Church on the Blood, Ekaterinburg

http://www.byzantines.net/byzcathculture/churchonblood.html

We marvel at the dedication and determination of the Russian state and Church to move forward with the construction of the memorial church on the site of the Ipatiev House even before Tsar Nicholas and his family had been canonized viz. glorified by the Church. Their canonization was not a foregone conclusion at the time that the construction of the temple on the hill began. In fact much controversy surrounded the issue for several years. Even after the scant remains of most family members had been identified through DNA tests, old Bolsheviks continued to object to "bloody Nicholas". Others claimed that the Tsar was no saintly person and was murdered solely because he was a Romanov, hated symbol of the monarchy, rather than for his Orthodox faith. In spite of the Holy Synod's ambivalence and reluctance to offend some members of the Duma, popular support for canonization continued to grow, encouraged by the media and by many of the clergy all over Russia.
At this point we want to point out to our readers that saints are not made by prelates assembled in solemn conclave, but by the grace of God and by the popular acclamation of the faithful. In the Early Church and in the Orthodox Churches today, one is recognized as "holy" - svyati, hagios, sanctus - by the will and declaration of the faithful. The role of the Church is to confirm this popular acclamation through a process called canonization or glorification. By the end of the 20th century the Holy Synod acquiesced to the will of the people and announced its intention to proceed with the canonization of the Tsar and his family as "holy passion bearers" along with thousands of others who suffered and perished as victims of Bolshevik persecution. The canonization took place in August 2000 in the newly restored Cathedral of Christ the Savior in Moscow, presided over by Patriarch Alexis II, the hierarchs of Russia and from many other countries. See the page, Christ the Savior, at: http://www.byzantines.net/epiphany/christsavior.htm
The query is often raised by many why the Russian state and Church [9] bothered to "rehabilitate" the Romanovs and to restore old palaces and churches and build new ones when both were impoverished and hard pressed to come up with enough money to meet necessary demands. Repeatedly one hears the justification expressed in terms of atonement and repentance. We wonder, however, whether atonement and repentance for the sins of the Bolshevik Interregnum tell the whole story or whether there may be other motives not readily apparent such as the inherent need of Russians to recover and restore themselves as Russians and as Orthodox after seven decades of denial and oppression by a tyrannical regime inspired by an alien doctrine. The reassertion of narodnost viz Russian ethnicity and the resumption of their identity as Russian Orthodox Christians seem strong motives to explain the willingness to expend scarce resources in restoring the symbols of the past and building new ones. [10] What can be more Russian than the Romanov dynasty and the Russian Church? While the Romanovs represent the past, the Church is past, present and future as Russians seek their own resurrection from the spiritual death which was Marxism/Leninism. Thus Russians are finding their way back to themselves, singing, shouting, and crying out as they proclaim in the words of the third Resurrection antiphon:
"Let God arise and let those who hate Himflee from before His face!...As smoke vanishes, so let them vanish aswax melts before a fire!...So let the wicked perish at the presence ofGod, and let the righteous ones rejoice!"

http://www.byzantines.net/byzcathculture/churchonblood.html