Will Arianism be added soon?

[azufelichsusrill]

It's odd to me why one of the biggest christian so called "heresies" doesn't make an apperance. game feels incomplete without it tbh

[brownacs]

I thought that'd more or less died out by the time this game starts? The last Arian King in Europe was Garibald of the Lombards and he was deposed in 671 CE. Could still add it in by all means though. It wouldn't be the only religion which doesn't fit historically.

[Lemon Soul]

arianism has been dead for centuries mate

[Erebor]

I also think it should be added. Anyway we have some dead or nearly dead religions in the game so yes definitely this one is missing

[pint_engineer]

A bit late response, but the heresy of Arianism was taken care by the 1st Ecumenical Synod. Practically soon after that (4th century) ceased to exist. Nestorianism appeared after that, which ceased after the 4th Ecumenical Synod (5th century). Then, Monophysitism => Monothelitism => Monoenergism => Iconomachy.

So you wouldn't really see Arianism on the 9th century. Perhaps some remains of the Iconomachy, which by the way was taken care by the 7th Ecumenical Synod (8th century). What an era....

[SeiFeR]

Dead religions are part of the game, you can convert to a lot of pagans religions so why not arianism

[Seek and Find]

"Nestorianism" was still around in the 1800s.

Excerpt from "The Nestorians, Or, The Lost Tribes" by Asahel Grant, 1841. From Part II, Chapter VI. It is an interesting read from a missionary who journeyed to the area at that time.

"Nestorian is a name disliked by the people thus designated. They rarely apply it to themselves, and they are averse to its application by others, lest, as it seems, they should be thought to participate in the reputed heresy of Nestorius, a bishop of Constantinople, who was excommunicated from the general church A.D. 431. But the reason which they assign for objecting to the use of this name is, that they never derived either their doctrines or their rites from Nestorius. They reverence him for raising his voice against the worship of images, and against the prevalent use of the title Mother of God; which, as they affirm, virtually takes away the humanity of our Saviour, and thus leaves us without a Mediator. But having themselves never applied any other title than Mother of Christ to the Virgin Mary, and their worship having never been polluted with images;* while, at the same time, they have ever held to the human and Divine nature in one person in Christ, they ask, where is the propriety of calling their ancient church after a bishop who lived in a comparatively late day, and with whom they never had any connexion? It is true, they espoused his cause as the cause of an injured man, whom they regarded as a faithful servant of the Lord Jesus, persecuted for righteousness' sake; and on this account the enemies of Nestorius endeavoured to fasten reproach upon them by calling them after his name."

* See Reasearches of Smith and Dwight, vol. ii., p. 202-242

[Erebor]

Originally posted by SeiFeR:

Dead religions are part of the game, you can convert to a lot of pagans religions so why not arianism

No need to say anymore, +1

[Deylendor]

What special tenets would this religions have to have? If it is buidable via create new faith with already existing tenets there will always be the argument of "make it yourself".

[Erebor]

If anyone who read this topic is interested and wants to know more, i really invite you to read the story of the priest Arius, especially how he he died, and why what will become the Roman catholic church wanted to kill Arianism as well.

To come back to ck3, @deylendor with this type of argument, we can get rid of half the religions and just create them ourself, but to answer, I don't know for the tenets, at least it will get the Gnosticism one.

But you know considering the treat it was for roman catholic church, the historical impact an the fact there is some ck3 'religions' i would not more important, to say the least, this one deserves to be added in the base game without any actions from the player.

But the story of Arianism and how it ended to put it in a nutshell is again about power, violence, control, as such it deserves a place in ck3 hahaha.
Never got it, why you have for instance the religion of the 'Cathares' from South of France, but not that one.

[Deylendor]

Originally posted by Erebor:

To come back to ck3, @deylendor with this type of argument, we can get rid of half the religions and just create them ourself, but to answer, I don't know for the tenets, at least it will get the Gnosticism one.

Exactly, we could. But they are going to stay aren't they. I am not saying they shouldn't add new and fascinating religions for us to discover. I am just saying the create faith button is there for a reason(s). One of them to save the developers from an ongoing barrage of addition requests.

Do I prefer for paradox to add the religions themselves and integrate them in an meaningful way for us to find and use them? Of course I do.

If Hellenism is there why not Arianism, right?

[TurksTeeTime]

Originally posted by pint_engineer:

A bit late response, but the heresy of Arianism was taken care by the 1st Ecumenical Synod. Practically soon after that (4th century) ceased to exist. Nestorianism appeared after that, which ceased after the 4th Ecumenical Synod (5th century). Then, Monophysitism => Monothelitism => Monoenergism => Iconomachy.

So you wouldn't really see Arianism on the 9th century. Perhaps some remains of the Iconomachy, which by the way was taken care by the 7th Ecumenical Synod (8th century). What an era....

MY history degree just got a big boner from this!

[arthurverdin]

Never got it, why you have for instance the religion of the 'Cathares' from South of France, but not that one. [/quote]

Because the Cathar heresy happens during the game timespan?