The author intends to examine not merely the enacted positive canonical legislation concerning the «communicatio in sacris», but more so the ontological structure of the right to participate in the «res sacrae», among which is chiefly included the right to three sacraments of Penance, Eucharist and the Anointing of the Sick, and states that this aforementioned right by its very nature presupposes full ecclesial communion. As a result of this principle, the author raises a question about an apparent ecclesiological impasse: current non-Catholic Christians are considered to be in true (but not full) ecclesial communion, and at the same time they are  admitted to the sacraments of Penance, Eucharist and the Anointing of sick (cf. can. 844 §§3-4). From this arises the question: in order not to deny the necessity
of full ecclesial communion in the participation in the three aforementioned sacraments, should not one think that current non-Catholic Christians are (at least in some respects) in full ecclesial communion?

This article is divided into two parts. The first describes the genesis, hitherto unknown, of art. 126 of the General Regulations of the Roman Curia, that regulates the procedure for obtaining approval in forma specifica by the Supreme Pontiff of an act of a dicastery of the Roman Curia, which consequently becomes an act of the Supreme Pontiff and is therefore not open to appeal. The second part describes a recent practice: dicasteries asking the Supreme Pontiff for specific approval of an act that was challenged at the Apostolic Signatura, and which is conducting a judgment on the same act through contentious-administrative recourse. This situation would require – in the opinion of the author – the application of the aforementioned art. 126 of the General Regulations of the Roman Curia, which consists of (at
least) the acquisition of the file to be submitted to the Supreme Pontiff of the documentation of the process regarding the act to be approved in forma specifica.