WI The Catholic Church w/o the Papal states?

Undoubtedly, the fact that the development of the Catholic church was affected by it's possession of the so-called Papal States....

However this need not be so. Around the middle of the 10th century a seperation of Church and State was established under Alberic II Patrician of Rome. Unfortunately he died in his 40's and had the nobles of Rome elect his son Octavian Patrician and Pope upon his death and the death of the reigning pontiff. Octavian would take the papal name John XII and go on to be one of the worst popes in Catholic history.

Now What if Alberic II lives into his 60's and his son Octavian continues the precedent of seperating the Catholic Church from the "Papal States"? How would this effect the development of the Catholic Church?
 
Now What if Alberic II lives into his 60's and his son Octavian continues the precedent of seperating the Catholic Church from the "Papal States"? How would this effect the development of the Catholic Church?
AFAIK it wasn't so much that Alberic II separated the offices, he just dominated Rome with an almost unheard of level of totality. Alberic ruled as "Prince and Senator of all Romans." He wielded power to appoint popes at his whim.

Octavian surviving could mean nothing but trouble. Remember, the Pornocracy has already taken hold in Rome. The Papacy is at its lowest in the tenth century, and Alberic and Octavian exemplified the worst of this. So I can't imagine anything but more corruption could emerge as a result.
 
This WI is primarily born out of reading Chamberlin's The Bad Popes in which Alberic II is portrayed in a rather positive light having allowed the Papacy to basically run itself regarding spiritual affairs...
 
The Babylonian Captivity seems to be the best bet for separating the Church from the Papal States. If Rome's oligarchy had been able to consolidate an effective republic (like other comtemporary Italian cities had done) then I think they might have been able to keep the Papacy from returning to the city. The Roman noble families seem to have a longevity that other Italian noble families didn't. In many other Italian cities the republics were established once major noble factions were expelled from the city. The relative domestic peace and agreement allowed new political arrangement.

So the POD would be the expulsion of one or several noble factions early in the Avignon Papacy, and the creation of a musclar Roman republic that holds sway over large sections of the Patrimony of St. Peter.
 

General Zod

Banned
The Babylonian Captivity seems to be the best bet for separating the Church from the Papal States. If Rome's oligarchy had been able to consolidate an effective republic (like other comtemporary Italian cities had done) then I think they might have been able to keep the Papacy from returning to the city. The Roman noble families seem to have a longevity that other Italian noble families didn't. In many other Italian cities the republics were established once major noble factions were expelled from the city. The relative domestic peace and agreement allowed new political arrangement.

So the POD would be the expulsion of one or several noble factions early in the Avignon Papacy, and the creation of a musclar Roman republic that holds sway over large sections of the Patrimony of St. Peter.

This may be a possiblity, but IMO an even better one is the victory of the Hohenstaufen in the 12th-13th centuries. Say a somewhat more successful Frederick I Barbarossa, a long-lived Henry VI, and a Frederick II that is groomed to think like a German King with possessions in Sicily rather than the other way around, manage to build a strong centralized hereditary German monarchy that crushes the Italian Communes and brings all of Italy under their control. If this happens, the theocratic popes of the 12th-13th centuries shall surely be first crushed, then butterflied away, and the Papal States become a part of Imperial Italy.
 
This may be a possiblity, but IMO an even better one is the victory of the Hohenstaufen in the 12th-13th centuries. Say a somewhat more successful Frederick I Barbarossa, a long-lived Henry VI, and a Frederick II that is groomed to think like a German King with possessions in Sicily rather than the other way around, manage to build a strong centralized hereditary German monarchy that crushes the Italian Communes and brings all of Italy under their control. If this happens, the theocratic popes of the 12th-13th centuries shall surely be first crushed, then butterflied away, and the Papal States become a part of Imperial Italy.
I think the problems faced by the Hohenstaufen in OTL will be present in TTL as long as they hold both Germany and Sicily. It wasn't just that some monarchs were more concerned with Sicily than Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. The very fact that they possessed the crown of Sicily is what caused the problems. Even if Frederick II was more concerned with Germany, any time he goes to Sicily at all would increase the power of the German princes. So IMO to get a stronger Hohenstaufen dynasty, one must prevent them from getting Sicily in the first place.
 

General Zod

Banned
I think the problems faced by the Hohenstaufen in OTL will be present in TTL as long as they hold both Germany and Sicily. It wasn't just that some monarchs were more concerned with Sicily than Germany and the Holy Roman Empire. The very fact that they possessed the crown of Sicily is what caused the problems. Even if Frederick II was more concerned with Germany, any time he goes to Sicily at all would increase the power of the German princes. So IMO to get a stronger Hohenstaufen dynasty, one must prevent them from getting Sicily in the first place.

Not if Frederick I and Henry VI are more longeve and successful and by the time Frederick II takes the throne Imperial power in Germany is already fairly entrenched. What you say is true if Frederick II would be the one to do all the work, but here I postulate a string of successfu long reigns from grandfather to grandson.
 
This may be a possiblity, but IMO an even better one is the victory of the Hohenstaufen in the 12th-13th centuries. Say a somewhat more successful Frederick I Barbarossa, a long-lived Henry VI, and a Frederick II that is groomed to think like a German King with possessions in Sicily rather than the other way around, manage to build a strong centralized hereditary German monarchy that crushes the Italian Communes and brings all of Italy under their control. If this happens, the theocratic popes of the 12th-13th centuries shall surely be first crushed, then butterflied away, and the Papal States become a part of Imperial Italy.

Forcing the Papacy to recognize Imperial authority and getting rid of the Papal states are not the same thing. Even if the Staufen are able to impose Imperial authority, the Pope will still hold sway over the city of Rome and the surrounding area. He will simply do so with the say-so of the Emperor. This arrangement won't last forever. The Staufen will eventually lose authority in Italy, and the Pope will continue to rule his territory.

If Rome is able found an oligarchic republic during the captivity, then the Pope wouldn't be able to return to Rome because the Republic doesn't want the Pope, and neither will the other Italian states. The Papacy controls a very rich church, and that very rich church can undertake the kind of military adventures that the Duke in Milan and the King in Naples would rather that they didn't.

The emerging national states might also start thinking maybe not going back to Rome might not be a bad idea, especially as the Council movement gains popularity. Church government by council, the Pope bound by the combined desires of the monarchs of Europe, that would have to be tempting to monarchs looking to expand their power and make sure the Church stays out of the way. If the Church is denied a permanent home base (or if that home base stays in Avignon or moves to some third city, maybe Aachen or somewhere in the gray zone between France and the HREGN) then the Pope is stripped of secular power, he cannot raise armies and make war. He will be forced to continue to recognize the power of the Councils that now run the Church.
 

General Zod

Banned
Forcing the Papacy to recognize Imperial authority and getting rid of the Papal states are not the same thing.

True, but most likely the course of the successful struggle between the Staufen and the theocratic Popes - Italian Communes coalition sees the former affirming Imperial control over Italy, including Rome and Latium. They are not going to tolerate any independent centers of power in Italy, most definitely including any Papal states. The Pope is reduced to a position very similar to the one of the Bizantine Patriarch, they hold a lot of prestige and influence, but are allowed NO secular power base.

It is quite possible that the course of the struggle sees an early Great Schism emerge in Europe, the Empire holding Germany and Italy to the obedience of the pro-Imperial Antipope, while the theocratic Popes make an alliance of convenience with the King of France and/or England. Then it boils down to whom wins the war in Western Europe. Of course, unless the pro-Papal King wins an early crushing victory (and if France sides with the Pope against the Empire, most likely England takes the opposite side, and vice versa), which affirms the cause of the theocratic Papacy, either the Empire wins, then the Papal cause is crushed, or a stalemate develops that shall make the Roman Pope effectively as much a puppet of France/England as the Imperial Pope is of the Staufens. The most likely outcome of the stalemate is that the various monarchs can see beyond their differences and agree on their common interest to affirm secular supremacy and on some kind of compromise making the Council supreme in the Church.

Even if the Staufen are able to impose Imperial authority, the Pope will still hold sway over the city of Rome and the surrounding area. He will simply do so with the say-so of the Emperor.

No. Given past experiences, they shall see it is unwise to leave the Papacy any kind of independent secualr power base, and their goal in this struggle is to affirm centralized power base in both Germany and Italy. this leaves no place for a Papal state.

This arrangement won't last forever. The Staufen will eventually lose authority in Italy,

And what is ever going to cause this loss of authority ? If the Staufens are able to establish a solid centralized rule in Germany and Italy at this point, and abort the development of the Communes as an independent power structure, you shall have a big centralized bi-national state running from the Baltics to Sicily. It might break up if they undergo some terrible catasthrophe (a total military defeat against France, successful Mongol invaison of Europe, a long dynastic civil war, although the latter is much less likely with the uprooting of feudal decentralization) but is not a given by any means. At this point, the Emperors would have already wiped out all the most important centrifugal structures, the feudal princes in Germany, the Communes in Italy , and the theocratic Church. The most likely outcome at this point is that it evolves into a big centralized Empire much akin to a Western Russia all the way into the Modern age.

Mind it, this is an age where national identities are still very fluid and largely driven in their development by the political borders.
 
Top