EU4 - Development Diary - 24th of March 2020

[andersonm]

i really wish, that reformation can be prevented PERMANENTELY. Keep reform desire low until 1550 may be...
It would be such good thing for an acheivement.

I think the Catholic Church felt the same way.

 

[John the John]

Looks great!

Catholic Nations can also Buy Indulgence to increase the Curia Coffers

But buying indulgenges as being the main option of giving curia money doesn't make sense. The Council of Trent forbid the selling of indulgences. Does it mean that after the Council of Trent it won't be possible to give money to Curia Coffers outside of contributions? If not, Could you rename it to "Give alms to Curia" or "Give a gift to Curia"?

 

[Zhetone]

"sola fide" as a "concession" makes absolutely no sense theologically when looking at Catholic doctrine, it's completely illogical to include this as a decision in-game. the "allowing vulgar bibles" one makes no sense either seeing as the issue at the time was not allowing bible translation but allowing unauthorized bible translations. I get the feeling whoever is in charge of the Catholicism content doesn't know a lot about Catholicism in the time period (or today)

 

[DominusNovus]

Agreed - there are not Catholic "mystics." The term does not make any sense. How about traditionalism?

I think this belongs in a theological debate regarding Catholicism. I would argue that there is mysticism within Catholicism.

At least at a surface level (regardless of deeper theological opinions) mysticism typically refers to practices more common in the Eastern Orthodox Church or in Islamic Sufiism rather than Roman Catholicism. However, even if we grant that such practices occurred in Renaissance-era Catholicism, which I am unqualified to comment on but highly doubt, then these would still not have been seen as the "hard-line" stance of traditional Church dogma. It would make more sense for mystics to be on the lenient branch than the conservative one.

Regardless of the status of mysticism within Catholicism, the idea of mysticism in opposition to a doctrine that literlaly means 'faith alone' is a non sequiter. Mystics are all about embracing faith as the main means of knowledge.

"sola fide" as a "concession" makes absolutely no sense theologically when looking at Catholic doctrine, it's completely illogical to include this as a decision in-game. the "allowing vulgar bibles" one makes no sense either seeing as the issue at the time was not allowing bible translation but allowing unauthorized bible translations. I get the feeling whoever is in charge of the Catholicism content doesn't know a lot about Catholicism in the time period (or today)

Agreed 100%. The terminology is about as accurate as would be expected from a cursory overview of Catholicism within a Protestant cultural context (something even many Catholics living in culturally Protestant countries struggle with).

@Johan or @Groogy Would you be open to considering changing some of the localization? The fundamental mechanics sound pretty good (I particularly like the general contrast of getting more out of true faith provinces or a smaller amount from all provinces), but the terms themselves could use a lot of work.

First Concession:
Secret Confessions really sounds redundant, as the Seal of Confession has been a fundamental aspect of Catholicism since, at least, the 13th century and most likely since the earliest days of the Church.

Second Concession:
As mentioned before, it isn't the translation of the Bible itself that was the problem for the Church, but unauthorized translations. Perhaps renaming it something along the lines of 'authorized translations' or something. Or, as the conciliatory alternative to 'Roman Catechism,' perhaps something vague like 'Ecumenical Catechism.'
EDIT: another option would be to divide it by the language of the Mass, rather than of the Bible. After all, Catholic Masses were conducted in primarily in Latin well after the Reformation, even when authorized translated Bibles became common for Catholics. So, it could be "Catholic Mass/Vernacular Mass" as an option.

Third Concession:
I'd be surprised if the Church gave ground on clerical celibacy, but there's nothing fundamentally off about the naming here, so no real complaints. There's probably a better name, but its not inherently bad.

Fourth Concession:
The Magisterium of the Catholic Church (Catholic Magisterium) is the Church's authority to interpret the Word of God. This is a far better contrast to Sola Fide, which is not something the Church would ever embrace, as it is absolutely contrary to Catholic Dogma, which does not change (Doctrine can change, but Dogma cannot).

Finally, I think there could be some further Concessions to add to the list, perhaps something around the original hot button issues like Indulgences, but that would be an actual mechanical proposal, and I'm just concerned about the terminology used.

 

[AMDG]

Hello @Johan and @Groogy, and to the rest of the forums. I am a Paradox and EU4 player since 2014. I would like to
make a few comments on the proposed mechanics surrounding church councils and the Council of Trent. Because I took a university course on church councils which especially focused on Trent, I'm making my first post this afternoon because I feel my perspective might be of use. With this said, I like many of these mechanics and feel they are a great starting point.

1.) Regarding the Ecumenical Council Mechanic

• There's not even anything insulting about this description of a ecumenical council, it's just incorrect. Like, the mechanic doesn't even make sense. This is not and has never been even close the point of ecumenical councils.

• I also believe that ecumenical councils should not function as outlined. Church councils are meetings, predominantly of bishops, convened to make decisions regarding "faith and morals" which have binding authority on the church. When they apply to the whole Catholic Church, they are called "ecumenical."
• The first problem with the outlined mechanic is that "the Papal States" did not necessarily pay for councils as much as the Church did. Why introduce a curia coffer mechanic if this is just a way for the Papal States, and not the Papal Controller -- presumably, the Pope's benefactor -- to ahistorically pay for church councils?
• The second, related problem is that the Pope, historically, did not always like ecumenical councils, as they often attempted to limit his authority. For example, then-named John XXIII convoked the Council of Constance (1414-1418), and then the council removed him! Its 1417 decree, Frequens, then stipulated that the Pope had to call ecumenical councils with binding authority every few years -- a big limit on Rome's power. While popes generally ignored this after the fact, it nonetheless does not make sense for Church councils to function as a mechanic for sustaining the incumbent Papal Controller.
• I propose modifying the mechanic. Should it remain, it should be renamed and the siphoned funds should come from the Papal Controller's treasury. Simultaneously, the Papal States themselves should also have access to the mechanic and have the ability to either contribute from their treasury or exploit development to maintain their grip.
• I also propose incorporating church councils into a more appropriate dynamic. I am very happy that councils were included. The Papal Controller should be able to call a church council, and a majority vote of Catholic princes should also be able to do so, weighted by allocation of bishops. Councils could then function as electorates according to the same distribution of bishops and make decisions on: under normal conditions, papal authority (perhaps this results in cost modifiers and benefits/costs of papal interactions); given special circumstances, moral issues (this could include the usage of mercenaries, treatment of natives in the New World, the slave trade, parliaments); and, as prompted, the other stages of the Reformation, including the Hussites and Calvinists. For example, the Council of Constance (1414-1418) condemned Jan Hus.

2.) Regarding the Location of the Council of "Trent," and Participation in It (here I rely on Trent: What Happened at the Council by John O'Malley)

• In 1523, the HRE's Imperial Diet called for a "free Christian council in German lands." However, the Council of Trent only began in 1545. One reason for this delay was the debate surrounding the council's location, which related to concerns over: a) the relationship of the Pope to the council; b) the relationship of the council to the Habsburg-French rivalry.
• What were the possible locations? The emerging Protestant princes (later, the Schmalkaldic League) felt that "free" meant a council without Papal predominance, i.e. one outside the Papal States. The Germans, together, would not go to either France or Spain, given the above factors. Germany was ruled out because the French would not go. Given these concerns, Paul III unsuccessfully proposed Mantua as a location in 1537 -- as it was close to Rome, but nominally Imperial territory, albeit over the Alps. Paul only came upon Trent, a sleepy village in the Tirol, in 1542, given its status as a Habsburg domain on the Italian side of the Alps -- making it sufficiently German and not German for the participants.
• The French were not pleased by the location and only participated fully in the council by its Third Period, under Catherine's leadership. Nonetheless, their eventual delegation led by Cardinal de Guise proved decisive in bringing the council to a somewhat successful conclusion. Beyond council stances, Catholic states should have the ability to contribute to the Council of Trent with gold, manpower (for a garrison), diplomats, missionaries, etc. to amplify the extent of its final modifiers. Realistically, the IRL Council of Trent could have easily failed.
• The brilliance of EU4 is its ability to allow its eras' fundamental factors to dynamically lead to alternate series of events. I believe that a series of events can be made to allow for the Papal Controller to decide on the location of the council for each of its periods, resulting in modifiers for: diplomatic opinion, religious tolerance, local province development, etc. Of course, Trent would be a middle-road option available for events to unfold as they did historically.
  
• Finally, Protestant countries should have the opportunity to send delegations and themselves choose to re-convert or become "conciliatory" or hardlined towards Catholics. The real Council of Trent did have Protestant delegates, however they arrived too late in the game to make a difference, as theological differences had been cemented by that point.

3.) Minor issue: "Private Confession"

• I do not understand why this is a "conciliatory position." Does this refer to the individual right to religious freedom? Or, does it refer to the private confessing of sins to a priest or minister? In Christianity, "private confession" generally refers to offering auricular confession to a priest or minister who then, in the person of Christ, dispenses absolution and (depending on the denomination) penance. If it is referring to the sacrament of confession in this way, "private" should not be a conciliatory position for the Catholic Church, for which it is the status quo. In addition, Luther retained many elements of Catholic confession. Finally, many Reformed denominations removed the "private" element from confession, i.e. the one-to-one conversation with a priest or minister. Confession, for these folks, became a conversation with God.
• Depending on the description and intent of this, the name should be changed.

Thank you for all your work and for reading this if you have. Please message me with any questions.

 

[MarshalDray]

These reworked Curia mechanics certainly make staying Catholic more appealing. I think the Council of Trent is a good way to keep Catholicism relevant post-reformation.

 

[Stronghold]

Sounds great! Can't wait to see this being used in the devclash

 

[PhoenixG]

well the big hurt point of catholic is still the roulete like who become the papal controller. Which is imo the very big down side of catholic.

 

[wobarch]

this looks great! A lot of different scenarios are possible with that mechanic.

@Johan are there events / eventchains that support the different parts of the mechanics?

And will there be different notifications for the nations to get an information if something happend or was picked with the bulls/ council?


Edit:
And an alert would be perfect if iam the curia controller and have not yet picked a golden bull.
Same thing is for an alert for the information that I can pick a side for the council as player (and as the curia controller that its now possible to pick a choice of the 2) - so that I don't have to check every time.
Also this would be very important for new players in my opinion to make it more obivious that there are this options as they would easy miss that little buttons.

 

[Groogy]

@Johan are there events / eventchains that support the different parts of the mechanics?

Yes

And will there be different notifications for the nations to get an information if something happend or was picked with the bulls/ council?

Of course, when a papal bull is picked you'll get a notification, or when the council becomes available.

 

[rus-chel]

i really wish, that reformation can be prevented PERMANENTELY. Keep reform desire low until 1550 may be...
It would be such good thing for an acheivement.

 

[Xdevo]

Does Catholic still retain the -1 Tolerance of Heretics as part of its base "bonuses"? Its currently the only religion with a malus as one of its religious "bonuses" which seems somewhat unfair to an already suffering religion compared to its other options.

 

[Groogy]

Does Catholic still retain the -1 Tolerance of Heretics as part of its base "bonuses"? Its currently the only religion with a malus as one of its religious "bonuses" which seems somewhat unfair to an already suffering religion compared to its other options.

It does still retain that yes. but with the council you get more than enough to compensate

 

[Weyird]

Wow, so much really cool info. You get 2 thumbs up and full support from me.

 

[RMS Oceanic]

+25% Resistance to Reformation Centers

Is this the same as the Resistance to Reform Age ability, because that ability has felt lame and counterintuitive, especially when in the late stage you can have it active everywhere and it still affects your provinces.

 

[Rindera]

Harsh Position
-20 Opinion of Heretics
+25% Resistance to Reformation Centers
+2% Missionary Strength
-25% Institution Spread

Conciliatory Position
+10 Opinion of Heretics
+25% Resistance to Reformation Centers
+25% Improve Relations
-5% Heretic Missionary Strength

Do they both have +25% resistance or should it be -25% for conciliatory?

 

[imvdm]

Do they both have +25% resistance or should it be -25% for conciliatory?

Being conciliatory means Catholics who don’t want to convert, but are working with the Protestants.

 

[Groogy]

Do they both have +25% resistance or should it be -25% for conciliatory?

No that's correct, concillatory means more that you are willing to reform the Catholic faith to address the issues that the Protestant movement has.

 

[Will Steel]

Finally, catholics are getting more interesting mechanics. Now I am hyped about playing a Christian Japan run as soon as this comes out.