WI: CATHOLIC CONSTANTINOPLE ORTHODOX ROME

I know this seems too ASB but I was wondering how different would the world be if the pope existed in constantinople with catholic religion, and the Arch bishop of Rome is orthodox. To elaborate what I mean Orthodox religion would spread thru the west, while the Catholic religion would spread to east. So call it a reverse schism which religion would be more dominant .
 
In order for this to happen, the Western Roman Empire would need to survive while the Eastern fell. That was really the situation that set the two apart as they developed.

This, essentially, changes everything.
 
This doesn't make any sense. What are we talking about, Catholic and Orthodox? What would this even mean? The patriarchs admit Papal Primacy like Catholics do, but the Pope himself doesn't? That's silly. Even if that did happen it would just mean the Pope wins and no schism happens.

This isn't ASB as in it's improbable. It's ASB in that it makes no sense.

In order for this to happen, the Western Roman Empire would need to survive while the Eastern fell. That was really the situation that set the two apart as they developed.

This, essentially, changes everything.

It would change everything, but only in making it more likely that there is no schism, or at least no schism comparable to the East-West one.
 
This doesn't make any sense. What are we talking about, Catholic and Orthodox? What would this even mean? The patriarchs admit Papal Primacy like Catholics do, but the Pope himself doesn't? That's silly. Even if that did happen it would just mean the Pope wins and no schism happens.

This isn't ASB as in it's improbable. It's ASB in that it makes no sense.



It would change everything, but only in making it more likely that there is no schism, or at least no schism comparable to the East-West one.

The trend that started sending the two churches down separate paths was Caeseropapism, which was practiced by the East until the fall of the Czars. You keep an Emperor in the West, and get rid of emperors in the East, you essentially have flipped the two. Kind of. It's the closest thing I could come up with.
 
Well the Bishop of Rome and Patriarch of Constantinople could be forced to relocate so many times by fluctuating, warring empires that they eventually end up in opposite places.

A reversal scenario to that extent has sort of happened in OTL, for Islam. Non-Sunni Islam today is largely practiced in Iran, northern Yemen, central-eastern Turkey, the Caucasus, and Oman. However, in the heyday of the Shi'a-ruled Fatimid Caliphate, they controlled everything west of the Arabian Desert, while the areas east of that (today ~60% non-Sunni) were Sunni-ruled.

Of course it's not a perfect reversal because you have to include all non-Sunnis instead of just Shi'a, and the Fatimids were mainly Shi'a in their ruling class, but it shows that a limited reversal can happen. Then if the empires created solidify maybe it could be completely opposite from OTL.
 
Last edited:
Have Peter die in Constantinople rather than Rome (no idea how) so that the Church is founded there..gives it a much better chance combined with the West v East switch....it makes it the founding church center
 
Given that in Peter's day, Byzantion was insignificant, I think by the point there is a Constantinople Rome as likely to be primary has been cemented.
 
It may be a longshot, but if:

Instead of bossing around other bishops, the Pope treats the national head bishops (is there a word for that?) of the various Western European kingdoms as being somewhat close to his equal

AND

National churches do not develop in the East so all bishops serve under the Patriach

You may get what the OP was looking for. Sort of anyway.
 
Top