The Pope & the College of Cardinals

LordofSaxony · Sep 20, 2010

from Wikipedia said:
The College of Cardinals is the body of all cardinals of the Holy Roman Church.

A function of the college is to advise the pope about church matters when he summons them to an ordinary consistory.[1] It also convenes on the death or abdication of a pope as a papal conclave to elect a successor.[2] The college has no ruling power except during the sede vacante (papal vacancy) period, and even then its powers are extremely limited by the terms of the current law, which is laid down in the Apostolic constitution Universi Dominici Gregis and the Fundamental Law of Vatican City State.

Before 1555

From the 13th to 15th centuries, the size of the College of Cardinals never exceeded thirty, although there were more than thirty parishes and diaconal districts which could potentially have a titular holder; Pope John XXII (1316—1334) formalized this norm by limiting the College to twenty members.[2] In the ensuing century, increasing the size of the College became a method for the pope to raise funds for construction or war, cultivate European alliances, and dillute the strength of the College as a spiritual and political counterweight to papal supremacy

Do you think we should have this? I remember mentioning this before in the original Crusader King's forum's CK2 wish list thread, but I'm not sure if it was mentioned here yet. For CK2 you could create bishoprics which make Bishops, which in turn can be elected Cardinals, and as a Cardinal can vote for the next Pope, or even becoming a Pope himself.

Just like my earlier example of Royal Edicts there could be a Papal Edicts that may institute certain holy laws that could make things easier, or worse, depending. The only person with control of this would be the Pope (Player controlled if currently player's character is currently in that position). Aside from that, the Pope does the usual stuff such as approving crusades, excommunicating, etc.

Source #1: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/College_of_Cardinals
Source #2: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Size_of_the_College_of_Cardinals

unmerged(2456) · Sep 20, 2010

What is the downside from just spamming bishopries if it raises money and decreases the power of the College?

LordofSaxony · Sep 21, 2010

Jinnai said:
What is the downside from just spamming bishopries if it raises money and decreases the power of the College?

It could be that if you have a bishopric in a province then you get less soldiers for that particular province, so if you have a bunch of provinces that are bishoprics then you are lowering your overall soldier amount, and it could be a considerable amount. Therefore you may be the holiest kingdom on the face of the earth, but also the weakest if you only have bishoprics. So basically, having too many would be a bad thing, but having too few and you are hurting your chances to have one or more of them becoming a Cardinal.

Earl Uhtred · Sep 21, 2010

Bishoprics weren't intrinsically weak. Look at the number of them in frontier zones.

The strategic advantage should be there is a new appointee every generation. The disadvantage should be the same.

Brian Bóruma · Sep 21, 2010

If you attempt to revoke a Bishopric you should stand a decent chance of getting excommunicated.

wobbit · Sep 23, 2010

Well, in 1066, the method of electing the pope was still very much up in the air. I'd like to see the possibility of developing a college of cardinals, but also the chance of having selection of popes controlled by secular figures, whether the emperor or local aristocratic families. Another alternative would be election of the pope by the people of Rome, which was something the Roman commune of the early twelfth century was pushing for (but ultimately failed to obtain).

Regarding the bishoprics, to expand on Earl Uhtred's suggestion, the method of selecting a bishop should vary according to royal and papal power and a number of events. If the king is strong and the pope is weak, the king should be able to select the next bishop. If the situation is reversed then the pope would get to choose. If neither is particularly powerful then the clergy of the province would elect a bishop (ie a local figure, possibly one of the baron class, would be elected, or one would be created at random). While the king retained control of episcopal elections then bishops would be valuable allies. If he lost control of them, they could swiftly become threats. Moves against episcopal involvement in the secular world could also have a great effect on the position of the bishop (this was basically what motivated the reform movement at the start of the game period).

Stratagyfan101 · Oct 2, 2010

Regardless I'd like to see something better that CK1. The Papal State was just an annoying kingdom that stood in the way between me and my beloved Roma.

Maybe somthing like EU3's College of Cardinals.

I see two option, have it come about during the game or put it at the start.

No matter what the Papal State/Pope/Church need to be more involved than just a few usury and diocese bishop events

Orinsul · Oct 14, 2010

Should there be Papal Controllers?

If youre playing a Dynasty, not a country headed by a dynasty member, then shouldnt the way to pass Bulls and put though or repeal Papal Reforms or excommunications be though getting a dynasty member onto the throne of St-Peter?

malize · Oct 14, 2010

wobbit said:
Well, in 1066, the method of electing the pope was still very much up in the air. I'd like to see the possibility of developing a college of cardinals, but also the chance of having selection of popes controlled by secular figures, whether the emperor or local aristocratic families. Another alternative would be election of the pope by the people of Rome, which was something the Roman commune of the early twelfth century was pushing for (but ultimately failed to obtain).

Even more interesting - what would be the long term consequences of either of those two alternatives on historical events?

Unfortunately EU3 isn't setup to accomodate repurcussions from such things and carry them forward, because that would be cool.

Don_giorgio · Jan 7, 2011

Well we could have an event somewhere in the game introducing the Papal Bull "in Nomimine Domini" and remove the election of the Pope from the Emperor and handing it over to Cardinals...

RedRooster81 · Jan 7, 2011

In both CK and EU3, I have always striven to make the Pope my vassal, so there should be events for direct appointment in such a case. The basic argument was whether the Pope or the HRE was the legitimate successor to the Roman Empire. If the Emperor or other powerful secular leader holds the Pope in vassalage, then the Pope is reduced at best to a Patriarch (as in the Orthodox Church) at worst to a simple bishop. With what we know so far, I plan to vassalize the Pope and make him my diocese bishop, another jewel in the crown of the de Hauteville Mediterranean empire. Then again, I might have to fight Heinrich von Franken for control of Rome, once he wins the Investiture Controversy.

Either way, Gregory VII is going down. ;-)

unmerged(133356) · Jan 7, 2011

Did CK1 include family ties in the internal math for determing the Papal Controller?

One of the families that made up a large number of my vassals in one very long game produced several popes over the centuries, and the head of that family, who was usually a Duke somewhere in my Empire, was often the Papal Controller.

Ruwaard · Jan 7, 2011

Orinsul said:
Should there be Papal Controllers?

If youre playing a Dynasty, not a country headed by a dynasty member, then shouldnt the way to pass Bulls and put though or repeal Papal Reforms or excommunications be though getting a dynasty member onto the throne of St-Peter?

Not only papal controllers, historically counts and dukes also tried to have influence in the local bishoprics. They would often try to get a younger son or bastard son to be elected the bishop of a local bishopric.

RedRooster81 · Jan 7, 2011

KristopherWG said:
Did CK1 include family ties in the internal math for determing the Papal Controller?

One of the families that made up a large number of my vassals in one very long game produced several popes over the centuries, and the head of that family, who was usually a Duke somewhere in my Empire, was often the Papal Controller.

It was usually the Pope's closest relative with a title or else their former liege. The latter allowed me to dump large numbers of conquered provinces into a new archbishopric and eliminate a lot of infamy. My protege would usually be elected pope pretty soon, because he had so many titles, and I would get it all back. An exploit, but it helped me get through some tough expansionist moments.

RedRooster81 · Jan 9, 2011

Another thing is to make excommunication a real detriment, with an appropriate event series. In the case of an elective monarchy (like the HRE), excommunication should be fodder for pushing the king (or duke) what his vassals want for him to do. It was still not clear who was the leader of Christianity in the West, the Pope or the Emperor, so you better make sure that your dukes are comfortable with breaking with Rome before you proceed against the Pope. Such was the case of Heinrich IV in 1076; he was all but deposed when he did penance at Canossa, barefooted and in sackcloth. The Alps were the major front in the conflict between spiritual and secular leaders; Philippe I of France was repeatedly excommunicated IIRC, but without as critical of an effect.

Panjer · Jan 9, 2011

I do hope that characters get different names when they become pope. It's kind of strange to see a pope Albrecht.

Drakken · Jan 10, 2011

Panjer said:
I do hope that characters get different names when they become pope. It's kind of strange to see a pope Albrecht.

And a Latin name, I add.

DreadLindwyrm · Jan 10, 2011

Well, going back to a thread about naming that was up a while back, if the game databases have the latin equivalents of all the names, then the new Pope could just take the latinised version of their name.

Thus, a bishop named any of John/Sean/Ian/Euan/Jan/Yan would become Iohannes, Peter/Pierre/Pedro/Dieter and the like would become Petrus (Although the new pope would almost certainly have adopted a new name in this case), Charles/Karl/Carl/Carlo/Karol/Carol would take Carolus.

Alternatively, the new pope could just generate a new Latin name from a list taken from real world popes, saints, archbishops and cardinals.

RedRooster81 · Jan 10, 2011

DreadLindwyrm said:
Well, going back to a thread about naming that was up a while back, if the game databases have the latin equivalents of all the names, then the new Pope could just take the latinised version of their name.

Thus, a bishop named any of John/Sean/Ian/Euan/Jan/Yan would become Iohannes, Peter/Pierre/Pedro/Dieter and the like would become Petrus (Although the new pope would almost certainly have adopted a new name in this case), Charles/Karl/Carl/Carlo/Karol/Carol would take Carolus.

Alternatively, the new pope could just generate a new Latin name from a list taken from real world popes, saints, archbishops and cardinals.

To get it right, the Papal States will need a history file going back to St. Peter. Only ten minutes' work, fortunately, thanks to Wikipedia.

LordofSaxony · Jan 10, 2011

DreadLindwyrm said:
Alternatively, the new pope could just generate a new Latin name from a list taken from real world popes, saints, archbishops and cardinals.

This is the best and simplest solution.

The Pope & the College of Cardinals

a Relic

Pure Evil Genius

a Relic

Unfurl The Bratwurst

Ard-Rí na hÉireann

Captain

Lt. General

Absent Minded

Major

Major

Modding Paladin

Colonel

Imperial Vicar of the HRE

Modding Paladin

Modding Paladin

Captain

Kawachi-no-kokushu

Augustus of the North

Modding Paladin

a Relic