Folia Theologica et Canonica 3. 25/17 (2014)

IUS CANONICUM - Szabolcs Anzelm Szuromi, O.Praem., Crystallization process of the ecclesiastical discipline regarding the sacrament of extreme unction and its canon law historical sources

234

SZABOLCS ANZELM SZUROMI, O.PRAEM.

of the absolution, as well as the anointing with the blessed oil. Similarly to this it is worth descending to D. 3 c. 18 de cons.26, attributed to Pope Fabianus (236- 250)27, which makes provisions in general of the blessing of the holy oils by the bishop, that is, not only of the oil of the sick. According to the main rule this is to happen once a year. The text emphasizes that for the blessing of the oils it was the apostles and their successors who received authority. Quoting canon 20 of the Council of Toledo this is complemented by D. 4 c. 124 de cons.28, which fixes the bishop’s legal power for blessing the holy oils anytime. Among normal circumstances its standard is the blessing of oils before Easter, fallowing which the bishop must provide for the passing of the holy oils to the area of the whole diocese by the deacons and subdeacons. The closing sentence of the canon reserves the power of using the holy oils for the bishop and empowers a presbyter only in the absence of the bishop for their administration. Based on its context however it is also unequivocal, that here the conciliar canon speaks fundamentally of the anointment performed during baptism. It is well known that during the early centuries - as it is clearly testified by the canonical sources and by those medieval canon law collections which used these sources - the ecclesiastical disciplinary texts designate the bishop as the administrator

.29 If, after all these, we turn our attention to the decretal collection of Gregory IX (1227-1241), that is to the Liber Extra, we can see, that X 5.40.14, coming from Pope Alexander III (1159-1181) in 1 172-1 17330, lays down that determination which later becomes a definition about the administration of the holy anointment, and according to which every priest, and only an ordained priest is capable to administer it. It is the curiosity of the text that referring to the evolved ecclesiastical tradition it appoints even the date of the solemn administration of the

26 D. 3 c. 18 de cons.: Litteris uestris inter cetera insertum inuenimus, quosdam religionis uestrae episcopos a uestro nostroque ordine discrepare, et non per singulos annos in cena Domini crisma conficere. Errant uero qui talia excogitant, et mente uesana potius, quam recta sentientes hec facere audent. §.l. Sicut enim ipsius diei solempnitas per singulos annos est celebranda, ita ip- sius sancti crismatis confectio per singulos annos est agenda, et de anno in annum renouanda, et fidelibus tradendum, quia nouum sacramentum est et per singulos annos, in iam dicta die in- nouandum, et uetus in sanctis ecclesiis cremandum. Ista a sanctis Apostolis et successoribus eorum accepimus, uobisque tenenda mandamus. Friedberg I. 1357.

27 JK +93 (lxxvi).

28 D. 4 c. 124 de cons.: Omni tempore liceat episcopo crisma conficere, et per suas dioceses destinare ita, ut ad accipiendum crisma diaconus aut subdiaconus ante diem Pascae de singulis ecclesiis ad episcopum destinetur. §. 1. Presbiter uero presente episcopo non signet infantes, nisi forte at episcopo fuerit illi preceptum. §.2. Nec liceat presbitero prius episcopo in baptisterium introire, sed cum episcopo, nisi forte aut absens fuerit, aut egrotus. Friedberg I. 1399.

29 Szuromi, Sz. A., Egyházi intézménytörténet (Bibliotheca Institut! Postgradualis Iuris Canonici Universitatis Catholicae de Petro Pázmány nominatae 1/4), Budapest 2003. 7; cf. Szuromi, Sz. A., A keresztség kiszolgáltatására vonatkozó kánoni előírások egyházjogtörténeti változásai és alkalmazhatóságuk az új evangelizációban, in Kánonjog 16 (2014) 71-82.

30 JL 12184 (8191).