A religious counterweight to the Pope...

[Don_giorgio]

I was thinking that since we have the Pope as top religious figure in the West maybe we can have his counterweight on the East...
I think that the position of the Patriarch of Constantinople should be created in CKII as a counterweight to the Pope...
Historically the Patriarch never holded any land as the Pope did but it was a position of authority in the Byzantine court... So i would suggest that in the court of Byzantine Emperor (wherever this may be) instead of a Diocese Bishop there would be a unique office called Patriarch of Constantinople... and having roughly the same functions as the Pope has in the West... with some diferences though... The Patriarch should be subject to removal by a decision of the Emperor (with very dire consequences though) and when he dies or is removed there would be an event in which the Emperor would decide if he will appoint his successor himself or throw the election to the Bishops...

 

[RedRooster81]

I was thinking that since we have the Pope as top religious figure in the West maybe we can have his counterweight on the East...
I think that the position of the Patriarch of Constantinople should be created in CKII as a counterweight to the Pope...
Historically the Patriarch never holded any land as the Pope did but it was a position of authority in the Byzantine court... So i would suggest that in the court of Byzantine Emperor (wherever this may be) instead of a Diocese Bishop there would be a unique office called Patriarch of Constantinople... and having roughly the same functions as the Pope has in the West... with some diferences though... The Patriarch should be subject to removal by a decision of the Emperor (with very dire consequences though) and when he dies or is removed there would be an event in which the Emperor would decide if he will appoint his successor himself or throw the election to the Bishops...

I would go a bit farther than that. Many Catholic kingdoms had archbishoprics (Castilla had Toledo, France had Reims, the HRE had Cologne, England Canterbury, Denmark eventually Lund), some of which were the basis of national churches under Rome's nominal authority. These would be the diocesan bishops of their respective monarchs almost by default. So, not to distract from the Patriarch of Constantinople, but the West also had its patriarchates of a sort, called primacies (e.g., Primate of Spain in Toledo's case), who served de facto at the pleasure of the monarchs they served. High-ranking clerics in the West were the backbone of any royal administration, more so as it turned out in the XI century than the XV in most places.

To more directly address your point, I think that Constantinople should be dealt with in a similar fashion, although to my knowledge since at least Justinian's rule, the emperor of Byzantium dominated the patriarchate in that city, who had rather little authority. I would like to see decisions and events whereby each country's patriarch (or primate) was allowed to develop as the interplay between church and state locally worked its way out (issues like weak vs. strong monarchs, how much the king depended on churchmen as administrators vs. appointing secular dukes, etc.) But I encourage the line of thinking that you have suggested.

 

[Don_giorgio]

Well the Patriarch couldnt make foreign policy decisions (except in some limited cases when acted as a regent to an infant Emperor) but holded tremendous authority over internal affairs both spiritual and secular... For instance divorce was granted by the canon law to orthodox if u petitioned for that to your local Bishop as "Corpus Iuris Civillis" dictates... secular authorities had little to do with that... Or in some other cases the Patriarch refused to crown the new Emperor untill he fullfilled a few things asked by the Patriarch first... Remember how Patriarch Nicholas I reacted to the 4th marriage of Emperor Leo VI... And when the Emperor deposed him and installed a new one he agreed to accept the 4th marriage as valid but imposed heavy penance to the Emperor for that and Leo had no other choice but to accept...
By having a unique court position (aka a clergyman in your court having the trait or the position "Patriarch of Constantinople") could give a nice twist in the game especially for those who enjoy to play CKII as Byzantine Empire or an orthodox realm...

 

[yourworstnightm]

The Patriarch was pretty much under the emperor anyways.

 

[Don_giorgio]

The Patriarch was pretty much under the emperor anyways.

I wont disagree... But even the Emperors feared Patriarchs in numerous cases... I ve wrote before in another thread about how many Emperors virtually submitted to the wishes of the Patriarch "if they wanted to remain Emperors"
Βut to get to the point i always thought that in the case of the church CK was somehow onesided... You have the Pope in the west and various church events while in the east there isnt any equivalance... no leading figure and rare church events... Seus Vult expansion and some modification enhanced the situation but i still believe that Paradox can do more about that...
Speaking as a player who enjoys playing in the Byzantine Empire i always found bad this lack of religious authority in the east...

 

[Orinsul]

The Pope didnt have that much authority during the period in question, he had religious authority for sure, but his only political power was as temporal, as a glorified italian prince of when it comes down to it, a quite minor italian kingdom.
If there is a mechanic for ecclesiastical fealty alongside the secular, then not only could the eastern church have a patriarch but western schisms could be represented too.
i.e. if every king has allegiance which he can change at all given time [with stern diplomatic consequences and possibly the resignation of all his bishops or even worse internal strife, then a king could 'convert' politically but not his religion but his allegiance from east to west [i.e. a catholic in the roman empire publicly swearing loyalty to the patriarch in order to keep his title or visa-versa in the west.] and with this ecclesiastical liege being the one the church type events come from.
then that would give the patriarch a place in the game, maybe he wouldnt exist in any court but be reachable though a court-bishop provoked menu. As having him in the emperors court would open the gates to events or odd results with him dissapearing to turn up in england given elected successions, surrenders and the like. Or maybe the Emperor's Court-Bishop could be the patriarch if an additional slot was to be avoided but then it might be harder to give special treatment, who knows.
but also allow for schisms and heresies and the like in the west by giving lords the option to break off from rome, either to a pretender pope or to claim the authority of the king over all matters as was occasionally done. Each with alot of risk for not much gain but isnt that what makes the thing fun to do.

 

[Don_giorgio]

Maybe if the Diocese Bishop in the Emperor's court was remamed to Patriarch and have some religious events created for Byzantine use only could do the trick... But still the Diocese Bishop aka Patriarch must be subject to election or appointment by the Emperor (or removed by the Emperor)

 

[ComradeOm]

But still the Diocese Bishop aka Patriarch must be subject to election or appointment by the Emperor (or removed by the Emperor)

And that's the difference between the Papacy and a mere bishopric or a Gallican church. The Church's role in Europe was unique and I'd like to see it be given a lot more attention in CKII

 

[unmerged(155641)]

We also need the infamous Anti-Popes.

 

[Danevang]

We also need the infamous Anti-Popes.

Yeah, the "Frankish" popes at Avignon should be in, letting you side with either one. That would be cool.

 

[Orinsul]

the pope and cardinals thread has largely become about anti-popes of late

 

[Don_giorgio]

A Patriarch court position in the Byzantine Emperor's court could add to the game a lot... especially through Emperor-Patriarch relations chain events... Speaking as a player who in CKI enjoyed playing as the Byzantine Empire i believe that the lack of a Patriarch in Constantinople made the Byzantine empire completelly colourless...

 

[unmerged(133356)]

I'd be happy with a way to chip away at the power of the church over time in CK2.

In CK1, it was obvious that the Pope was mainly there to make your life, as the player, harder. It's not has if any of the other computer-run realms ever responsed to the calls for crusade with anything more than lip service.

 

[RedRooster81]

I'd be happy with a way to chip away at the power of the church over time in CK2.

In CK1, it was obvious that the Pope was mainly there to make your life, as the player, harder. It's not has if any of the other computer-run realms ever responsed to the calls for crusade with anything more than lip service.

I would agree, although I have seen a number of AI characters get the Crusaders trait and conquer bits of the eastern Mediterranean. I get picked on when playing Aragon to go all the way across the sea to Jerusalem. Historically, the Pope forbade Iberian Christians to go to the Holy Land because they had enough Muslims to fight on their own doorsteps. He also issued bulls calling for the conquest of this or that Muslim stronghold. French knights also gained the same privileges in going over the Pyrenees and many did so.

It seems that there is going to be a lot of back and forth between the Church and secular leaders. I would like to see the possibility of coming to an "understanding" with the pope, especially for kingdoms taking up the cross.

 

[Drakken]

Yeah, the "Frankish" popes at Avignon should be in, letting you side with either one. That would be cool.

These were legitimate Popes, they had been moved away from Rome.

 

[vadermath]

I think we can all agree on the fact that the East needs a separate religious system of some sort; how it is implemented is really up to the devs.

 

[Don_giorgio]

I think we can all agree on the fact that the East needs a separate religious system of some sort; how it is implemented is really up to the devs.

True... In CKII East will need a Patriarch as a spiritual leader for the Orthodoxs too...

 

[Don_giorgio]

Besides remember that in course of time both churches (Eastern and Western) developed differently... For example Western Church recognised Pope as a universal Bishop and as "Primus Solus" in the church... While in Eastern Church the Patriarch was "Primus inter pares" and his acts must had the consent of the Holy Synod (although in practice the Synod sided with the Patriarch or the Emperor in most cases) but it would make a nice event if any potential disagreements occured between the Synod and the Patriarch/Emperor... I believe that development of the churches after the schism shoulf be pictured in the game... either the churches growing apart from each other or coming close again and healing the schism...

 

[King]

He's in and he is classed as a King. Naturally he begins life as a vassal of the Byzantine Emperor. In fact one of our researchers scriped characters for all the bishops, arch-bishops and patriachs of Constantinople up untill 1066. I fixed the problem where Saint Andrew (the first bishop of Constinople) was not of Scottish culture as he should be. I hope you are all pleased about this news.

 

[Panjer]

He's in and he is classed as a King. Naturally he begins life as a vassal of the Byzantine Emperor. In fact one of our researchers scriped characters for all the bishops, arch-bishops and patriachs of Constantinople up untill 1066. I fixed the problem where Saint Andrew (the first bishop of Constinople) was not of Scottish culture as he should be. I hope you are all pleased about this news.

This game just keeps getting better and better.