Talk:Avignon Papacy

message: Is there someone who could elaborate on why the seat of the Papacy was moved to Avignon? (I'd do it myself, except that I know nothing whatsoever about the topic...) - Vardion 09:14, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh.  I was wondering the same thing! MichaelHudson 12:57, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  France was, by far, the most powerful Western power at the time, and this meant a lot of Cardinals. There was a constant power struggle between the French Cardinals and the (largely) Italian Popes. Avignon was, for the average Christian, five weeks closer than Rome, so it was also a big help to the average person seeking justice. Acting as adjudicators had become a constant part of the Curia's job. There was also a desire to get away from some of the corruption of Rome. I got all of these from Southern's "Western Society and the Church in the Middle Ages" starting on page 133.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by JoshNarins (talk • contribs) 18:45, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

text: Avignon was seat of papacy because Rome was a complete mess and getting sacked all the time.  The popes went to Avingnon to be "protected" by the French Crown.  It did not turn out to be a good experience.  St Catherine of Siena is the one who finally pushed for the Pope to return to Rome.DaveTroy 10:32, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: While I realize the absurdity of answering a question from four years ago. I would like to split a hair and point out that Avignon was never the "seat" of the papacy. The popes who resided there did so for protection (needed or otherwise). Rome continued to be the "seat" of the Papacy and the Avignon Popes always considered themselves the Bishops of Rome.--Kjrjr (talk) 19:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: (First comments)

message: The article seems to say that Martin Luther first coined the term above. Is there a reference for this? Luther did write an influential book called On the Babylonian Captivity of the Church, but from my reading of the summaries (blush) I understand that this referred to the "captivity" of the church under papal rule, not to the "captivity" of the papacy in Avignon.--Iacobus 01:11, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Bingo, the term was coined by Petrarch, who wrote of Avignon as "the Babylon of the West" in a letter to a friend, written between 1340 & 1353. Link to text of letter here  (shame there is no proper citation). I will change the article accordingly. --Iacobus 04:01, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Babylonian Captivity of the Papacy 

message: This article kind of mentions the schism, mainly just in one of the headings. Perhaps a small note should be made about what the schism actually was (linking to the main schism article?) As it stands, the word is in the heading, but isn't really mentioned in that section of the article!
:: Agreed.  The article should, I think, link up to the Western Schism, but instead it talks about the revolt of Italian territories.  Very confusing, and it needs an expert review.  jrcagle 17:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a bit late, but the gap was still there by the look of it, so I've fixed it (see here}. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:43, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Schism? 

message: The article says "A stronger source of influence [for the move] was the move of the Roman Curia from Rome to Avignon in 1305." But the Roman Curia article says the Roman Curia was established in the 16th Century.  So how is this possible? 68.36.163.22 00:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman Curia? 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 14:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: England and/or France weren't so main power as some people think. Hungarian royal inland revenues, controlled territories and royal armies were bigger/higher in that period than English or French revenues/armies/territories.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.111.185.112 (talk) 21:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ENGLAND AND FRANCE AS MAIN POWERS? :))))) 

message: Were the Avignon popes still formally Bishop of Rome? Were they also made Bishop of Avignon (if such a title existed)? Who filled the void in administering the Diocese of Rome during this period?--NeantHumain (talk) 23:23, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. No. Whoever did the work when the pope was there, presumably...Moonraker12 (talk) 13:47, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bishops of Rome 

message: The article could maybe mention that similar attempts to move the papacy outside Rome have also been made in more recent times. For instance, Leo XIII had proposed to move the papacy to Austria-Hungary, while Pius XII had considered moving it to Portugal. ADM (talk) 16:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: When? Gavin (talk) 01:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Leo XIII and Pius XII

message: Could this short division be considered an Orthodox sect? (I'm trying to learn more about Orthodoxy.) In a rather brief scan through, the wiki article for Easter Orthodox Church doesn't seem to indicate what makes up an Orthodox church. Some parts seem to indicate it means any church that divided from the Roman Papacy during the ecumenical reforms. Others seem to indicate any church which considers itself Catholic and has a pope not presiding or adhering to the Roman Papacy. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 04:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Orthodoxy?

message: I've changed the introduction quite a bit; it mostly wasn't about the Avignon papacy at all, and was talking about the western schism. On the other hand, the "Schism" sectiion had a big gap in it, as it didn't explain what the schism was or why it is relevant here.
So hopefully that's been resolved now. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:40, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent edits 

message: Prior to this move back in the 5th Century, the then-pope, Stephen II, was under threat by the Lombards of Italy.  They were one of the local kingdoms and were trying to take Rome and what is not the vatican land away from the Pope.  The pope first asked the patriarch in Constantinople if he would send military assistance to defend the papacy from the Lombards.  His request was not only refused, it was ignored...kind of cemented the Schism with the Orthodox church in the East.  He then turned to the Franks who helped Pope Stephen II out at a "price they couldn't refuse."
Over time the relationship between France and the Papacy, different players now - King Phillip the Fair, and Pope Innocent III, became in-tolerable to other nations, specifically England.  France was "borrowing" money from the Vatican to pay for the excesses of King Philip, the Fair, of France in his war with England. There was other politicking going on too, but no room or time to go into that.
King Phillip, offered--urged---forced the move of the control of the Papacy and the Pope to relocate in Avignon.  This in turn caused another upheaval which included three different popes, at least one of which was in Rome elevated legitimately by the sitting Cardinals, all at the same time claiming the authority and headship of the Church. BobG  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.123.142.48 (talk) 01:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: (A comment)

message: This section is inadequate in its scope and the main article it should refer to is Western schism (not War of the Eight Saints). Western schism provides a better overview of the situation:
After Pope Gregory XI died in 1378, the Romans rioted to ensure the election of a Roman for pope. At the same time a large group of Italians demanded an Italian pope. On April 8, 1378 the cardinals elected a Neapolitan because of the coercion of the Italian mob.[3] Urban VI, born Bartolomeo Prignano, the Archbishop of Bari, was elected. Urban had been a respected administrator in the papal chancery at Avignon, but as pope he proved suspicious, reformist, and prone to violent outbursts of temper. Many of the cardinals who had elected him soon regretted their decision: the majority removed themselves from Rome to Anagni, where, even though Urban was still reigning, they elected Robert of Geneva as a rival pope on September 20 of the same year. Robert took the name Clement VII and reestablished a papal court in Avignon. The second election threw the Church into turmoil. There had been rival antipopeclaimants to the papacy—before, but most of them had been appointed by various rival factions; in this case, a single group of leaders of the Church had created both the pope and the antipope. This greatly confused the European people, who had seen the pope as a sacred position. With two popes people had trouble having faith in either leader.[4]
The conflicts quickly escalated from a church problem to a diplomatic crisis that divided Europe. Secular leaders had to choose which claimant they would recognize:
Avignon: France, Aragon, Castile and León, Cyprus, Burgundy, Savoy, Naples, Scotland and Owain Glyndwr's rebellion in Wales recognized the Avignon claimant;
Rome: Denmark, England, Flanders, the Holy Roman Empire, Hungary, Ireland (English dominion), Norway, Portugal, Poland (later Poland-Lithuania), Sweden, Republic of Venice, and other City States of northern Italy, recognized the Roman claimant.''
Peter K Burian (talk) 02:05, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Western Schism section needs more specifics 

message: I dispute this quote, as no citation is given and a Google search also only turns up uncited references which just seem to have been copied from here. Indeed, Tiernay (1964, pp. 83-84), writes: "The king did not reply by theological arguments." Sylvesterjay (talk) 08:38, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: "Your venerable conceitedness may know that we are nobody's vassal in temporal matters."

message: Why do we have sections about the anti-popes? This article is suppose to be about the popes who resided at Avignon from 1309 to 1377. Put the French anti-popes in an article of their own. GoodDay (talk) 06:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Remove the anti-popes