jump to last post 1-2 of 2 discussions (5 posts)

Why didn't any pre modern King persecute priests to secure their power?

  1. profile image61
    peter565posted 2 years ago

    Why didn't any pre modern King persecute priests to secure their power?

    Duaring the dark and middle ages, the church was really powerful, even threaten the power of a good King. The nearby Ottoman Empire, was really powerful, even able to defeat the whole Europe. Why didn't any European King thought of, secure their power, by swearing loyalty to be subject to the ottomans and then massacure the priests and when the Catholic Church attack, they got the protection of the Ottomans due to the King's loyalty to him. Thus, secure the King's power and independent from the church?

  2. profile image0
    LoliHeyposted 2 years ago

    Because they were Catholics themselves.  Europeans were heavily swayed by the Catholic Church and believed in God.  They wouldn't have thought to pledge loyalty to Ottomans because they hated the Muslims!  The Crusades were started as a way to stop Muslim take over in Europe.  The only time a king dared defied the Catholic Church was when Henry VIII decided to defect, and marry Anne Boleyn.

    1. profile image61
      peter565posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Just prove how Kings of that era are stupid and corrupt, otherwise, there would be those who sworn allegiance to the Ottomans, in exchange for Ottoman protection, against the corrupt church.

    2. profile image0
      LoliHeyposted 2 years agoin reply to this

      WHA???? Then we'd be following Sharia Law!  The world would suck!

    3. profile image61
      peter565posted 2 years agoin reply to this

      Not really, the Ottoman Empire was part of Mongol Empire, Mongol Empire was too big, so they separate it into India, Ottoman and Russia, Mongol's Ottoman policy is, rule in respect to local custom, that is why sharia law exist in Ottoman,

 
working