Using the example of the late medieval bishops of Minden, the article examines how the question ‘The church as a state?’ is to be answered concerning the terri-tories of the ecclesiastical princes of the empire. After a look at the position of the bishops as the holders of their own principalities with corresponding rights, i.e. secular rights of rule, the relationship of the bishops to the kings or emperors of the Holy Roman Empire is first examined, whereby in the case of Minden it becomes clear that closer relationships with the head of the empire were rather the exception and often stemmed from kinship or other closer contacts that had been established before the episcopate. Subsequently, the focus is on the episcopal rule over the ecclesiastical principality. The study considers the restrictions on episcopal action, the bishop's rule in the prince-bishopric and his relationship with his neighbours. The study concludes that the bishops of Minden had little room for manoeuvre due to the difficult financial situation of their principality as well as the conflicts with their cathedral city and some of their neighbours. Their rule certainly had features that could be considered characteristics of a ‘state’, but since the episcopal territory was part of the Holy Roman Empire, the term ‘church as principality’ is more appro-priate for the circumstances described than ‘church as state’.