The other Italian metropolitan response was from Odilbert, the Patriarch of Milan from 805-813, a trusted friend of Charlemagne, but it is difficult to evaluate because it is only a series of quotes, what came to be known as florilegium. Did he write this text as a response to Charlemagne or was this a pre-existing text? Was he describing the Roman rite, rather than the local usage, since he has a section on the imposition of the hand. This response followed the liturgical order of Ordo XI. Why did he choose the texts that he did? He may have been limited in his choice of texts, since he quoted from John the Deacon sixteen times, Isidore of Seville thirteen times, Ambrose seven times, and three each from Augustine, Gregory the Great, and Cyprian. Thus, it is not surprising that his presentation would have Roman characteristics, rather than local Milanese elements. Odilbert followed the basic pattern of Charlemagne's letter, but there are a few differences. The exorcism precedes the giving of the salt, while the post-baptismal anointing comes before the clothing. A child might not need the clothing as quickly as an adult. The Communion preceded the imposition of the hand, and there is a mention of the Milanese specialty of foot-washing, that Maxentius had not mentioned in his presentation. The influence of John the Deacon and Isidore of Seville is apparent in chapter seventeen on anointing. Odilbert used John's interpretation that the anointing gave a priestly and royal character, as well as Isidore's royal-priestly interpretation. Although Maxentius interpreted the anointing to be pneumatic, Odilbert clearly held to the traditional Christological position. He also added the comment from John the Deacon, about the white band around the head that was to protect the sacred oil on the neophyte. In chapter twenty-one, Odilbert used a quotation from Isidore about how the episcopal laying on of the hand bestows the Holy Spirit. He also used three of Cyprian's letters to emphasize this relationship between the imposition of the hand and the giving of the Holy Spirit. There is little doubt as to Odilbert's understating of this post-baptismal action. By the choice of these texts, he indicated that he was favorable to the Christological anointing interpretation, with the pneumatic laying on of the hand. There are a few questions concerning Odilbert's presentation. The laying on of the hand came after Communion, indicating that this action has been separated from the initiation activity itself. However, his citations do not explicitly indicate that this is the exact way that these activities took place in Milan. Perhaps his friendship with Charlemagne may have led him to add these comments about the episcopal imposition of hands. There was a clear distinction between the completing pneumatic anointing in Aquileia, and the confirming pneumatic laying of the hand in Milan. If these episcopal texts have been devoid of any mention of a confirmatio, the various councils held in ninth century Pavia did not fail to indicate this episcopal task. However, since these councils were held under the insistence of the Carolingian kings, they do not really represent the practice in Milan, but rather the Roman-Carolingian ideal, the Romanizing influence that took place in the early Middle Ages. What do you know about Milan?
No comments:
Post a Comment