What is wrong with that? I'd like to see examples where priests in the middle ages held a lot of high feudal titles. The ones that did certainly weren't spending their time preaching in some rural town where they could be attacked by 10 followers of a foreign religion.
And before you say that it would have been historically accurate for him to have done so: tough beans. There are plenty of things that would have been historically accurate that we prevent you from doing for game balance reasons.
I believe Anaris speaks on such comparisons quite well.
If 90% of the religion follows you and 10% are evil heretics, you shouldn't be getting wounded. Your followers should protect you. Whether or not the game mechanics reflect this or not is for a different topic and proposal.
Actually, it's a perfect topic for a poorly considered proposal.
The mere fact that your argument is essentially "go away! You're pointing out my flaws and lack of consideration for more aspects of the game than the singular one I want to change because someone I tried to get assassinated didn't get knocked from his/her position!" speaks volumes.
