No Central Church?

How could it be that there is no central christian church? How would that affect Europes development and the Christian faith?
 

Deleted member 67076

How could it be that there is no central christian church? How would that affect Europes development and the Christian faith?
It depends. Is it that the Catholic church never becomes dominant to other sects like Arianism or Monophyitism?
 
Maybe it becomes popular in Rome but never becomes the state religion? It fragments into various different sects later on?
 
I assume that the Catholic Church would never be formed.

If the Catholic Church never forms then there's no guarantee that Christianity would exist in its present form. I red somewhere that Constantine was looking for a new state religion. So if Christianity is not chosen and instead its say, Sol Invictus, then would Christianity continue to exist or would there be a more active attempt to wipe it out completely? After all, If I was the Emperor, I wouldn't want to let a threat to my new State Religion continue to exist.

Maybe it becomes popular in Rome but never becomes the state religion? It fragments into various different sects later on?

So Christianity would essentially stay the same as it was before it was legalized. Though again, would Christianity still exist or develop the same way it did OTL? Me thinks no. Christianity would, if it continued to exist, no doubt remain as one of the many odd religions that existed in the East.
 
If the Catholic Church never forms then there's no guarantee that Christianity would exist in its present form. I red somewhere that Constantine was looking for a new state religion. So if Christianity is not chosen and instead its say, Sol Invictus, then would Christianity continue to exist or would there be a more active attempt to wipe it out completely? After all, If I was the Emperor, I wouldn't want to let a threat to my new State Religion continue to exist.

I'm not sure that Christianity is a threat to Sol Invictus if Sol Invictus is in charge. It takes certain tenets of dogma - or attitude - to have the idea that the existence of religions other than the one's own is a threat.
 
What centralised church are we talking about here? Because most of Christianity can exist quite happily without the dictatus papae and nulla salus. The idea that a single, universal and supreme authority on all matters of faith exists is, if anything, the odd one out, and the idea that the church can be oirganised as a top-down command structure doesn't come about before the middle ages. It didn't work too well then, either.

A church without the imperial paqpacy would be easy to imagine. One without the patriarchates and ecumenical councils less so.
 
I'm not sure that Christianity is a threat to Sol Invictus if Sol Invictus is in charge. It takes certain tenets of dogma - or attitude - to have the idea that the existence of religions other than the one's own is a threat.
Plus Constantine seemed to not have any intention of persecuting any pagan religions when he made Christianity an accepted religion. I don't think that came until Theodosius.
 
WI the Catholic Church never becomes centralized because Gregorian Reform is defeated? The various archbishops like Canterbury, Reims, Mainz, Leon, Braga etc. run their local Churches without reference to the bishop of Rome other than rare nods to his seniority, and the bishops of Rome who make trouble end up deposed, arrested and dying in prison (naturally or otherwise) as was the case through 10th century and first half of 11th?
 
OK, so what I intended was that the pope and patriarch never become important, and remain as bishops, Christianity still becomes a major religion somehow.
 
Just never have Christianity become the dominant state religion in the Roman Empire. It'll stay decentralized yet would still have at least a strong minority of the population. Maybe it could eventually be absorbed/merge with the other major religion over time?
 
The easiest way would be to split the church into various national churches. Each one might be central in its own area, and all might nominally accept the pope, say, but France, Spain, the HRE and England all effectively go their own ways.

Would that count?
 
The easiest way would be to split the church into various national churches. Each one might be central in its own area, and all might nominally accept the pope, say, but France, Spain, the HRE and England all effectively go their own ways.

Would that count?

Similar to how Orthodox church operates? Maybe Pope is first among equals or has somewhat elevated role but far from being supreme ruler who can order other (arch)bishops around.

Not sure if this would work but what about HRE winning investiture controversy? If state/ruler appoints bishops then state church is more linked to state rather than Papacy with state then having greater influence over running of "their church"
 
Similar to how Orthodox church operates? Maybe Pope is first among equals or has somewhat elevated role but far from being supreme ruler who can order other (arch)bishops around.

Not sure if this would work but what about HRE winning investiture controversy? If state/ruler appoints bishops then state church is more linked to state rather than Papacy with state then having greater influence over running of "their church"
Except the Orthodox have done a very good job of maintaining consistent theology and liturgy over a millenium and more. I suspect national churches in Europe would diverge more and faster.

And, yes, that would be one pod.
 
Last edited:
Except the Orthodox have done a very good job of maintaining consistent theology and liturgy over a millenium and more. I suspect national churches in Europe would diverge more and faster.

And, yes, that one be one pod.

Well, you could start with united church in Roman Empire that sets down the theology. Then when national churches become more separated they maintain original theology. I think it would help that seat of their church would be more local rather than in far away Rome so money and such would remain localy.

I'm not saying that various "heresies" wouldn't pop up but I don't think it's a given.
 
Well, you could start with united church in Roman Empire that sets down the theology. Then when national churches become more separated they maintain original theology. I think it would help that seat of their church would be more local rather than in far away Rome so money and such would remain localy.

I'm not saying that various "heresies" wouldn't pop up but I don't think it's a given.

Not so much 'heresies' as disunity of practice. Can priests marry? Can bishops? Is divorce allowed, or just annullment? Do you use latin or the vernacular in the liturgy? Is communion in one kind or two? If two, is intinction allowed, required or forbidden? If one, which?

Remember too, that iotl there were multiple local variants of the text for the mass before the council of Trent standardized on one in the counter reformation. Us Anglican types fondly remember the British Sarum Rite, even if there was little practical difference. It was ours, you see. Youd likely see far more of that.

Even things like the authority of tradition vs scripture vs councils vs the 'pope' could easily vary from place to place.
 
Top