...“velikomuchenik” (great martyr) with “strastoterpetz” (sufferer of passion), underlying the MP’s skepticism regarding the pedagogical merit of the martyrdom. Is that correct?
I'm trying to keep this brief, but its kind of hard because I have to refer to a lot of history or the Russian Orthodox Church after the Russian Revolution...and how the so called Soviet government used the MP as an extension of soviet power. Suffice it to say that the MP today is just the continuation of the soviet church, run by the GPU/NKVD/KGB and now the FSB. Actually, the MP ommitted only a few of the ROCA saints glorified by ROCA.
In the 1980's and early '90's the MP was an institution that was literally an extension of the soviet govenment, but they had no clout with the Russian people who knew the MP hierarchs were just KGB operatives. Thus the MP was an organization of the state, but without any spiritual legitimacy. ROCA had a great deal of spiritual authority WITHIN Russia because of its great suffering and ascetic hierarchs: Metropolitans Anthony, Annastassy and Philaret.
I wouldn't put too much in the distinction between the ROCA's and MP's use of martyr or passion bearer...I think it was just the MP trying to show just a little bit of independent thinking. But, they had to go along with the glorification of the New Martyrs of Russia (and the Royal Martyrs) because that is what the people in Russia wanted. In fact, I personally think the term pasion bearer is more appropriate given that Tsar Nicholas II was murdered for the sins of the people just as our Savior was crucified.
St. Nicolas the Tsar was born on the feast day of the much suffering Job of the old Testament. He knew he was going to suffer greatly...and he did so with great dignity and Christian love.
Here is the icon of the New Martyrs of Russia written (painted for you non Orthodox) by Archimandrite Kyprian of Holy Trinity Monastery in Jordanville, NY for use at the glorification in 1981. On this icon, the Royal Martyrs are at the center of the lower third.
