Talk:Crown-cardinal

message: Apparently, the pictures within the article refer to crown-cardinals. However, some persons appearing in the pictures do not appear in the lists within the text. For example: Jules Cardinal Mazarin, Armand Jean du Plessis, Cardinal Richelieu, Henry Benedict Stuart. --Top.Squark (talk) 12:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing cardinals 

message: I think someone should elaborate on the difference between a crown-cardinal and a national cardinal protector. We have three different lists for
1. Cardinals who are both crown-cardinals and national cardinal protectors
2. National cardinal protectors
3. Crown-cardinals
but no clear explanation of the difference. Is it that "cardinal protector" is an official title whereas "crown cardinal" is a non-official one? Does it mean people in list 2 where considered cardinal protectors officially but weren't affiliated with the crown in practice? What about jus exclusivae? What kind of cardinals does it apply to? --Top.Squark (talk) 13:02, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There certainly must be a difference, since Cardinal Protectors had to reside in the Curia to manage the interests of their monarch, while, as the discussion of Crown Cardinal seems to indicate, Crown Cardinals stayed at home and were important in the administration of their countries, e.g. Richelieu, Mazarin, Granvelle, the Infante of Portugal, etc.  There may also be a significant difference between 'created at the request of' and 'created with the permission of'.  Vicedomino (talk) 07:41, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crown-cardinals vs. cardinal protectors 

message: A manuscript list of cardinals appointed at the request of Crowns can be found in the Vatican Library in the Borghese collection, Borg. lat. 376, pp. 131-141: Pietro Francesco de Rossi, De cardinalibus electis ad preces Principum, ab anno 1294 usque in finem pontificatus Pauli III.  Its existence suggests that in the 17th century, it was thought that the institution went back to the end of the 13th century, not to the 15th century, as the authority quoted indicates.  This entire subjects seems to be ill-researched, and too casually defined. Vicedomino (talk) 08:07, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: =Cardinals appointed by Crowns

message: I take some exception to the following statement in the text, "Some crown-cardinals were cardinal-nephews or members of powerful families".  A cardinal-nephew was appointed by the Pope, not a Crown, and acted as the Pope's foreign minister and more. How could he be a crown cardinal? A Crown could and did request the Pope to appoint a member of an important Roman family to be a Cardinal Protector (as in the case of Antonio Barberini and France).  But there is confusion and imprecision in the article, I fear.  Vagueness of statements is not a good thing.  Vicedomino (talk) 08:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Crown cardinals, defined

message: The statement appears just above (which seems to have been subsequently altered in the entry), "...that the crown-cardinals of Austria, France, and Spain could exercise the jus exclusivae during papal conclaves from the 16th to 20th centuries?"  This is not precise.  Austria did not have the jus exclusivae.  The Holy Roman Emperor did.  Up until 1804, when Napoleon forced the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire, it was often true that the Archduke of Austria was also the Holy Roman Emperor, but theoretically the Imperial Crown was elective.  Hence the War of the Austrian Succession in the 1740's.  And Cardinals, crown or otherwise, did not just issue the exclusiva at will or whim. There had to be a document from the Crown stating the exclusive, and the cardinal declaring it had to be properly credentialed as the representative of the Crown concerned before they could impose the exclusive.  They had to present their credentials and the actual letter of exclusion to the Dean of the Sacred College, who had them registered in the acts of the Conclave. 
In 1903, Jan Puzyna de Kosielsko of Krakow presented the veto personally authorized by the Emperor Franz Josef.  The Emperor  had tried to have the Cardinal Archbishop of Vienna, Anton Gruscha, carry the exclusiva, but the Cardinal refused, both on grounds of principle and of personal friendship (Princess Catherine Radziwill, The Austrian Court from Within (New York 1916), 188-190). I know of no evidence that Puzyna was a 'crown-cardinal'.
Vicedomino (talk) 08:24, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Jus exclusivae

message: In the lede...
Usually unable to take part in the pratiche, they were not papabili and rarely received more than one or two votes
What does pratiche mean, since it is a non-link ?  Obviously they were able to vote in the Conclave.. Claverhouse (talk) 06:59, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pratiche