How to destroy the Papacy in the 11th Century?

[Bee]

Normans; Benedict IX

The Normans weren't the ones to destroy the papacy in the 11th century. They could have done it some temporal damage in 1049 when they were at war with the papacy (and captured the pope in battle at Civitate), but even if Leo IX had been killed, the papacy's prestige would not have been hurt. In fact it might have been enhanced. Thereafter, the Normans and Papacy came to a modus vivendi and were on quite good terms by the end of the century.

So much so that in 1085, the Normans rescued Gregory VII from Rome when it was occupied by Henry IV's troops. Had they failed, Henry's puppet would have been installed but he would not have been accepted everywhere, and if necessary Gregory's loyalists would have elected a successor.

There might be an opportunity to wreck the papacy earlier in the century, when it had one of the most corrupt popes ever (Benedict IX). Among many other misdeeds, Benedict sold the papacy in 1045 (then tried to renege on the deal). For a while there were three rival popes.

If that state of affairs continued, with corrupt popes multiplying the office and making a mockery of it, its prestige could have been ruined. First, howver, there would have been at least one serious effort to reform; for the papacy to fall, the reformers would have to degenerate into corruption, too.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Would the triumph of the Anti-Pope, an imperial victory in the investiture crisis, and the failure of Hildebrand (who OTL became Pope Gregory VII) and his reform faction satisfy the OP? Because that's absolutely doable with a later 11th Century PoD.

 

[Grouchio]

But that would imply that the Papacy would nonetheless live on, and Catholicism would continue to prosper. What I desire is for the investiture controversy to evolve into the first reformation 400 years early. When Henry IV marchers into Rome in 1083, he'll slay the pope and his college of cardinals, declaring a damnatio immemoriae on the pontificate and then promptly abolishes it the next day. He then announces to his subjects that the HRE shall officially break off all ties with the remnants of the Catholic Church, and proclaims a brand new church, the Teutonic Protestant Church. Many of his loyal supporters convert on spot, and the rest will follow within the Reich within a few generations or so (if not forced). He then splits the Norman holdings with the HRE taking back Sicily, Capua, and Benevento while Byzantines taking back Amalfi, Salerno, Kalavria, and Apulion at the Treaty of Neapolis. Emperor Henry IV then arrives back in Germany where he is celebrated as a hero to the Empire against papal bigotry, even with the mixed reception of his ecclastical declaration. Henry then summons the Reichstag at the Council of Nuremberg in 1084. There the structure of the new-found church is laid out, in which the Emperor is to appoint his Patriarch of Cologne, who has as much power in affairs as the Patriarch does in Constantinople. Furthermore the HRE is to be renamed The Holy "Teutonic" Empire (as part of the Treaty of Naples to improve relations with the ERE), and is to be reorganized into a more centralized state (sorta like the Golden Bull of 1356 OTL).

Could this work?

 

[Elfwine]

But that would imply that the Papacy would nonetheless live on, and Catholicism would continue to prosper. What I desire is for the investiture controversy to evolve into the first reformation 400 years early. When Henry IV marchers into Rome in 1083, he'll slay the pope and his college of cardinals, declaring a damnatio immemoriae on the pontificate and then promptly abolishes it the next day.

Not going to happen.

He then announces to his subjects that the HRE shall officially break off all ties with the remnants of the Catholic Church, and proclaims a brand new church, the Teutonic Protestant Church. Many of his loyal supporters convert on spot, and the rest will follow within the Reich within a few generations or so (if not forced).

Also not going to happen. If he tries this, he's going to get a revolt so massive it's not even funny.

He then splits the Norman holdings with the HRE taking back Sicily, Capua, and Benevento while Byzantines taking back Amalfi, Salerno, Kalavria, and Apulion at the Treaty of Neapolis. Emperor Henry IV then arrives back in Germany where he is celebrated as a hero to the Empire against papal bigotry, even with the mixed reception of his ecclastical declaration. Henry then summons the Reichstag at the Council of Nuremberg in 1084. There the structure of the new-found church is laid out, in which the Emperor is to appoint his Patriarch of Cologne, who has as much power in affairs as the Patriarch does in Constantinople. Furthermore the HRE is to be renamed The Holy "Teutonic" Empire (as part of the Treaty of Naples to improve relations with the ERE), and is to be reorganized into a more centralized state (sorta like the Golden Bull of 1356 OTL).

Could this work?

No.

 

[KnightofTempest]

Muslim Incursions into Italy could do it, if said Muslims could reach Rome, perhaps they attack the city, take it for a little while and are defeated by the HRE? The Emperor puts a puppet on the throne of St. Peter afterwords and garrisons troops in the city to "Prevent another Sack of Rome by the Saracens." except that the troops are really there to keep an eye on the new pope. After a bit the arrangement sticks? Something like that perhaps?

 

[Elfwine]

Muslim Incursions into Italy could do it, if said Muslims could reach Rome, perhaps they attack the city, take it for a little while and are defeated by the HRE? The Emperor puts a puppet on the throne of St. Peter afterwords and garrisons troops in the city to "Prevent another Sack of Rome by the Saracens." except that the troops are really there to keep an eye on the new pope. After a bit the arrangement sticks? Something like that perhaps?

Tiny problem: Troops from where? There isn't a standing army, mercenaries are expensive, and feudal levies are short term.

Also, of course, it sticking seems easier said than done, but first thing is to get it off the ground.

 

[Grouchio]

And that the status of the Bishop of Rome is reduced to a mere puppet status, with as much power as any other Bishop, and the college of cardinals abolished? Could Henry IV place a damnatio memoriae on the Papacy so that no one dares restores their power ever again?

 

[Elfwine]

And that the status of the Bishop of Rome is reduced to a mere puppet status, with as much power as any other Bishop, and the college of cardinals abolished? Could Henry IV place a damnatio memoriae on the Papacy so that no one dares restores their power ever again?

Not going to happen. Even if the Pope is de facto a puppet (de jure status as subordinate to the Emperor even), he's still the senior most patriarch of the Church. Being a "mere" Bishop of Rome would require a radically different church.

And why in the name of Dinky Hooves would Henry want to do this to the Church?

Really, that someone in the 11th century would be acting like a radical, violent, and probably crazy atheist strains my suspension of disbelief past the breaking point.

Henry wanting a papal puppet, fine. Henry wanting to cement the regal side's victory in the Investiture controversy, fine. But this doesn't work.

 

[Grouchio]

Henry wants this because I think he can and it would be fun? Am I going crazy?

 

[Elfwine]

Henry wants this because I think he can and it would be fun? Am I going crazy?

In other words, there's no actual reason for Henry to want this.

That's something I think you need to accept. Henry is going to decide to do this because it makes sense to him based on his beliefs, his preconceived notions, his prejudices, his ideology, and his attitude. Not on yours.

 

[Grouchio]

Any other ideas on how to destroy Papal power?

 

[Elfwine]

Having the Investiture controversy go the way of the kings would probably count by most people's standards.

 

[Grouchio]

Having the Investiture controversy go the way of the kings would probably count by most people's standards.

What do you mean? Other kings happen to jump in on the bandwagon of OTL Henry IV and support his side of the controversy?

 

[KnightofTempest]

Tiny problem: Troops from where? There isn't a standing army, mercenaries are expensive, and feudal levies are short term.

Also, of course, it sticking seems easier said than done, but first thing is to get it off the ground.

Ok how about instead of the HRE the ERE gets involved as a sort of opportunistic thing, holds onto the territory and eventually reconciles the faiths? It's a bit outlandish but it's where my thinking takes me at this point.

 

[Elfwine]

What do you mean? Other kings happen to jump in on the bandwagon of OTL Henry IV and support his side of the controversy?

That might help. Or Henry IV coming to the throne older - his father died young, so Henry IV being in such a weak position at the start of his reign might be avoidable.

 

[Elfwine]

Ok how about instead of the HRE the ERE gets involved as a sort of opportunistic thing, holds onto the territory and eventually reconciles the faiths? It's a bit outlandish but it's where my thinking takes me at this point.

Not easy to do at this point. Not impossible, but . . .

 

[eliphas8]

Not going to happen. Even if the Pope is de facto a puppet (de jure status as subordinate to the Emperor even), he's still the senior most patriarch of the Church. Being a "mere" Bishop of Rome would require a radically different church.

And why in the name of Dinky Hooves would Henry want to do this to the Church?

Really, that someone in the 11th century would be acting like a radical, violent, and probably crazy atheist strains my suspension of disbelief past the breaking point.

Henry wanting a papal puppet, fine. Henry wanting to cement the regal side's victory in the Investiture controversy, fine. But this doesn't work.

What about my idea of a massively decentralized church into more manageable chunks based on kingdoms rather just the one pope in Rome? In the very least its an idea that I could see being accepted by christians at the time as all it will likely mean for the simple joe on the street is a change in leadership and possibly service performed in the vernacular (which was usually very popular whenever it was adopted and I don't understand why it wasn't that way to begin with) and from the perspective of the nobility it means that now the church is focused specifically on running things in their nation and is likely far more manageable by them. Its a massive change in the way the church runs but atleast its a massive change I could see people coming up with.

 

[Grouchio]

That might help. Or Henry IV coming to the throne older - his father died young, so Henry IV being in such a weak position at the start of his reign might be avoidable.

Oh I know! Instead of Henry III the Black going to Meissen in May 1056 (where he catches a flu and dies), he instead accepts Roi Henri's challenge to a duel at Ivois and, as legend has it, simply shoots the Valiant king in the heart with a quick crossbow bolt as he charged at him. Like a Kaiser. (alright alright, he had one of his guards shoot the king in the back with a crossbow while hidden in the woods, but whatever works. )
Instead it is Matilda who gets sick and dies (HURRAH!). Henry the Black then simply goes back to Frankfurt and take care of further imperial affairs that I will get into later, but nevertheless lives 15 years longer. Capetian France, on the other hand, is totalement baisée. With Henri I dead 4 years early and his son Philippe 4 years old and France at it's weakest point, William the Conqueror changes his mind...

 

[KnightofTempest]

Perhaps they co-opt some more ethnic groups as mercenaries to do so. I'm fairly certain that the Varangian Guard being the only "Official" Foreign Mercenaries employed by the ERE took some politiking on the part of some Varangian commanders and a few Emperors. Perhaps the Bulgars could be co-opted for this campaign, maybe with some sort of Marriage alliance?

Or perhaps it's just a string of really lucky breaks and commanders savvy enough to capitalize? Sometimes history seems to unfold by accident even in OTL.

I've even seen a few TL's where the ERE and HRE manage to find enough common ground to Ally with each other for long enough periods of time. Perhaps something like that happens?

 

[Elfwine]

What about my idea of a massively decentralized church into more manageable chunks based on kingdoms rather just the one pope in Rome? In the very least its an idea that I could see being accepted by christians at the time as all it will likely mean for the simple joe on the street is a change in leadership and possibly service performed in the vernacular (which was usually very popular whenever it was adopted and I don't understand why it wasn't that way to begin with) and from the perspective of the nobility it means that now the church is focused specifically on running things in their nation and is likely far more manageable by them. Its a massive change in the way the church runs but atleast its a massive change I could see people coming up with.

I'm not really sure there's going to be a lot of enthusiasm for it at this point. I think it might go somewhere, but I think it would be less based on kingdoms and more divided up among the leading archbishops.

Grouchio:

>(\<

Why would Henry do that in a duel?

William doesn't have even a faint claim to France, why would he do that?

KnightofTempest: It's not so much the soldiers being found part as the Empire making that kind of commitment.

And the HRE and ERE allying doesn't mean that they tear the "Catholic" Church apart together.