The Patriarch Supreme, the Roman Provinces, and ecclesiastical jurisdiction.

[Silver Wizard]

While playing, and reading the code behind it during breaks, I noticed something that I found rather odd.

It is easier to prevent the great schism, or to mend it, than it is to restore the Roman Empire. This for the simple reason the land required for the former is a subset of the land required for the latter. Thus it is to be expected that by the time the Empire is restored there already is a Patriarch Supreme.

A Byzantine Emperor can only anoint a Greek Patriarch Supreme, not a Latin one, therefore it is to be expected that a Roman Empire restored by the Byzantine Empire has a Greek Patriarch Supreme, based in Constantinople.

However, the Pentarch for all Roman Provinces is set to Rome. Probably to allow the player to excommunicate all vassals and below.

But I find it odd that the most likely result is the Pope of Rome getting jurisdiction over the entire Empire, while his colleague in Constantinople is the Supreme one.


While on the subject of Patriarchs: shouldn't the title of the Prince-Archbishop of Aquileia be localized as Patriarch?

 

[Rylock]

It would be nice if we could mod the way the pentarchy works, or change the composition of the ecclesiastical sees.

We cannot, however, and thus one has to be aware that "religion head" when it comes to a religion that uses the pentarchy only holds sway over areas that are both outside of an existing see (unless that see's title isn't held) and not within the realm of a King or Emperor where their realm's patriarch has sway (through autocephaly). So it's a fairly limited position, compared to the Catholic Pope, much more comparable to the way Orthodox works (which is the same -- if an Orthodox empire gets ahold of Rome then the Patriarch of Rome would also have sway over way more territory than the Ecumenical Patriarch). That's Christianity for you, however.

While on the subject of Patriarchs: shouldn't the title of the Prince-Archbishop of Aquileia be localized as Patriarch?

Why would he? Priests under the Chalcedonian religion are bishops (and thus Prince-Archbishop, or what have you). A patriarch is a specific title given to the bishop who holds one of the pentarchy titles (other than Alexandria or Rome) or who is the appointed Patriarch of a kingdom/empire.

 

[queermobile]

It would be nice if we could mod the way the pentarchy works, or change the composition of the ecclesiastical sees.

We cannot, however, and thus one has to be aware that "religion head" when it comes to a religion that uses the pentarchy only holds sway over areas that are both outside of an existing see (unless that see's title isn't held) and not within the realm of a King or Emperor where their realm's patriarch has sway (through autocephaly). So it's a fairly limited position, compared to the Catholic Pope, much more comparable to the way Orthodox works (which is the same -- if an Orthodox empire gets ahold of Rome then the Patriarch of Rome would also have sway over way more territory than the Ecumenical Patriarch). That's Christianity for you, however.



Why would he? Priests under the Chalcedonian religion are bishops (and thus Prince-Archbishop, or what have you). A patriarch is a specific title given to the bishop who holds one of the pentarchy titles (other than Alexandria or Rome) or who is the appointed Patriarch of a kingdom/empire.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchate_of_Aquileia

The archbishop of Aquileia was essentially a "mini patriarch" under the Pope in Rome. I believe that he wasn't given the title until the "official" split of East and West in the eleventh century, however. There was a handful of these "mini patriarchs". I believe it would be best represented by a Titular Patriarchate title (which I believe is actually what the Roman Church uses). The only other ones I know off the top of my head are the ones in Lisbon and the West Indies, though I believe there was one in Palermo and another one elsewhere in North Western Italy.