Russian Empire. To others, he was a holy man on a mission to save the Romanov dynasty. He believed staunchly in the Khlysty philosophy, a sect, which believed that "salvation could be attained only by total repentance" and that this became far more achievable for one who had truly transgressed. Their motto was "Sin in order that you may obtain forgiveness."(3) How did this man, whose name literally means "the dissolute", come to the Imperial family? It was rumored that this "Man of God" had prophesied the birth of little Alexis and had been blessed with the power of healing.
Rasputin arrived in St. Petersburg as a starets--a "Holy Man" who lived in poverty and solitude. He offered himself as a guide to others in their moments of suffering and distress. The Grand Duchess Militsa eventually persuaded the Grand Duke Nicholas, the Tsar's cousin, to introduce Rasputin to the Tsar and Tsarina for the sake of the child. Rasputin impressed the Empress immediately, and therefore, became the key he used to reach the Tsar. Rasputin gained entrance to the empire when he stopped the bleeding of the tsarevich Alexis. It is not known exactly how he was able to do what the doctors could not, but it is common belief that he "used his extraordinary eyes to hypnotize the Tsarevich and then, with the boy in a hypnotic state, suggested that the bleeding would stop."(4) Whatever method he may have used, the bleeding stopped. This is all that was needed to win favor with the Empress.
Alexandra was a strong believer in the Orthodox faith, and she believed that Rasputin was the "'man of God' sent by Providence to protect the life of the future Emperor of Holy Russia."(5) Nicholas viewed Rasputin in somewhat of a different light. He saw Rasputin as a personification of the Russian people. Nicholas accepted Rasputin as a holy man but more importantly, believed that he was connected to the millions of Russian peasants through him. Ironically, Rasputin had in fact become a wedge between the Tsar and his people.
Tsar Nicholas was an isolated man. His life consisted of his work, his family, and of course, Rasputin. Perhaps it was the isolation that made the Tsar even more receptive to the advice of the Empress and her entourage. One of the Empress' ladies-in-waiting, Baroness Buxhoevedon, stated "from Alexandra's intense love for her son, grew her faith in Rasputin the healer."(6) This obsessive trust had disastrous results.
At first, Rasputin did not attract public attention. He had the ability to mask himself in the shroud of innocence. However, he did not fool everyone as he fooled the royal family. One person who was particularly opposed to him was Prime Minister Peter Stolypin. In 1911, Stolypin warned Nicholas that the Imperial family's connection to Rasputin was undermining popular support. Stolypin then ordered Rasputin to leave the capital, thus making the Empress furious. In the same year, Stolypin was murdered. Although no evidence was found to prove Rasputin was involved, he was, nevertheless, pleased at Stolypin's demise. The more Rasputin was attacked, the more the Tsar and Empress supported him. Rasputin was their "Friend," a term used by both Nicholas and Alexandra.
Between the years of 1914 and 1917, Nicholas made mention of "Our Friend" twenty-two times in the letters he sent his wife while he was away at the battle front. These letters reflect the extent of Rasputin's influence. In a letter dated September 9, 1916, Nicholas asked his wife's advice and the opinion of "Our Friend" on governmental matters. Alexandra faithfully passed on Rasputin's advice to her husband. Despite many warnings by other government officials, Nicholas listened and often acted accordingly, believing that what Rasputin said was the will of God.(7)
Rasputin became the guiding influence behind the throne. Although he had no official position in the government, the children's English tutor Charles Gibbes proclaimed, "it was enough that he had the Imperial favor."(8) Rasputin entered the Tsar's life in 1905, two weeks after the signing of the October Manifesto. This document was designed to give the people their civil rights, freedom of speech, and a Duma with legislative powers. Nicholas signed this first "Constitution" in an attempt to crush the rebellion in the country. Nicholas' tragedy, however, was "that he would be remembered more for Rasputin than for the October Manifesto."(9)
Despite Rasputin's influence, Russia went through a period of recovery and prosperity between the years of 1907 and 1914. Industrial developments progressed, foreign investments in coal and oil increased, and public health and education advanced. However, at the beginning of World War I in 1914, the situation changed drastically. It was at this time that Rasputin made a startling prediction: "If Russia goes to war, it will be the end of the monarchy, of the Romanovs and of Russian institutions."(10) During the war, and through Alexandra, Rasputin played a large role in military matters about which he knew little. In a letter to Nicholas, Alexandra wrote "Obey your firm little wife and Our Friend."(11)
In August, 1915, Nicholas committed what was considered to be the greatest mistake in his reign. He dismissed his cousin, the Grand Duke Nicholas, from supreme command of the national army and assumed the office himself. This was followed by defeat after defeat for the Russians on the front lines, and home affairs began to unravel quickly as well.(12) This was not, however, the only position change during this crucial time. Rasputin completely controlled the appointment of ministerial posts, and during the first two years of World War I, "four Chairmen of the Council of Ministers passed through the political arena, as well as six Ministers of the Interior, three Ministers of War, and three Ministers of Foreign Affairs."(13) Alexandra's letters also showed that Rasputin had his own ideas about taxes, the food shortage, and the hiring and firing of church officials. The fate of the Empire was literally in his hands. This fact is shown in a letter dated September 7,1916, written to Tsar Nicholas from his wife:
Do listen to him [Rasputin], who only wants your good and whom God has given more insight, wisdom, and enlightenment than all the military put together. His love for you and Russia is so intense and God has sent him to be your help and guide you and he prays so hard for you.(14)
Needless to say, the war began to wreak unbelievable havoc upon Russia. Blockades were established on Russian ports by the Central Powers, transportation was shut down, cities continued to experience food and fuel shortages, and the cost of living continually rose. By 1916, many of the Russian people had lost hope of a victory and feared that a revolution would occur soon after the war. The political situation was so critical that in Petrograd, there was talk of coups and of "removing the empress to a convent and sending Rasputin to Siberia or even of disposing of the emperor and proclaiming a regency for Alexis."(15)
As the decay of the tsarist regime became utterly apparent, action had to be taken. Prince Felix Youssoupov, husband of the Tsar's niece, along with Grand Duke Dmetri Pavlovich and a staunch right-wing conservative named V.M. Purishkevitch decided to murder Rasputin. These three were motivated by the desire to save the monarchy from further deterioration.(16)
On December 30, 1916, Prince Youssoupov invited Rasputin to his house to meet his wife, Irma. A midnight supper was fixed, and Rasputin made himself at home. During the first few minutes of the visit, Rasputin gulped down two glasses of wine and two cakes, all of which had been poisoned. However, the poison seemed to have no effect on him. Prince Youssoupov ran upstairs to ask his accomplices what to do. Dmetri Pavlovich handed him a revolver. The Prince returned to the dining room and shot Rasputin in the back after warning him to say a prayer. Dr. Lazovert, who had mixed the poison, pronounced Rasputin dead. Minutes later, however, Rasputin opened his eyes and struggled to his feet. The Prince ran up the stairs when Rasputin lunged towards him and yelled "Purishkevitch, fire, fire. He's alive, he's getting away."(17) Purishkevich chased Rasputin out in the snow and fired several shots before battering Rasputin's body with his fists and feet. The three wrapped. Rasputin in a curtain and took him to the Neva River and pushed his body through a hole in the ice. Two days later, the body was recovered and an autopsy was performed. The cause of death was ruled as a drowning which meant "Rasputin was still alive when he was thrown into the river."(18)
Rasputin was buried in the imperial park, and an icon was placed on his chest signed by the Tsar and his family. The murder was accompanied by "hopeful schemes such as to persuade the Emperor to resign as commander-in-chief, or to form a new Cabinet chosen for ability and integrity rather than loyalty to Rasputin."(19) However, the plan failed because Nicholas would still not listen.
Nicholas did not make any particular changes in Petrograd or Russia that were contrary to the pre-established wishes of Rasputin. Therefore, the murder seemed to have achieved nothing. However, the "holy man's" uncanny gift of prophecy continued. Shortly before the murder, Rasputin sent a letter to the Tsar. In the letter Rasputin warned the Tsar:
Czar of the land of Russia, if you hear the sound of the bell which will tell you that Grigori has been killed, you must know this: if it was your relations who have wrought my death, then no one of your family, that is to say none of your children or relations, will remain alive for more than two years. They will be killed by the Russian people.(20)
In time, this prophecy was to come true. In February of 1917, the revolution began. To many people, the February Revolution appeared both inside and outside of Russia as "the gentlest revolution of all time. It was unanimous in the sense that all Russians felt the Tsar must go."(21) On March 15, 1917, Nicholas II yielded and abdicated the throne. The Duma then formed two revolutionary institutions: the Soviets representing the victorious revolutionary mob, and the Provisional Government consisting of moderate liberals. With these institutions, "Imperial Russia simply rotted away from the centre outward until the shell fell in."(22)
Less than a week after his abdication, Nicholas was taken to Tsarskoe Selo where he was rejoined with his family at the palace. They remained there until August 1, 1917, when they were transferred by the Provisional Government to Tobolsk, Siberia, because of threats made on their safety. In April of 1918, the family was placed at the Ipatiev House, translated to mean the House of Special Purpose, in Ekaterinburg.(23)
Three months later, the decision was made by Vladimir Lenin and his Bolshevik group to dispose of the royal family. Sometime during the night of July 16, 1918 the Romanov dynasty ended. Nicholas, Alexandra, their four daughters and the young tsarevitch Alexis, several attendants, and even the family dog were led into the basement, seated, and shot. The bodies were then taken and burned. The dynasty which began 304 years earlier in the midst of a social revolution ended violently in the midst of another. The world was kept in ignorance. All reports coming from Moscow stated that only Nicholas had been shot and that the former Empress and the young Alexis were in a place of safety. The official announcement that the Ural Soviet alone gave the order for execution was also false. Leon Trotsky wrote on April 9 that Lenin ordered the execution and then stated:
The execution of the Tsar's family was needed not only in order to frighten, horrify, and dishearten the enemy, but also in order to shake up our own ranks, to show them that there was no turning back, that ahead lay either complete victory or complete ruin.(24)
What sense can be made of the tragedy of these needless deaths? It is true that Nicholas II was a weak leader. But his greatest faults were but two. First, was his distrust of those most capable and fit to serve him and their country. Second, was his ready confidence and willingness to believe in unfit counselors. If by some chance Nicholas would have chosen a different wife, if there had been no wars, and above all, if there had been no Rasputin, circumstances would certainly be different. However, all of these did occur. Ironically, the most damaging was "the Friend" who had greatest influence over him and who was the "principle cause of death of those who thought to find in him their salvation."(25) So how would these events affect Russia? Nicholas himself sadly exclaimed in the final statement of his abdication speech: "May God help Russia."(26)
ENDNOTES
Grand Duke Alexander of Russia, Once a Grand Duke (Garden City, New York, 1932), quoted in Ann E. Healy, The Russian Autocracy in Crisis (Hamden, Con n.: Archon Books, 1976), 39.
Michael T. Florinsky, The End of the Russian Empire (New York: Collier Books, 1961), 55.
C.L. Sulzberger, The Fall of Eagles (New York: Crown Publishers, 1977), 214. The Khlysky also believed that God could be reached through the ecstasy of sexual relations. These relations were practiced within the group by all members.
Robert K. Massie, Nicholas and Alexandra (New York: Athenum Books, 1967), 200.
Florinsky, The End of the Russian Empire, 58.
Paul and Beatrice Grabbe, eds., The Private World of the Last Tsar (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co., 1984), 43.
Anthony Summers, The File on the Tsar (New York: Harper & Row, 1976), 36.
J.C. Trewin, ed., The House of Special Purpose (New York: Stein and Day, 1975), 22.
John D. Bergamini, The Tragic Dynasty: A History of the Romanovs (New York:Putnam's Sons, 1969), 405.
Victor Alexandrov, The End of the Romanovs, trans. William Sutcliffe (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1966), 155.
Sulzberger, The Fall of Eagles, 269.
E.M. Almedingen, The Romanovs: Three Centuries of an Ill-Fated Dynasty (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1966), 311.
Albert P. Nenarokov, Russia in the Twentieth Century: The View of the Soviet Historian (New York: William Morrow & Company, Inc., 1968), 56.
V.C. Vulliamy, ed. The Niky-Sunny Letters: Correspondence of the Tsar and the Tsarita 1914-1917 (London: Academics International, 1929), 394.
Bergamini, The Tragic Dynasty: A History of the Romanovs, 439.
Virginia Cowles, The Last Tsar (New York: G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1977), 178.
Ibid. 180.
Ibid.
Anatole G. Mazour, Rise and Fall of the Romanovs (Princeton, New Jersey: D.Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1960), 135.
Sulzberger, The Fall of Eaales, 277.
Robert Lockhart, "The February Revolution of 1917," Historv Today 41 (February 1991): 36.
Edward Crankshaw, The Shadow of the Winter Palace: Russia's Drift to Revolution (New York: The Viking Press, 1976), 393.
Trewin, The House of Special Purpose. 99.
Leon Trotsky, Trotsky's Diary in Exile trans. Elena Zarudnaya (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968); quoted in Anatole G. Mazour, Rise and Fall of the Romanovs (Princeton, New Jersey: D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., 1969), 181.
Massie, Nicholas and Alexandra, 214.
Basil Dmytryshyn, ed., Imperial Russia: A Sourcebook 1700-1917 (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1967), 411.
url: [url=http://cumber.edu/acad/history/SusanWalker93.htm]http://cumber.edu/acad/history/SusanWalker93.htm[/url]
2003-02-14 02:32 | User Profile
Was Grigori Rasputin a Pervert?
Was the soon-to-be-sainted Rasputin a pervert? Depends on your definition of the word. If you mean did he sleep with goats, men, chickens--we know that ultimately he slept with the fishes--nothingââ¬â¢s ever been proven in a court of law.
If ââ¬Åpervertââ¬Â can be defined as a morbidly oversexed womanizer with an expensive drinking problem, then he was. The Czarina, the Grand Duchesses, the Ladies-in-Waiting, most of the local hookers--all have been implicated as mad monk conquests. Of course, that, too, is conjecture.
Whatever the truth is, many Orthodox Russians are convinced that he was a martyred patriot who suffered a bad press and a horrible death at the hands of the usual suspects.
St. Rasputin. Iââ¬â¢ll drink to that.
2003-02-15 20:00 | User Profile
Originally posted by seq@Feb 13 2003, 19:32 St. Rasputin. Iââ¬â¢ll drink to that.
Dring "Old Rasputin" ;)
<img src='http://www.ncoast-brewing.com/images/oldrasput.jpg[/img]
2003-02-17 01:31 | User Profile
An interesting comparison between Rasputin and Herbert W. Armstrong, creator of the old Worldwide Church of God cult. Rasputin may not be that bad after all.
[url=http://members.tripod.com/~ejm/rasputin]http://members.tripod.com/~ejm/rasputin[/url]
FYI, The khlysty sect was an offshoot of theBogomili, Skoptzy and Bezpopovsti in which large groups of people called "arks" whipped themselves with sticks and held a frenzied mass orgy afterward.
**Dring "Old Rasputin" **
Yes, Old Rasputin is good brew. Makes Guiness taste` like Coors Lite in comparison.
2003-02-17 03:55 | User Profile
Originally posted by Oklahomaman@Feb 16 2003, 18:31 **An interesting comparison between Rasputin and Herbert W. Armstrong, creator of the old Worldwide Church of God cult. Rasputin may not be that bad after all.
[url=http://members.tripod.com/~ejm/rasputin]http://members.tripod.com/~ejm/rasputin[/url]
FYI, The khlysty sect was an offshoot of theBogomili, Skoptzy and Bezpopovsti in which large groups of people called "arks" whipped themselves with sticks and held a frenzied mass orgy afterward.
**Dring "Old Rasputin"ÃÂ **
Yes, Old Rasputin is good brew. Makes Guiness taste` like Coors Lite in comparison.**
You forgot .htm at the end:
[url=http://members.tripod.com/~ejm/rasputin.htm]http://members.tripod.com/~ejm/rasputin.htm[/url]
Yeah, "Old Rasputin" is the ultimate beer in terms of taste and alcohol content :lol: