Latest / The Romanov Dynasty: Rise, Power, and Bloody End — Fexingo History / The Romanovs and the Russian Orthodox Church: From Peter to Nicholas
Transcript
- Lucas: We've talked a lot about the Romanovs as rulers — their wars, their reforms, their downfalls. But I want to look at something that's been running underneath all of it: their relationship with the Russian Orthodox Church. Because the Church wasn't just a spiritual institution — it was a political power in its own right, and the Romanovs had to figure out how to control it, use it, and sometimes suppress it. Luna: So the Church was like a rival to the tsar? Lucas: Exactly, especially early on. When the Romanov dynasty began in 1613, the Church was immensely powerful. Patriarch Filaret — who was actually the father of the first Romanov tsar, Michael — essentially co-ruled with his son. But by the time Peter the Great came to power, he was determined to end any independent authority. In 1721, he abolished the patriarchate altogether and replaced it with the Holy Synod — a government committee of bishops headed by a lay official, the Ober-Procurator. The Church became a department of state. Luna: He basically turned the Church into a branch of the civil service. Lucas: That's exactly what he did. Peter's Spiritual Regulation, or Dukhovny reglament, written mostly by his ally Feofan Prokopenko, argued that a single patriarch could become too powerful and challenge the tsar. A synod, on the other hand, could be managed. And he made sure the bishops swore an oath of loyalty to the emperor. From then on, the Church's primary role was to legitimize the autocracy and preach obedience. Luna: But did the Church ever push back? Lucas: Some did. After Peter's death, there was a brief revival of the patriarch idea under Peter II, but it didn't last. Catherine the Great went even further. In 1764, she secularized all church lands — that is, she took away the vast estates and serfs that the Church had owned for centuries. Hundreds of monasteries were closed. The Church became financially dependent on the state. And the clergy — especially the parish priests — became impoverished and often barely educated. Lucas: Catherine also persecuted the Old Believers — those who had refused to accept the liturgical reforms of the 1650s and 60s. They were forced to pay double taxes, were barred from public office, and many fled to the edges of the empire. It was a state policy of religious homogenization, which continued under later tsars. Luna: So the Church lost its independence and its wealth — what did it get in return? Lucas: It got the monopoly on religious legitimacy. The tsars used the Church to sanctify their rule. Coronations were elaborate Orthodox ceremonies. The Church taught that the tsar was God's anointed, and to resist him was to resist God. Under Nicholas I, this became formalized in his slogan 'Orthodoxy, Autocracy, Nationality' — the three pillars of Russian identity. The Church was the first pillar. Lucas: But there was a dark side to that partnership. The Church became a tool of repression. It was involved in censorship, in persecuting dissent, in the army's moral oversight. The Ober-Procurator under Alexander III and Nicholas II, Konstantin Pobedonostsev, was a deeply reactionary figure who saw any liberal reform as a threat. He opposed religious toleration, he cracked down on Protestant and Catholic minorities, and he even opposed the canonization of saints if he thought it might encourage popular enthusiasm. Luna: But wasn't there a famous canonization under Nicholas II? Seraphim of Sarov? Lucas: Yes, great catch. In 1903, Nicholas II pushed through the canonization of Seraphim of Sarov, a 19th-century monk and mystic. It was a huge popular event — hundreds of thousands of pilgrims came. But it was also politically motivated. Nicholas and Alexandra were deeply religious and saw Seraphim as a heavenly protector for the dynasty. They also wanted to rally traditional Orthodox piety against the rising tide of secularism and revolution. Lucas: But the Church itself was deeply divided. There were reformist priests who wanted to revive the patriarchate and give the Church more autonomy. There were conservative monks who were suspicious of the state. And then there was Rasputin — a wandering holy man who wormed his way into the imperial family's confidence. The Church hierarchy hated Rasputin, but the tsar protected him, and that caused a huge crisis of legitimacy. Luna: So the Church had lost its independence, then it was associated with Rasputin — no wonder it was in trouble by 1917. Lucas: Exactly. When the February Revolution came, the Church initially supported the Provisional Government. The Holy Synod even issued a statement praising the fall of the old regime. But it was too late. The Bolsheviks were virulently anti-religious. They began persecuting the Church almost immediately. In 1918, they executed the new patriarch, Tikhon, and launched a campaign of terror against priests and believers. Luna: It's a tragic arc — from co-ruler to state department to victim. Lucas: Absolutely. And it's a story that's often overlooked when we talk about the Romanovs. But the Church was central to their identity, their power, and their downfall. Luna: You know, if today's conversation was worth a coffee to you, that's the link — buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. It honestly helps keep these deep dives coming. Lucas: Yeah, and if you've been stepping into history with us episode by episode, that small gesture makes a real difference. No ads, no pressure — just the history we all want to hear. Luna: So back to the Church — one thing I've always wondered: what happened to all those closed monasteries under Catherine? Did the buildings survive? Lucas: Many were repurposed as barracks, warehouses, hospitals, or even asylums. Some fell into ruin. But a few survived and were revived in the 19th century as part of a religious renaissance. The Optina Monastery, for example, became a famous center of spiritual eldership — starets — that attracted writers like Dostoevsky and Tolstoy. So even in decline, the Church's influence on Russian culture remained profound.