Nope, you would literally have to go back to the fall of the Roman Empire to have that (431 for Nestorianism, 451 for Miaphysitism).
How would that make them not heretics? A united Melkite religion would surely be able to enforce the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, where as a post Great Schism would not. Don't you think?
They were declared as heresies long before the schism. That why they are called pre-chalcedonian faiths.
Exactly. That's why I'm saying, since they're non-Chalcedonian, wouldn't it make sense to make them heretics of a Chalcedonian Christianity when it was still considered one somewhat?
Because it WAS a schism.
While not very well known, and didn't make as great an impact on the world as the East-West Schism, Celtic Christianity ( practiced by Bretons,Gaels, Britons and Picts) essentially broke off from the Western Church for quite a long while. Most of it had to do with the Celts' problems with authority and thus didn't jump at every Papal command, and it created a pretty tense situation for a long time. However, the Celtic Schism ended when the Vikings sacked their holy places, like Iona, in ToG's timeline.
I'd suggest looking it up, its pretty fascinating.
As for it being implemented in the game, while its definitely within the timeline of CM (and ToG, for that matter), I doubt it'd get implemented.
Source please. In terms of what I have read, they have never broke communion with Rome. Just because a particular group of Christianity has a different ritual and what not, doesn't make them schismatic nor a lack of contact. Schisms are a result of Councils and Anathemas due to heresies or in case of the West, disobedience to the Pope, which the Celtics did not do since they venerated Roman authority. There were plenty of different rites in Western Christianity such as the various British ones, Gallic, Mozarabic, et cetera. However, in the end they all accepted Roman authority.
As cool as this sounds apparently according to wikipedia they were prevalent int he late 6th century.
They were pretty much dead though some provinces should be represented by them, but the ruling elites all converted to Islam by then.
M-maybe in CKIII ;_;
Although, I believe the split could work based on several factors, based on a de iure Pentarchy relations system.
Sigh, I really wish we had some real theologians to figure this out.
I'm a semi-qualified theologian.
The thing as, as many have noted, the whole East-West schism is overly-complicated due to multitude of factors involved. For starters, 1054 is just a convenient dating, where as in reality it was just a verbal spat between a Cardinal and a Patriarch, the former having no real authority due to his Master's death. The key events that led to the situation we know today are; Coronation of Charlemagne, Photian Schism and the two Fourth Councils of Constantinople, that verbal spat, and the various events related to the Fourth Crusade. That's not even including the prior events such as the elevation of Constantinople, Three Chapters Controversy, and the whole cluster-fuck with the Council in Trullo which goes back to a period where the Fall of Rome was awfully fresh (or even before that!).
.png){kind=avatar}
