At What Point Was The Roman Catholic Church At Its Weakest?

Was there any time in history before the Protestant Reformation that the RCC could have been toppled due to extreme weakness and Protestantism begun much much earlier than the OTL PR? Please offer as many details as possible.
 
My "Sweet Lands of Liberty" proposes a Waldensian Reformation, part of that was because of relativerly strong noble supporter in the ATL. I think the Holy Roman Emperor in his conflicts with the Churchcreates some good points where the church is weak and the central authority could have wound up being taken from the Pope and given more to rulers.
 
I actually had Peter Waldo in mind for replacing Roman authority. I have him in mind as the leader for the "Church of Italy" akin to what Luther is to Germany or Calvin is to France or Knox is to Scotland. Nationalized Churches are what I have in mind for a broad, global timeline where the Roman Catholic Church is destroyed either pre- or during the Protestant Reformation. I'm not sure what the definitive POD or PODs should be as this timeline is approximately 7/10 plausible and 3/10 ASB.
 
Have a look at Gregory VII. He unfrocked literally half the clergy of his era for either financial or sexual indiscretion, presiding over the largest internal housecleaning in church history. He also codified new rules for ordination that were significant contributors to the eventual Protestant Reformation. His career implies a fantastic level of corruption in the Church of his day; I can't immediately point to any would-be Protestants, but rebellion against the Church certainly seems plausible to me without his reforms. One alternative explored on this site was also having him call the Crusades 25 years early; not out of character, and would have blown enough of his political capital that he wouldn't have been able to get the reforms he demanded. A corrupt church failing at crusades seems not long for the world.

Another idea I've had is having St. Dominic admit he lost the debate in 1203 and convert to the Cathari. I suspect a RCC without Dominic would be much weaker, but perhaps someone else would have risen to the occasion.
 
1415, three popes, the council of Constance trying to establish councillor authority as against papal and the hussites establishing a viable non catholic alternative in W. Europe. It could have all gone differently at that point.
 
I think what I'm leaning towards at this point is the RCC collapsing in lieu of the PR. That way I have viable candidates for "national" church leaders (Luther in Germany, Waldo in Italy, Calvin in France, etc.) I'm trying to create national churches that would allow European nation-states the ability to still colonize the Americas as in OTL because monies would be spent on foreign exploration and the "national" church that would've sanctioned such exploration instead of having all that cash go to Rome. Is this too lofty or farfetched of a goal?
 
Ha ha ha, money invested in exploration instead of the church? A few crumbs, perhaps, but most of it will be feasted away, Harry VIII style, or spent on shiny new palaces and the like, or gifted to their cronies.
Probably the widespread wealth of the late middle ages will evaporate even faster, the social gulf will be wider, and there will be even less constraints on the power of the state. Perhaps akin to the late Roman dominate with its all-encompassing oppression.
 
Ha ha ha, money invested in exploration instead of the church? A few crumbs, perhaps, but most of it will be feasted away, Harry VIII style, or spent on shiny new palaces and the like, or gifted to their cronies.
Probably the widespread wealth of the late middle ages will evaporate even faster, the social gulf will be wider, and there will be even less constraints on the power of the state. Perhaps akin to the late Roman dominate with its all-encompassing oppression.

Elizabeth I repaired much of the damage that her father caused. We're trying to assume that colonizing the Americas would still be viewed as a profitable business venture, thus creating a great sense of urgency, perhaps greater than OTL, because Church constraints would not exist. Explorers and missionaries from "national" churches would be doing the work of evangelism in the Americas. All settlements would be along national lines.
 
The Gregorian Reforms don't take place. Property continues to leave the church's control while scandals rock the populace's faith. Popular discontent leads to some sort of Reformation, where the power of the Papacy is demoted to that of Patriarch of the West...

I would need to check to see if I could identify any figures who would lead that, but Cluny Abbey might be a start.
 
The Gregorian Reforms don't take place. Property continues to leave the church's control while scandals rock the populace's faith. Popular discontent leads to some sort of Reformation, where the power of the Papacy is demoted to that of Patriarch of the West...

I would need to check to see if I could identify any figures who would lead that, but Cluny Abbey might be a start.

Thank you. I'm grateful for constructive replies. Basically giving guys like Luther, Knox, Calvin, Waldo, etc. the power, but not necessarily the title, of "archbishop" of the German, Scottish, French, and Italian churches. I even managed to find a Protestant Basque man who translated the New Testament into Basque. They're out there, just scattered and persecuted so the records are spotty at best.
 
Elizabeth I repaired much of the damage that her father caused. We're trying to assume that colonizing the Americas would still be viewed as a profitable business venture, thus creating a great sense of urgency, perhaps greater than OTL, because Church constraints would not exist. Explorers and missionaries from "national" churches would be doing the work of evangelism in the Americas. All settlements would be along national lines.
What church constraints were there to exploration and colonization?
 

Jasen777

Donor
Well the Catholic Encyclopedia states that Marcionites, "arose in the very infancy of Christianity and adopted from the beginning a strong ecclesiastical organization, parallel to that of the Catholic Church, they were perhaps the most dangerous foe Christianity has ever known."
 
Which didn't really stop anyone from exploring (even the Catholic French ignored it).

The Church absolutely played a huge role in the development of the Spanish and Portuguese colonial empires (which are really the only game in town for over a hundred years, and certainly the most important for even longer). The flow of money to Rome certainly didn't prevent those. Rather, the Church sanction for the exploration helped support the expansion. Missionaries were often in the vanguard of exploration movements, and that's not going to change, while church debates played a serious role in the development of e.g. Spanish laws about treatment of the natives (which might or might not actually be obeyed on the ground).

That said, the weakest pre-Reformation point for the Catholic Church (not counting early periods like the first few centuries, where it's dubious to even call it the Roman Catholic Church) might be the Western Schism in the late 14th/early 15th century. If you can preserve that for longer (and it already had national characteristics, with e.g. England backing the pope in Rome while France supported the pope in Avignon) you might be able to make the split permanent. Especially as heretics like the Hussites and Lollards are growing, you could more easily see a split and decentralized Western church.
 
Well the Catholic Encyclopedia states that Marcionites, "arose in the very infancy of Christianity and adopted from the beginning a strong ecclesiastical organization, parallel to that of the Catholic Church, they were perhaps the most dangerous foe Christianity has ever known."
It's not wrong, it just badly understates how varied the early church was or how up for grabs orthodoxy was.
 
Top