AHC: Theocratic Russia?

Using whatever point of divergence may be necessary, transform Russia into a theocratic state, specifically of the Ecclesiastical variety. Also, describe what possible consequences this may have on Russia's development.
 
Easy.
Start with this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarch_Filaret_of_Moscow "From 1619 to 1633 there were two actual sovereigns, Tsar Michael and his father, the most holy Patriarch Filaret".
Let him have the bright idea to make patriarchy de-facto hereditary: so after the death of Patriarch the younger tsar takes the vows double-quick and gets elected as a new Patriarch, with his heir getting crowned as a new co-ruler. The circle continues for two or three hundred years, with tsars losing more and more seculary power to the patriarchs, and then disgruntled bishops and archbishops stage a coup, bringing back true elections of the patriarch as both ecclesiastic and seculary ruler and getting rid of tsars entirely. Mission accomplished.
 

Kosta

Banned
Easy.
Start with this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarch_Filaret_of_Moscow "From 1619 to 1633 there were two actual sovereigns, Tsar Michael and his father, the most holy Patriarch Filaret".
Let him have the bright idea to make patriarchy de-facto hereditary: so after the death of Patriarch the younger tsar takes the vows double-quick and gets elected as a new Patriarch, with his heir getting crowned as a new co-ruler. The circle continues for two or three hundred years, with tsars losing more and more seculary power to the patriarchs, and then disgruntled bishops and archbishops stage a coup, bringing back true elections of the patriarch as both ecclesiastic and seculary ruler and getting rid of tsars entirely. Mission accomplished.

Not quite.

Bishops come from the monasteries. Monks are celibate.

Ergo, if the czar's a monk, he's not having any kids and heredity just went out the window.
 
Not quite.
Bishops come from the monasteries. Monks are celibate.
Ergo, if the czar's a monk, he's not having any kids and heredity just went out the window.
Evidently my English is not as fluent as I thought. In this system tsar takes monastic vows _after_ he has children, immediately after the former Patriarch passes away. If he has no children at the moment... well, that's what younger branches of the family are for.
 
Not quite.

Bishops come from the monasteries. Monks are celibate.

Ergo, if the czar's a monk, he's not having any kids and heredity just went out the window.

Alright, here's how medieval churches worked in Russia:

For example the Novgorod republic: the head of state was their self-proclaimed Archbishop (only ranked as a Bishop by Constantinople) who was Black Clergy, orthodox style, so had to be a monk.

There were other high officials: the thousands-man (head of the guilds) and the voivode (army leader). A particular family, after dominating the thousands-man position for two generations, does the following:

Son has a wealthy friend (who was also previously a sub-voivode) who is rich enough to afford his own pilgrimage to Constantinople and even Jerusalem, and indeed rich enough to FOUND AND BUILD his OWN monastery, where he becomes a monk. the previous head (igumen) dies, the friend becomes head. Now the man in the firs tpart of this story (son) who previously held a government ruling post, decides to renounce the vanity of this world and takes the vow.

After his friend and original founder of the monastery dies, he gets elected igumen, and from there proceeds to Archbishop and ruling Novogorod again.

Needless to say he had children before he became a monk.

Churches were VERY aristocratic. For more examples of Theocratic monks with children, look at the papacy. They used nephews, hence "nepotism", but the children for the mitre on occasion too.
 

Kosta

Banned
Evidently my English is not as fluent as I thought. In this system tsar takes monastic vows _after_ he has children, immediately after the former Patriarch passes away. If he has no children at the moment... well, that's what younger branches of the family are for.

Oh, good point. That makes sense.

Alright, here's how medieval churches worked in Russia:

For example the Novgorod republic: the head of state was their self-proclaimed Archbishop (only ranked as a Bishop by Constantinople) who was Black Clergy, orthodox style, so had to be a monk.

There were other high officials: the thousands-man (head of the guilds) and the voivode (army leader). A particular family, after dominating the thousands-man position for two generations, does the following:

Son has a wealthy friend (who was also previously a sub-voivode) who is rich enough to afford his own pilgrimage to Constantinople and even Jerusalem, and indeed rich enough to FOUND AND BUILD his OWN monastery, where he becomes a monk. the previous head (igumen) dies, the friend becomes head. Now the man in the firs tpart of this story (son) who previously held a government ruling post, decides to renounce the vanity of this world and takes the vow.

After his friend and original founder of the monastery dies, he gets elected igumen, and from there proceeds to Archbishop and ruling Novogorod again.

Needless to say he had children before he became a monk.

Churches were VERY aristocratic. For more examples of Theocratic monks with children, look at the papacy. They used nephews, hence "nepotism", but the children for the mitre on occasion too.

Maybe the Popes of Rome aren't the best examples to use, since some of them had children after they became monks. Well, of course, that depends: do Catholic bishops have to become monks first, or can any priest become a bishop in the West?
 
Maybe the Popes of Rome aren't the best examples to use, since some of them had children after they became monks. Well, of course, that depends: do Catholic bishops have to become monks first, or can any priest become a bishop in the West?

Any priests, but only priests; and I think you don't even have to be a priest to be a cardinal, you could be a deacon or a monk.
 
Top