I strongly feel that the Papal State should have a similar opportunity to end the Schism, but in favour of the Catholics, just like how Byzantium can end it.
- 3
- 1
Upvote
0
Papacy destroyes the Scism.
- Thread starter firecage
- 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.
Why would you have to be PAP? Any Catholic that blows up the remaining Orthodoxy and takes out the heart of Sunni power would have effectively managed it.
- 2
Granted, but you could make a (strong) case that any state that bothered to conquer back the entirety of the middle east *and* convert the entire populace there back into a Catholic majority might be remembered as at least a *little* bit religious
.
Perhaps, but I don't think that alone for end the Schism, I feel that the Papal State, lead by the First Bishop, the First among Equals, should be the done to end it.
I don't know, it seems odd to me that a crusader state who successfully crusades and beyond couldn't end the schism.
The problem is that unlike the papacy the orthodox are very decentralised so you would literally have to hunt down every last orthodox nation on the planet to remove it compleatly while on the other hand the papacy gets some of its legitimacy from controling rome,if it losses all the holy sites then the pope is demoted to a puppet of any ruler that houses him,and you would have loads of "popes" claiming to be legitimate effectively destroying any sense of legitimacy.
In such a scenario every king would do as he pleased effectively turning the rest of the "catholic" nations into self-controling protestants.
In such a scenario every king would do as he pleased effectively turning the rest of the "catholic" nations into self-controling protestants.
- 1
I think a decision to end the Protestant Schism would make more sense. Probably should have some difficult prerequesites, like disbanding the HRE.
The prerequisite for that should be something like "Protestant and Reformed are both activated, there are no Protestant or Reformed provinces anywhere in the world, and the year is at least 1600".
- 1
Well, BYZ doesn't have to convert all of the catholics to destroy the schism, so why would the Pope? On the other hand it would be nice if there was an event forcing catholics to choose between Orthodoxy, Protestantism, Reformation or Copticism once the Pentarchy is reestablished.
I already explained in my post,the papacy keeps legitimacy as long as its indepedent of foreign control,if the pope has to hide in some catholic kingdom then he has to apease the king protecting him,and any rival king will just declare his own guy as the proper pope and so on.
Without rome and with the mediteranian lost the papacy becomes just a tool of "catholic" kings to do as they please from annuling marriages they dont like to excomunicating their enemies,they basically become protestants picking and choosing what doctrine to follow and what to inforce with the pope reduced to a puppet in the kings hands.
Without rome and with the mediteranian lost the papacy becomes just a tool of "catholic" kings to do as they please from annuling marriages they dont like to excomunicating their enemies,they basically become protestants picking and choosing what doctrine to follow and what to inforce with the pope reduced to a puppet in the kings hands.
Strange. I don't recall this happening when the Pope lost his temporal power upon the creation of Italy. I do agree that Curia mechanics should get disabled if the Pope doesn't control Rome, though.
Because the Catholic-Orthodox schism has a rather different character, since both sides recognize the idea that the Bishop of Rome should be important - it's just that the Orthodox reject the notion that he should be anything more than the primus inter pares of the five patriarchs.
Protestants, on the other hand, generally reject the notion that there's anything special about the Bishop of Rome - indeed, some (mostly Calvinist i.e. Reformed) Protestants don't even recognize the concept of bishops.
By the time italy was formed religion had long since taken a back seat.
Also the pope still has vatican city so he is still in a sense sovereign.
Il try to sum it up with a discussion that would happen after rome fell to a resurgent byzantium on steroids rampaging through the mediteranian:
French King and Pope have lunch:
French King:I am more than happy to provide protection for your highness,did you know that the Holy Roman Emperor and the King of Spain both claim to have their own legitimate "popes" and that you should be burned at the stake as a pretending heretic?
Pope
sweating heavily)Oh you dont say,that is most unfortunate....French King
ont worry,being a good catholic im more than happy to make sure the "legitimate" pope is taken care of,by the way my wife is driving me crazy,im sure you wouldnt mind annuling the marriage so i can find one that isnt so "possesed".Pope:I think that can be arranged,im sure your majesty has valid reason.
French King:Excelent,also some of my barons have similair problems,arranged marriages between inbreed family and all,im sure you wouldnt mind annuling their marriages as well,after all we are a great "ally" of god.
Pope
prays silently)French King:And i almost forgot,you know about all those bastard children i had with my lovely mistresses,i would like them legitimised,dear Souphie and Duphnie just arent in the mood since the issue came up.
Pope:Of course your majesty,all can be arranged for the protector of the church(starts to cry inside).
EDIT:I made those smilies by compleat accident but man are they fitting
- 1