nominate a coadjutor with right of succession to a
bishop or head of a convent in case of necessity.
This prohibition has, indeed, been interpreted as
referring not to the pope but to other ecclesiastical
dignitaries; but practically, in the altered modern
circumstances, the matter is no longer of impor
tance. The same thing applies to the Protestant
churches of Germany, which at one time allowed
expectancies to exist in the bishoprics and chapters
that became Protestant at the Reformation or the Peace of Westphalia.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: P. Hinsehius, Kirchenrecht, ii. 65, 69, 84, 255, 474, 639, 65'3, iii. 113, 6 vols., Berlin, 1869‑97; J. H. BShmer, Jus ecclesiasticum protestantium, iii. 8, §§ 9 sqq., 4 vols., Halle, 1756‑63; H. C. de Senekenberg, De jure primarum precum, Frankfort, 1784 ; A. Mayer, Thesaurus noaus juris ecclesiastiei, i. 249, Regensburg, 1791.
EXSUPERIUS (EXUPERIUS), SAINT:Bishop of Toulouse; d. Sept. 28 (?), year not known. His early life is unknown, but from allusions in Jerome's letters (liv. 11, cxix., cxxiii. 16, cxxv. 20) it has been conjectured that in 394 he was a presbyter at Rome; he was bishop of Toulouse in 404, and in 411 was still living. In 406 Jerome dedicated his commentary on Zechariah to him. Jerome pays a glowing tribute to his self‑sacrificing charity during the disturbances in that part of France in 411. From the letters of Pope Innocent I. (Epist., vi.) it appears that in Feb., 405, Exsuperius applied to the pope for advice respecting Biblical and episcopal matters. He completed the basilica of St. Saturninus, begun by his predecessor, Silvius.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: ASS, Sept., vii. 623‑630; Tillemont, Ml;‑
moires, Vol. x.
I. In the Roman Catholic Church.
History (§ 1).
Doctrine (§ 2).
Preparation and Administration (§ 3).
II. In the Greek Church.
Extreme unction is one of the minor sacraments of both the Roman and the Greek Churches.
I. In the Roman Catholic Church: Extreme unction is mentioned as the fifth sacrament by Peter Lombard who brings it into close connection with the sacrament of penance. He
r. History. uses two passages as Biblical authori
ties, Mark vi. 13 and Jas. v. 14‑15.
These passages have, however, little to do with the
meus speak of it, but do not treat it as a sacrament.
Oil was, however, frequently used by Christians in
private life, chiefly for the anointing of the sick.
Tertullian, for instance, mentions the healing of
Severna, the father of the Emperor Antoninus, with
oil. Popular superstition soon exploited these ex
periences, and used the oil in the church lamps.
Some bishops, e.g., Chrysostom and Decentius, did
not object, but limited the employment to members
in good standing. Innocent I. also mentions the
anointing of the sick, but not of the moribund; in
case a priest was not available, laymen might per
form the ceremony. Toward the end of the eighth
century extreme unction entered upon a definite
course of development, and was brought into rela
tions with remission of sins; it received, conse
quently, a sacramental character in connection with
penance. The question of the repetition of extreme
unction was raised in the twelfth century. A
popular superstition held that a Christian who,
after participation, had been restored to health was
to be looked upon as one departed: he was not to
touch the ground with bare feet, eat meat, or
cohabit with his wife. When Theodulf of Orl6ans
xxtreme Unction 8zekiel
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
recommended that the anointing should take place in the church, he had not in mind either exclusively or chiefly the application to the moribund. Hugo of St. Victor (Summa aenten.tiarum, vi. 15) was the first theologian to treat extreme unction systematically. He deals, however, only with two questions, the institution and the repetition of the sacrament. From that time on, extreme unction received more detailed attention, particularly by Bonaventura and Thomas Aquinas. The latter treats it from two points of view: (1) the sacrament itself, its effect, matter, and form; (2) its administration and use, the recipients, repetition, and parts to be anointed. The principal features of the sacrament were thus fixed, and received ecclesiastical sanction at the Council of Florence (1439) through Eugene IV., and its final and definite form at the Council of Trent.
Extreme unction was instituted according to Peter Lombard by the apostles, according to Alexander Hales by Christ, according to Bonaventura by the Holy Spirit through the apos2. Doctrine. tles, according to Thomas Aquinas by Christ, but was promulgated by the apostles. The Council of Trent declares that, according to Mark vi. 13, Christ suggested the sacrament, and that James, his brother, promulgated and recommended it. The material which is to be used in extreme unction is olive‑oil consecrated by a bishop: and, according to a decision of Paul V., given in 1655, the oil is not effective unless so consecrated. Gregory XVI. (1842) confirmed and further limited this decision by declaring that not even in case of extreme necessity could a priest consecrate oil for the purpose. The form of the sacrament was settled only after many discussions. With the growing tendency to look upon anointing as sacramental, the form of prayer was changed from the precatory to the declarative, and this was confirmed by the Council of Florence. The specific purpose and effect of extreme unction is somewhat indefinite. The Council of Trent declares that this sacrament completes not only penance, but the whole Christian life. Nevertheless, it does not occupy nearly the important position in the doctrinal system of the Roman Church taken by baptism, the mass, and penance it is merely an annex to the latter sacrament to which it gives the character of preparation for death. A specific effect has never been attributed to it officially. Peter Lombard gives as the purpose the remission of sins and the alleviation of physical infirmity. Albert the Great declares that extreme unction could purify only from the remnants of sin which prevent the entrance of the soul into eternal rest. Thomas Aquinas defines these remnants as a spiritual weakness and lassitude which disqualify man for the full enjoyment of the life of grace and glory, and states that extreme unction is a medicine for both. He speaks of physical healing as a secondary effect, taking place when the primary purpose of the sacrament is not hindered but promoted. Bonaventura, on the other hand, teaches that the specific effect of extreme unction is the remission of venial sins which were completely obviated by this sacrament owing to its strengthening effect upon soul and body.
The Council of Trent repeated all the positive doctrines of the theologians, and added the doctrine of unction with the Holy Spirit as the specific effect. These differences concerning the effect and purpose of extreme unction were unsatisfactory, and attempts were made at greater precision. The Roman Catechism assumes two effects, the remission of venial sins, and the removal of spiritual weakness and of any remaining traces of sin. BelIarmine,finally, attempts a precise definition of the " remnants of sin "; they are mortal or venial sins which man might commit, after penance and the Eucharist; or sins which were not atoned for properly, because sick persons had unwittingly received in an improper manner, and, therefore, without the due effect.
The olive‑oil used in extreme unction is consecrated during the mass on 11laundy Thursday. Each deanery receives a certain amount for distribution among the parishes. The oil which is not used up within a year, is burned in
3• Prepara‑ the sanctuary lamp; if there be danger tion and that the supply will be exhausted
Athninis‑ before the end of the year, small quan‑
tration. titles of unconsecrated oil may be
added. Only a priest or higher dig
nitary may administer this sacrament. Even the
pope can not authorize deacons and laymen to do
so, although Innocent I. implies that they may in
case of necessity. The administrator acts as a
representative of the whole Church; and for this
reason it is desirable that several priests be present
to take part in the ceremony. The regulations
concerning the degree of sickness which entitles a
person to receive the sacrament vary, but agree in
the particular that the probability of recovery is
excluded, and that the recipient must be conscious.
The oil is to be applied to the eyes, ears, hands,
nose, and mouth, and to the abdomen and the feet
of males, but not of females. The sacraments of
penance and of the Eucharist should as a rule
precede extreme unction.
II. In the Greek Church: The usage of the Greek Church differs widely from that of Rome both in methodsof administration andindoctrine. Thereit is simply an anointing of the sick, and its purpose is the restoration of health, physical and spiritual. The place of administration is the church, if possible. The ritual is elaborate, and requires seven priests if they are procurable. The oil is consecrated on each occasion by the senior priest, and each priest repeats the full ceremony while seven selections are read each from the Epistles, Gospels, and collects. On Maundy Thursday the feast of euchelaion (" oil of prayer ") is observed, in which the whole congregation joins and is anointed. The frequent use of the sacrament is recommended.
The Neatorians never use extreme unction; the
Armenian Church has discontinued l ~it.
BIBLIOGRAPHY: On the Roman sacrament consult: RL, ix. 712‑725: E. Martbne De antiqau ecekaia•, ritibus i.. chap.
7, Antwerp, 1738; A. J. Binterim, DenkvxArdig,~n, vi.
3, pp. 217 eqq., Mains, 1831; J. C. N. Augusti, i)enk_ %OkeLfen. ix. 455 sqq., Leipaio, 1828; J. H. Blunt,
Sacraments and Sacramental Ordinances London, 1867;
idem. Dictionary of „al and Historical Theology, pp
958 RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA ~ kime Qaolrioa
771‑773, ib. 1870; F. Probst, Sakramente and Sakramentalien, pp. 373 sqq., Tiibingen, 1872; J. H. Oswald, Die dogrratische Lehre von den heiligen Sakramenten, ii. 257 sqq., Munster, 1877; M. Heimbucher, Die heilipe Oelung, Regensburg, 1888; P. Schanz, Die Lehre von den heiligen Sakramenten, pp. 639 sqq., Freiburg, 1893; W. E. Addis and T. Arnold, Catholic Dictionary, pp. 363‑366, London, 1903.
For the G•eek Church consult: W. Gass, Svmbolik der priechiechen Kirche, pp. 292 eqq., Berlin, 1872; F. Kattenbuseh, Lehrbuch der verglefichenden Kunleaeionakunde, i. 434 sqq., Freiburg, 1892; A. von Maltzew, Die Sakramente der orthodox‑kalholiachen Kirehe, pp. eoexxtiii. eqq.,,. 450‑553, Berlin, 1898; K. Beth, Die orientalische Chria‑
tenheit der Mittelmeerldnder, pp. 316 sqq., Berlin, 1902.
EYLERT, RUHLEMANN FRIEDRICH:Evangelical bishop of Prussia; b. at Hamm (20 m. s.e. of Munster) Apr. 5, 1770; d. at Potsdam Feb. 8, 1852. After completing his theological education at Halle in 1794, he became pastor in his native town, and in 1806 was appointed preacher to the court and garrison at Potsdam. Eleven years later he became bishop of Prussia and a member of the council of state as well as of the ministry for religion and education. Far more important than 'his official activity, however, was the influence which he exercised on Frederick William III. The development of Eylert was from rationalism toward orthodoxy, although he never reached a sure dogmatic position. He was deeply interested in the agenda and in the movement for union, and remained in active service until his resignation in 1844. Eylert was a prolific writer, his chief works being as follows: Betrachtungen caber die trostvollen Wahrheiten des Christentums bei der letzten Trennung von den Unsrigen (Dortmund, 1803); Homilien iiber die Parabeln Jesu (Halle, 1806); Predigten 4'sber Bediirfnisse unsers Herzens and Verhdltnisse unsers Lebens (1813); Ueber den Wert and die Wirkung der fur die evangelische Kirche beatimmten Liturgie and Agende (Potsdam, 1830); Das gate Werk der Union. (1846); and, above all, Charakterziige and historische Fragmente aus dem Leben Friedrich Wilhelm 111. (3 vols., Magdeburg, 18431846; Eng. transl. Characteristic Traits and Domestic Life of Frederick William III., King of Prussia, by J. Birch, London, 1844). He also collaborated with J. H. B. Daseke in publishing the Magazin von Fest‑, Gelegenheits‑ and anderen Predigten (4 vols., Magdeburg, 1816‑20).
BIBLIOGRAPHY: Neuer Nekrolog der Deutachen, Weimar, 1852; ADS, vi. 458.
EZEKIEL. I. The Prophet.
II. The Book.
Divisions and Contents (§ 1). Literary Peculi4rities (§ 2).
Symbolic Actions (§ 3).
Other Characteristics (§ 4). Theological Character (§ 5). Relation to the Priest Code (§ 6). L The Prophet: Concerning Ezekiel, the earliest exilic prophet, his book teaches (i. 2, 3, iii. 15, xxix. 17, xl. 1) that he was the son of Buzi, of priestly descent (through the Zadokites), that he lived by the river Chebar not far from Tel‑Abib among the captives whom Nebuchadrezzar had deported with King Jehoiachin, and that he labored there as prophet from the fifth to at least the twenty‑seventh year
of this captivity (593‑571 B.c.). The statement of Josephus (Ant. X., vi. 3) that he was still a boy when carried into captivity is not probable, since he was well acquainted with the temple and its service. The river Chebar must not be confused with the Habor of II Kings xvii. 6, xviii. 11 (the modern Khabur), which empties into the Euphrates (q.v.) near Carchemish, on which the exiles of the Northern kingdom were settled; it must be sought in Babylonia and is probably the canal Kabaru, not far from Nippur. Ezekiel enjoyed the authority of a prophet among the exiles, and they often sought his counsel though it was generally contrary to their desire, and in secret they gave vent to their wrath (ii. 6). He exercised a pastoral care among his people and formed a spiritual center for those who were cut off from their land and its temple (viii. 1, xiv. 1 sqq., xx. 1, xxiv.18, xxxiii. 30‑31).
II. The Book: The prophecy of Ezekiel, the third of the books of the major prophets in the arrangement of the English Version, was no doubt put in systematic form by the prophet himself; it divides into two main parts which correspond to the two periods in which Ezekiel prophesied. The first (i.‑xxiv.) closes with the beginning of the
siege of Jerusalem by Nebuchadrezzar :. Divi‑ (588 B.c.); the second (xxxiii.‑xlviii.)
sions and begins after the destruction of the
Contents. city (586 B.c.). The interval is filled
in by prophecies against foreign nations not arranged in strict chronological order (xxv.‑xxxii.). Each main part opens with utterances upon the importance and responsibility of Ezekiel's office. The contents vary in a characteristic manner. As long as Jerusalem was standing, the announcement of coming judgment predominated; what had been God's kingdom was to fall utterly; when that had come to pass, the work of reconstruction was to begin. " While in the first half Ezekiel buried the material hope of Israel, which rested on the continued existence of Jerusalem and the Temple, in the second he rebuilt in spirit land and people, city and temple " (Klostermann). Pronouncement of judgment on the worldnations formed the transition to the establishment of the theocracy in Israel; the episode belongs therefore to the second part.
The literary peculiarities of Ezekiel's book are connected with his position as an exile during its composition. He differed from the earlier prophets, even from his older contemporary Jeremiah, by being removed from the actual theater of history, thus being denied an immediate influence in the
developments of his time, and this 2. Literary affected the form of his oral and writ‑
Peculiari‑ ten speech. His prophecies were no ties. casual addresses to fit passing events,
but were worked out in quiet meditation and prepared with literary art, for which he had an evident liking. Not that the short, striking, oracular utterance is wholly wanting; but Ezekiel more often discusses his subject at leisure and his deliverance develops deliberately before his prophetic eye (compare the detailed description of his first vision‑chap. i.‑with the brief sketch of the similar vision in Isa. vi.). He is not satisfied with
THE NEW SCHAFF‑HERZOG
a few characteristic strokes, but rather aims at a perfect picture which affects the spectator less by its immediate power and warmth than by its grandeur and harmonious finish. The frequency of the visions attests also his inclination toward quiet meditation. That he could not come into immediate contact with the concrete objects may, furthermore, have helped to cause the figurative descriptions which are peculiar to him. His contemporaries complained of his figurative speech (xx. 49), and the enigmatie character of his writing has always tried the patience of Jewish as well as Christian interpreters, while it has yielded the richer material to mysticism. Figurative utterance is found in Ezekiel in various forms‑now as simple metaphor, now approaching the parable (xv.; xxii. 18 sqq.), now as true allegory (xvii.). He delights especially in personifying nations and countries or in representing them under the image of animal or plant. Thus he portrays Judah (Jerusalem) and Samaria as prostitutes (xvi., xxiii. 1 sqq.); the house of David as a lion's den (xix. 1 sqq.), or a vine (xix. 10 sqq.; cf. xvii. 6), or a cedar (xvii. 3); Egypt as a cedar (xxxi. 3 sqq.), or a crocodile (xxxii. 1 sqq.); the Chaldean power as a great eagle full of feathers of diverse colors (xvii. 3). After giving the meaning of his cryptic utterances, he again takes up the allegoric form. He shows himself a master in describing the great and sublime, and some portions of his book are specimens of the most beautiful and the most tender lyric poetry‑e.g., the elegies, characteristic of him as of Jeremiah, in which he laments the lot of the foreign powers (xix. 1 sqq., xxvi. 17 sqq., xxvii. 2 sqq., xxviii. 12 sqq., xxxii. 2 sqq.). To consider Ezekiel only a writer, however, who did not actually deliver his addresses, is not admissible; but it is true that the written form was of special importance to him, particularly as his spoken words could benefit only a small part of his people.
Once again, Ezekiel's position, his exclusion from all share as an active participant in the events of his time, was accountable for the symbolic actions with which he accompanied his discourses and made them impressive. His whole person was called on to serve his oracles in most varied pantomime. Dumbness (iii. 26), motionless constraint
(iv. 4‑8), eating and drinking (iv. 9 3. Symbolic sqq.), cutting of the hair (v. 1 sqq.),
Actions. stamping with the foot and clapping
of hands (vi. 11), sighing (xxi. 11), and trembling (xii. 17) were all made " signs." What happened to the prophet was emblematic of the fate of his people (xxiv. 14 sqq.); in his own person he represented also that of his king (xii. 3 sqq.). Partly because of the triviality of such symbolic signs it has been denied that they were actually employed, and they have been regarded as mere literary devices. But considering Oriental skill in interpreting such symbols and the readiness of the Israelites to attach importance to the acts of a prophet, actual performance is the more natural assumption, though vii. 23 and xxiv. 3‑5 are probably parables. In other cases a mere recital of what happened to the prophet would have lacked significance and contributed little as illustration.
But what an impression it must have made when people found him in the condition described in iv. 1 sqq. with hostile look directed for weeks on Jerusalem and with arm uplifted against itl The picture was a most eloquent epitome of the fate of the city. Klostermann attempts to make the long immobility of the prophet more intelligible by finding here the symptoms of severe catalepsy. Dumbness, indeed, seems to have been imposed on the prophet, to judge from expressions which can not be referred to mere silence (cf. iii. 26‑27, xxiv. 27). Such a disease might be considered a means rod‑ordained for prophetic purposes.
To the solemnly ceremonial style of Ezekiel belongs also the stereotyped recurrence of certain solemn formulas. The sayings are generally introduced by " thus saith the Lord Yahweh " (117 times according to Zunz) or ` the
spired by the entire sacred literature of the past,
especially by the " Mosaic " law, but also by sacred
history and tales of prehistoric times (cf., e.g., Gen.
ii. 8 and Ezek. xxviii. 13; Gen. i. 28 and Ezek.
xxxvi. l l ). Beside this is his artistic realism, which
everywhere produces concrete forms from the
material furnished by the historical, archeological,
and literary store of the theocracy. He was no
mere " scholar," as he has been called, but rather a
creative genius who made his knowledge of the
past useful for new ideas. His sentences are in
volved, often diffuse, and his language is more
Aramaized than that of Jeremiah; but the clumsi
ness of expression in Ezekiel's book is partly due
to corruption of the text, which in many passages
can be corrected from the Septuagint.
Passing to the spiritual significance and theological character of Ezekiel , he has marked points of contact with Jeremiah, who remained in Jerusalem. Both declare with all emphasis the destruction of the Jewish commonwealth to be unavoidable and near at hand, destroying relentlessly the illusory hopes of the patriots and strongly condemning the fraudulent policy of the princes who were trafficking with Egypt. The Levitical character of Ezekiel's prophecies, which portray the city of