What peoples could have plausibly have chosen Greek Orthodox over Latin Christianity?

What peoples could have plausibly have chosen Greek Orthodox over Latin Christianity?


  • Total voters
    90
How can the Scandinavians, beyond some Swedes, become Orthodox? It was Saxons, not Slavs, who Christianised them. I also can't see how Brits or French can become Orthodox either. Most Varangian Guard was before the Schism, and most Varangians stayed behind in Greece.

It would be by your namesake of course. Ol Hardrada despised the Latin church, and there was alot of discontent in scandinavia over them being governed, religiously, by the bishop of Bremen. If Harald lives longer, he might seek to break completely with Rome.
 
I'm actually leaning toward Britain.

If the Celtic Church remains independent from Roman control, then it would effectively be an autocephelous Orthodox Church. Some of the Eastern sees would also object to its dating of Easter, but I think the distance, and the absence of dispute on any theological points, would prevent any actual excommunications.
 
I'm actually leaning toward Britain.

If the Celtic Church remains independent from Roman control, then it would effectively be an autocephelous Orthodox Church. Some of the Eastern sees would also object to its dating of Easter, but I think the distance, and the absence of dispute on any theological points, would prevent any actual excommunications.

I remember a TL were the Reformation is snuffed out by a few modest concessions but Henry VIII still establishes the Church of England for political reasons and it ends up going Orthodox to give it a distinct non-Catholic character.

It was butterflies for the sake of them but I always liked it. Also the Eastern symbolism of Christ resplendent rather than the Catholic Crucifixion totally fits with the guitar playing liberal Anglican priest stereotype.
 
Actually, here's an important question: When you say Latin christianity, are we talking about simply the Latin Rite, or full Papal authority? You could certainly see Latin Rite churches that are not under Papl jurisdiction in certain scenarios.

Dominus Novus, sorry about not providing a clear answer to your question so far in this thread or the parallel one. I was not trying to evade the question but since you're asking for precision I needed to take a little time to think about it.

In my definition, to qualify as Latin Christianity or Roman Catholicism the churches need to meet these conditions, 1) Papal Supremacy (at least where there is no schism dividing the west) 2) the Latin rite 3) Latin Liturgy and the Vulgate, 4) western rules on priestly celibacy and monastic practices.

So, any deviation on points 2, 3 or 4 (use of the eastern rite, use if Greek or Church Slavonic liturgy or non-imposition of priestly celibacy) would render a church Greek Orthodox or Eastern Orthodox in my categorization, even if down the road there is some kind intercommunion deal with or allegiance to the western Pope.

In OTL it seemed to me both sides were firm on matters relating to the eastern/western schism through the first half of the medieval period, but then the Papacy became more open to intercommunion or accepting ecclesiastical allegiance from some churches despite their following eastern or oriental/monophysite rites from the later Crusades era onward (with churches in Greece, Ukraine, Lebanon and Armenia for example).

That easier for you to follow D N ?

If that definition changes your answers, which ones does it change?

Kerney - yes

Were all the baltic countries under Balts? Because if not, my top choice is not included.

Yes, you top choice was Lithuanians, then definitely Balts.

In my mind I was thinking of categorizing the Estonians as either Balts or Finns. If they were your favorite, which voting button did you pick for them?
 
Alternate History:
Hungary easily could have become Orthodox. It was right on the Byzantines' doorstep, with whom they had no more conflict than they did with the HRE. There were also followers of Eastern Orthodoxy in the 900s, before István cracked down on his religious enemies and enforced Catholicism. Some today believe that his archrival Koppány was himself Orthodox (while others say that he followed the old gods). István chose to steer the country into the Catholic world because he figured that's best for Hungary's future. If he is defeated by his rival princes, the country could have been steered to an Orthodox course.

So it seems to me that an Orthodox Hungary has the greatest overall "what-if" potential in terms of geopolitics and culture.

Indeed, given that the Danube flowed downstream to the Black Sea and the straits, I would have suspected greater economic ties between the Hungarians and Byzantines than than between the Hungarians and the HRE.

So, what if Koppany is Orthodox and wins over Stefan? Furthermore, he makes a deal for an autocephalous Hungarian Orthodox church on the Bulgarian model.

Unless this somehow makes Hungary much weaker, I imagine this would increase the likelihood of Slovaks and Croats following Eastern Orthodoxy as well. It would change the type of internal feudalism and administration that Hungary has. I wonder if the Hungarian state church would adopt a Slavonic or Greek liturgy or if it would have a Magyar one created using a unique script.

Over the long-haul, this is definitely going to change Hungarian relations with the ERE and Russia. Will Hungary still be the big dog in central Europe and the Balkans like it was for much of the medieval period, or might its choice of orthodoxy doom it to be genocidally beaten down into a lower rank by western Crusaders (mostly Germans, but maybe some Poles too).
 
Hmm, on the Slovaks and Croats I don't think the Magyar baptism is going to effect them unless it's later than OTL; the Southern Slavs were all Christian at that point IIRC
 
@ Hashoosh: stating that the HRE was the reason of the schism is oversimplifying things. Frankly one could also state the HRE was only possible, because of the reasons, which lead to the schism.

The Roman Emperor in Constantinople increasingly wasn't able to defend the Papacy and/or had a different agenda. Which lead to the Papacy seeking for the strongest Latin rite power as their protector.

Favouring the Patriarch of Constantinople over the Pope also didn't sit well, especially since Rome, Antioch and Alexandria were much more senior.

Then there are theological disagreements. In other words both Constantinople and Rome played their role in the schism.

On topic IMHO most likely candidates are those in between Rome and Constantinople.
 
Most Slavs and Hungarians easily, due to the influences present in OTL. Same goes for at least Lithuanians, and possibly other Balts if more Slavs go orthodox. For Venice and Finns you'd have to work a bit, but it's not beyond the realm of possibility IMO.

Not in the poll: Khazars, Pechenegs or other steppe hegemons.
 
Not in the poll: Khazars, Pechenegs or other steppe hegemons.

true- the idea of recently converted Bulgarians in Bulgaria converting some Bulgar brethren on the Volga has run across my mind and sounds intriguing, kind of like how English missionaries were important to the conversion of their cousins in Saxony.

Also not included of course are peoples even further afield- East Asians, Amerindians south of Alaska, sub-saharan Africans. Eastern Orthodox Philippines, Mexico, Brazil or Angola, anyone?
 

abc123

Banned
Croats. What you need is Duke Zdeslav living longer ( he put a Church in Croatia under Patriarch of Constantinople )....;) But he was killed soon and his sucessors reverted that decision...
 
Last edited:
Top