[A]s far as I know:
1) The church served as a wealthy but weak professional administrative branch of government.
2) The church could grant moral authority to nobility and monarchy, or revoke it. Meaning that if revoked, your lands were marked for conquest by others.
3) The central tenet of christianity is the extension of kinship love to non-kin, breaking familial and tribal bonds. This is the only meaningful principle. It also happens to intuitively reflect hunter gatherer ethics and morality.
4) The church was able to legally enforce this policy by the prohibition on cousin marriage, and the grant of property rights to women.
5) While the church pursued these policies purely out of self interest: the removal of competition to the church as government, and the cheaper acquisition of lands, the net effect was to restore order to Celtica after the Roman destruction of Celtic Civilization and the impact of the migration period, and to provide sufficient administrative support that Saxon (north sea hanseatic) civilization could evolve into what we think of as Protestant Europe.
There is nothing valuable at all in the literature. It is mere nonsense. The ‘good’ outcomes were the product of one principle ‘love’ and one institution: property rights under the common saxon law, administered by literate if ignorant clerks.
Rome created a false history of european barbarism. The church, starting with Bede, has been successful in authoring a false history of Europe. Just as the “democratic era’ has authored a false history of Europe. Just as americans are being taught a false history of Europe. Economic history tells us differently.
Aristocracy, sovereignty and Militita, Rule of Law, the common law of property, Extra-kinship love and high trust.
These institutions produce the lowest transaction costs, and therefore highest possible economic velocity humans are capable of.