# Is a cardinal allowed to vote for himself to be the next Pope? NT **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 27, 2013, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570 "2013-02-27T23:25:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![gerund](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ed655f/32.png) [@gerund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gerund)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2013, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/1 "2013-02-27T23:25:32Z")
NT ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2013, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/2 "2013-02-27T23:28:52Z")
Yes. (the ballots are anonymous, so there isn’t really any way to stop him if it was against the rules, but in any case, there isn’t any such rule) ---
**Author:** ![Waenara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/50afbb/32.png) [@Waenara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waenara)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/3 "2013-02-28T02:26:38Z")
There’s currently no rule against cardinals voting for themselves (since it’s a secret ballot). But in the past (from 1621-1495), the method of voting used was designed to prevent voting for yourself. From [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_conclave#Voting): > [@](#): > > The oath when casting one’s vote is therefore anonymous, since the name of the elector is no longer signed on the ballot with that of the candidate. (Previously, the ballot was also signed by the elector and then folded over to cover the signature of the elector and then sealed to result in a semi-secret ballot. See example above.) This was the procedure prior to 1945. Above is a copy of the old three section semi-secret ballot, which was last used in the conclave of 1939. There was no oath taken when actually casting ballots, prior to 1621. Completely secret ballots (at the option of the cardinals present and voting) were sometimes used prior to 1621, but these secret ballots had no oath taken when the vote was actually cast. At some conclaves prior to 1621, the cardinals verbally voted and sometimes stood in groups to facilitate counting the votes cast. The signature of the elector covered by a folded-over part of the ballot paper was added by Gregory XV in 1621, to prevent anyone from casting the deciding vote for himself. Cardinal Pole of England refused to cast the deciding vote for himself in 1549 (and was not elected), but in 1492 Cardinal Borgia (Alexander VI) did cast the deciding vote for himself. Faced by the mortal challenge to the papacy emanating from Protestantism, and fearing schism due to several stormy conclaves in the late 16th and early 17th centuries, Gregory XV established this procedure to prevent any cardinal from casting the deciding vote for himself. Since 1945, a cardinal can again cast the deciding vote for himself, though the 2/3 majority rule has always been continued, except when John Paul II had modified that rule in 1996 (after 33 ballots, a simple majority was sufficient), with the 2/3 majority rule restored in 2007 by Benedict XVI. So there is now a secret ballot, but a 2/3 majority is required. So you can vote for yourself and perhaps be the vote that tips it over the 2/3 cutoff, but that means that nearly 2/3 of the cardinals voted for you anyways. ---
**Author:** ![twickster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ec9cab/32.png) [@twickster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/twickster)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/4 "2013-02-28T04:35:58Z")
Moved MPSIMS --\> GQ. ---
**Author:** ![gerund](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ed655f/32.png) [@gerund](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gerund)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/5 "2013-02-28T05:46:33Z")
> [@Waenara](#): > > There’s currently no rule against cardinals voting for themselves (since it’s a secret ballot). But in the past (from 1621-1495), the method of voting used was designed to prevent voting for yourself. > > From [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_conclave#Voting): > So there is now a secret ballot, but a 2/3 majority is required. So you can vote for yourself and perhaps be the vote that tips it over the 2/3 cutoff, but that means that nearly 2/3 of the cardinals voted for you anyways. Fascinating. Thanks for that explanation. Another question: If you were a cardinal, would you cast the deciding vote for yourself as Pope? I would. ---
**Author:** ![Waenara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/50afbb/32.png) [@Waenara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waenara)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 9:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/6 "2013-02-28T09:10:27Z")
> [@Waenara](#): > > There’s currently no rule against cardinals voting for themselves (since it’s a secret ballot). But in the past (from 1621-1495), the method of voting used was designed to prevent voting for yourself. On re-reading my post, I realized I made a huge typo. Cardinals were prevented from voting for themselves from 1621- **1945** (not 1495). I’m an atheist, so it’s hard to say what I would do if I were a cardinal. I guess hypothetically there’s no reason not to vote for yourself if there’s no rule against doing so. And I guess if you truly feel that God is calling you to be pope (and that you already have to have nearly 2/3 of the cardinals voting for you), then I don’t see the harm in voting for yourself. However, I also feel that (theoretically and ideally), cardinals should be humble and maybe voting for yourself isn’t in line with that. IRL, I think that’s it’s more likely than not that a cardinal would vote for themselves if they think they’re a real contender at getting the top spot. ---
**Author:** ![Claverhouse](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/13edae/32.png) [@Claverhouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Claverhouse)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 9:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/7 "2013-02-28T09:48:38Z")
> [@Waenara](#): > > On re-reading my post, I realized I made a huge typo. Cardinals were prevented from voting for themselves from 1621- **1945** (not 1495). > > I’m an atheist, so it’s hard to say what I would do if I were a cardinal. Being an atheist is not an absolute bar to the papacy. ---
**Author:** ![sohvan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/96bed5/32.png) [@sohvan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sohvan)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 9:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/8 "2013-02-28T09:59:40Z")
Can the cardinals give an empty vote or do they need to vote for someone? If I was electing the next pope I’d probably do one of two things: 1. Throw my support behind my favourite candidate with a decent chance early. If they win, then my best pick is the pope and may be grateful for the early support. OTOH, if they lose the winner might resent me for opposing them from the start. 2. Keep my options open. Vote for myself or empty as a sign that my vote is still up for grabs, which should be pretty obvious if I only get one vote. ---
**Author:** ![Waenara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/50afbb/32.png) [@Waenara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waenara)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/9 "2013-02-28T10:03:24Z")
> [@Claverhouse](#): > > Being an atheist is not an absolute bar to the papacy. Well, I think you also need to be a Catholic (even if you’re a closet atheist). And you need to be male. I strike out on both counts. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 10:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/10 "2013-02-28T10:36:52Z")
One of the American cardinals explained that although you can vote for yourself you can not put yourself forward as a candidate. There is no campaigning for yourself of election speeches. ---
**Author:** ![yellowjacketcoder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/4bbf92/32.png) [@yellowjacketcoder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yellowjacketcoder)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/11 "2013-02-28T13:11:00Z")
> [@sohvan](#): > > Can the cardinals give an empty vote or do they need to vote for someone? If I was electing the next pope I’d probably do one of two things: > > 1. Throw my support behind my favourite candidate with a decent chance early. If they win, then my best pick is the pope and may be grateful for the early support. OTOH, if they lose the winner might resent me for opposing them from the start. > > 2. Keep my options open. Vote for myself or empty as a sign that my vote is still up for grabs, which should be pretty obvious if I only get one vote. Well, since it’s a secret ballot, how would the pope-elect now that you have or have not been voting for him? ---
**Author:** ![Alley\_Dweller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alley_dweller/32/430_2.png) [@Alley\_Dweller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alley_Dweller)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 1:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/12 "2013-02-28T13:21:42Z")
> [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > Well, since it’s a secret ballot, how would the pope-elect now that you have or have not been voting for him? He could ask. Would you, a cardinal, lie to the Pope? ---
**Author:** ![sohvan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/96bed5/32.png) [@sohvan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sohvan)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/13 "2013-02-28T13:28:08Z")
> [@yellowjacketcoder](#): > > Well, since it’s a secret ballot, how would the pope-elect now that you have or have not been voting for him? There’s no real way to know for sure of course. There’s always the possibility of promising to vote one way and actually voting another. I would be very surprised if there aren’t a lot of unofficial negotiations and deals struck in the process of electing the pope, though. ---
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/14 "2013-02-28T15:57:16Z")
> [@sohvan](#): > > There’s no real way to know for sure of course. There’s always the possibility of promising to vote one way and actually voting another. I would be very surprised if there aren’t a lot of unofficial negotiations and deals struck in the process of electing the pope, though. I recall reading a book about the JPI and JPII conclaves, in the year of 3 popes. Obviously people say and do things that they think enhance their chances; sort of like the old “pep talk in the locker room” from that annoying guy who uses lines like “we’re all pulling together to win, let’s go!”. But, too obvious campaigning would turn off more than it turns on. After all, a number of those guys are seriously dedicated and won’t tolerate “clique deals” that stink of political machinations. The number of Rome-based cardinals has slowly diminished, (IIRC early in the 1900’s half were Italian?) and the ones out in the real world don’t want a church percieved as introverted and self-serving. According to the usually “anonymous sources” several candidates got a decent number, and over the ballots a choice would climb, not reach 2/3, then fade as people realized “I guess it’s not him”. Cardinal Wojtyla for example, started to get a few votes, and as people abandoned the early favourites, they began voting for him in larger numbers. He said something like, “oh, no, not me” but the cardianls eventualy decided he was the one. Nobody’s going to twist arms and make deals with 100+ cardinals. After all, what can you offer them all? ---
**Author:** ![yellowjacketcoder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/4bbf92/32.png) [@yellowjacketcoder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yellowjacketcoder)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/15 "2013-02-28T16:29:01Z")
> [@Alley\_Dweller](#): > > He could ask. Would you, a cardinal, lie to the Pope? I imagine it happens on a daily basis. They are only human. ---
**Author:** ![APB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/8e8cbc/32.png) [@APB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/APB)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/16 "2013-02-28T16:43:17Z")
Where the process gets political is doubtless not with candidates voting and campaigning for themselves, but with their friends campaigning on their behalf. The successful candidate will have no way of knowing who voted for them. But they probably do have a good idea as to who has been going around suggesting their name to other cardinals. And this needn’t be overt. The smarter operators are presumably perfectly capable of discussing the matter in what appear to be general terms while leaving everyone in no doubt as to their preferred choice. It would be this, not the unknowable votes, that the new Pope might later want to reward. And why not? Those cardinals who can sway a conclave in this way, whether because they are astute, experienced, respected, ambitious or just really devious, probably are those to whom the Pope should be giving the best jobs. ---
**Author:** ![Pleonast](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pleonast/32/1183_2.png) [@Pleonast](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pleonast)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/17 "2013-02-28T16:52:37Z")
When was the last time the newly elected Pope was not previously a Cardinal? ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/18 "2013-02-28T17:06:43Z")
> [@md2000](#): > > I recall reading a book about the JPI and JPII conclaves, in the year of 3 popes. Was it Fr Andrew Greeley’s book, “The Making of the Popes 1978”? It’s a very good book on both conclaves, with detailed tallies of how the balloting went. It really does a good job of explaining the subtle campaigning and machinations that go into a papal election - highly recommended, if you can find a copy. ---
**Author:** ![moriah](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b2d939/32.png) [@moriah](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/moriah)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/19 "2013-02-28T17:20:22Z")
Voting for oneself can have a embarrassing result, even with secret balloting. If in the early rounds of voting a huge majority of cardinals got one vote, it would be obvious they were voting for themselves. If in the last round of voting the 2/3 majority was surpassed with 100% of the votes going to ‘the winner,’ then everyone would know you voted for yourself. Awkwarrrrrrrd. ---
**Author:** ![yellowjacketcoder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/4bbf92/32.png) [@yellowjacketcoder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yellowjacketcoder)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2013, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570/20 "2013-02-28T17:55:19Z")
> [@Pleonast](#): > > When was the last time the newly elected Pope was not previously a Cardinal? Last pope not a cardinal was Pope Urban VI in 1378. Last pope not a priest was Pope Leo X in 1513. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-a-cardinal-allowed-to-vote-for-himself-to-be-the-next-pope-nt/651570.md?page=2)