You might want to consult Stephan Kuttner, "Cardinalis: the history of a
canonical concept," Traditio 3 (1945): 129-214.
Tom Izbicki
At 11:36 PM 7/19/2000 -0400, you wrote:
>I've come across a usage I've never seen and could use some advice and
>interpretation from the learned list members. In a bull of 1097 Urban II
>proffered the following privilege to the abbots of St. Maur sur Loire in
>Anjou: "..apostolica auctoritate statuimus, ut in loco illo venerabili sepe
>superius nominato cardinale abbas perpetuis temporibus habeatur."
>The privilege was confirmed by Pope Anacletus II in 1131.
>My reading suggests that by this time, late 11th century, that the title of
>cardinal was restricted to the cardinal bishops, priests and deacons who
>were so appointed as a sort of Roman senate, with a title conveying as well
>a titular church in Rome which functioned as their "status" in the Roman
>church.
>My impression was that earlier on, there were some non-Roman priests and
>bishops who held the title "cardinalis" out of some local distinction or
>other, but that this had ceased, at least as a papal policy by the mid-11th
>century. So what do we have here? If anyone knows about this issue, I'd like
>also to know what perquisites were commonly attached to such a title as a
>non-Roman appointment.
>John Wickstrom
>Kalamazoo College
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|