When playing Bizantine game you can mend the cism, therefore making the catholicism heretical, the problem is that all converted kingdoms become autocephalus, what is ridiculous. Autocephalia is logical only with the fall of pentarchy what would made, in game terms, orthodoxy heretical. Even kingdoms inside the empire become autocephalus.
Autocephalous
- Thread starter oritemis
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I don't quite understand your point. The Pentarchy is simply the original 5 autocephalic Bishops; I'm not sure what is illogical about the situation.
The pentarchy is the brain of the orthodox church, brain meaning cephalus in latim. Any outside head of the church is called autocephalus because he decides by it self, and not following the official head of the church, the pentarchy. That happened on Russia only with the fall of the last of the pentarchs, with the fall of Constantinople.
In fact, the Byzantine Empire can name someone other than a patriarch the Court Chaplain, and he will become the head of an autocephalous church himself! Historically, though, Bulgaria, Georgia and Armenia (Edit: and Serbia, plus Armenia was Miaphysite) already had autocephalous churches before 1066, and the Russian church also became autocephalous before 1453.
One might argue that Orthodox kingdoms should stop having autocephalous churches if the Byzantine Empire successfully reconquered the Pentarchy. This is entirely a counterfactual, as it never happened; it’s plausible that autocephalous churches in communion with the Pentarchy was the deal, in this alternative history, that the Patriarchs made with the formerly-Catholic converts in exchange for reconciliation.
One might argue that Orthodox kingdoms should stop having autocephalous churches if the Byzantine Empire successfully reconquered the Pentarchy. This is entirely a counterfactual, as it never happened; it’s plausible that autocephalous churches in communion with the Pentarchy was the deal, in this alternative history, that the Patriarchs made with the formerly-Catholic converts in exchange for reconciliation.
Last edited:
Yes, would be a possible deal, but ending autocephalia in kingdoms would be an objective to emperor. Achivable by treaty or war, since that erase part of emperor's power.
Another nonsense is the continual existence of HRE after the cism is mended. Some times even the holy roman emperor converts to orthodox church.
Another nonsense is the continual existence of HRE after the cism is mended. Some times even the holy roman emperor converts to orthodox church.
A Patriarch is an autocephalus Bishop because he doesn't answer to a higher Bishop. It has nothing to do with not following the official head of the Church, because there is no official head of the Church in Othodoxy.
Cephalus is head, in Greek. There were quite a few autocephalus churches before the Russian church, including Georgia (already a patriarchy at game start), Bulgaria (870 and restored in 1235) and Serbia (1219). It would stand to reason that Mending the schism would start autocephalous churches in the west as well.
I sorta agree, but instead, it should be used to help promote end-game variety. It should be a goal of the Byzantine (or more probably Roman) Emperors to end the autocephalus patriarchs. This should be some sort of casus belli. Make the Byzantines have some real objectives that aren't just map-painting.
A war to force religious submission to Constantinople could work; but you’d have to code in some benefit for it. Just being able to excommunicate each other isn’t especially helpful, and in fact cuts both ways. Perhaps your vassal, the Patriarch, would get to appoint bishops and collect taxes from them. It might also be a prelude to, years later, approving an invasion.
The problem, I think, is not that autocephaly occurs but that kingdoms *within* the ERE still have autocephaly. It makes sense for the ERE to observe the pentarchy, but if you create Greece, then the kingdom of Greece should answer to the ecumenical patriarchy *unless* it's independent.
If we wanna be nitpicky then autocephaly should be granted by the Patriarch of Constantinople as the primus inter pares of the Orthodox Communion. Although, I would contend that should the Pentarchy be reconstituted that the Bishop of Rome should be given the first among equals designation as the Vicar of Peter. The Primacy of the Bishop of Rome was not the biggest issue which constituted the schism, but Papal Supremacy.
Yeah, my court chaplain is the Orthodox Patriarch of Rome, partly for role-playing reasons and partly for powergamey ones. (The historical emperor deliberately picked a mediocrity to be Ecumenical Patriarch, and his in-game stats reflect this.) It would be very possible to have the Ecumenical Patriarch demand the bishopric of Rome, by event or decision, and hand off that of Constantinople, or for there to be a decision for the emperor to transfer the Ecumenical Patriarchate to the Bishop of Rome, also naming him spiritual head of the Empire. But I can see an argument for the way it is: the Eastern Roman Emperors wanted, for very pragmatic reasons, to make the most powerful bishop in the Church be the one in their capital, not one who lived too far overseas to keep a close eye on, and between the fourth and ninth centuries, you see the bishops of Constantinople coming up with increasingly detailed justifications for why their originally-minor office should be more important than the three original patriarchates of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch.
Autocephalous national churches were common enough that I think the way it works now is an acceptable simplification. Essentially, if the king and his bishops tell Constantinople that they’ve gone autocephalous, it’s a fait accompli.
As for how it works in game: In a quick test game, forming the Kingdom of Syria within the Empire as Duke of Antioch, and then naming either the Patriarch of Antioch or another bishop as court chaplain, did not create an autocephalous patriarch, which is as it should be. However, as emperor, naming anyone but a patriarch, any patriarch, as court chaplain does create an autocephalous patriarch for the Byzantine Empire, which is bizarre. It could, however, be a way around the following problem: you also don’t count as having the same religious head as a part of your own empire that follows the Patriarch of Antioch, even if the patriarch is also your direct vassal. (I’ve not tried giving the Ecumenical Patriarch both dioceses, but this really shouln’t be possible.) If the reunited Roman Empire moves its capital back to Rome, I think it might make sense for the Episcopal Patriarchate to move there at well, at least on the death of the current bishop of Constantinople. This could be modded as an event that fires if a new bishop of Constantinople is invested while the capital is in Rome, Antioch or Alexandria.
A test game shows that, if I play as an Abyssinian Monophysite and capture Alexandria, I can grant the Patriarchate of Alexandria to the Coptic Pope, which makes sense. He becomes independent, not my vassal, and is very reluctant to vassalize to me, although I can get him to do it if we have very high relations. Testing shows that, if I appoint my current chaplain patriarch of Alexandria instead, the Coptic Pope will silently replace him and become my vassal, even though I still have an autocephalous patriarch. As far as I can tell, this is hardcoded, undocumented behavior.
Update: In a test game in which I played as the Duke of Antioch, converting to Monothelite and converting the Patriarch of Antioch to the Monothelite faith caused him to immediately abdicate to the Monothelite patriarch. Said patriarch would becaome my vassal if I’d made myself King of Syria by then, but if I were still a duke, he’d vassalize to the Byzantine Emperor instead.
Is this WAD? I’d propose three changes:
1. You should be able to ask any vassal patriarch for a favor
2. If you already have a patriarch of your religion as your vassal, your chaplain does not become an autocephalous patriarch. Arguably less of a problem, because you can always choose to keep your religious head as your direct vassal and name him your court chaplain if you really care. But it’s strange that foreigners would care about his spiritual authority if you don’t, or that the Patriarch of Antioch will accept the spiritual authority of some courtier you pick at random, but not the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople.
3. If there is any patriarch in your independent kingdom or empire, none of it should fall under the spiritual authority of a patriarch outside your realm. (Historically, even before the Great Schism, the Bishop of Constantinople exercised authority over Bysantine Sicily.)
Last edited:
Kingdoms of Greece and Anatolia should always be under Ecumenical Patriarchate, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to have any "de jure territory", like for example Patriarchate of Antioch has. Even if you create Kingdom of Armenia the area still stays under the Patriarchate of Antioch thanks to "de jure territory".
To be pedantic, the three bishops whose special authority was recognized at the Council of Nicea were those of Rome, Alexandria and Antioch, and (as I understand it) Catholic doctrine is that the Bishop of Rome always (should have) had authority over every other bishop. The church in Cyprus has been autocephalous since at least the Council of Ephesus in 431.