Anointing of the sick by proxy?

[smswife]

Our parish has monthly anointing of the sick after the Saturday AM daily Mass.

I have been told that one of our priests invites all to come up for an anointing even if not ill and they can offer the intention for someone else.

I’m wondering if that is true. Can you receive the sacrament of the sick with the intention that the graces be given to someone else?

If true, I would try to make these monthly anointings for the sake of others that I know.

But I didn’t think you could do sacraments by proxy. Although Masses of course can be offered for anyone, and I think you can offer up Holy Communion for others.

Anyway, if anyone knows the answer I would like to know. If you could quote the Catechism or Canon Law that would be even better.

Thank you!

 

[FrDavid96]

Our parish has monthly anointing of the sick after the Saturday AM daily Mass.

I have been told that one of our priests invites all to come up for an anointing even if not ill and they can offer the intention for someone else.

I’m wondering if that is true. Can you receive the sacrament of the sick with the intention that the graces be given to someone else?

If true, I would try to make these monthly anointings for the sake of others that I know.

But I didn’t think you could do sacraments by proxy. Although Masses of course can be offered for anyone, and I think you can offer up Holy Communion for others.

Anyway, if anyone knows the answer I would like to know. If you could quote the Catechism or Canon Law that would be even better.

Thank you!

No.

What you described is not legitimate.

There is no such thing as anointing of the sick by proxy, the whole idea is so absurd that you won’t find any Church document directly saying “this can’t be done.”

 

[smswife]

Thank you Fr. David.

I agree that it did not sound plausible. And in defense of our priest, I did hear about it second hand so that may not be what he actually said.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

One must be physically present to receive Absolution for ones sins - no telephone or e-mail etc. I suspect the same is true for all the sacraments. The one exception I know of is the Sacrament of Matrimony. The consent may be given by proxy, but that is only half of the sacrament. The sacrament is not complete until it is ratified by consummation [Which definitely cannot be done by proxy ]

 

[thistle]

Our parish has monthly anointing of the sick after the Saturday AM daily Mass.

I have been told that one of our priests invites all to come up for an anointing even if not ill and they can offer the intention for someone else.

I’m wondering if that is true. Can you receive the sacrament of the sick with the intention that the graces be given to someone else?

If true, I would try to make these monthly anointings for the sake of others that I know.

But I didn’t think you could do sacraments by proxy. Although Masses of course can be offered for anyone, and I think you can offer up Holy Communion for others.

Anyway, if anyone knows the answer I would like to know. If you could quote the Catechism or Canon Law that would be even better.

Thank you!

Canon Law:

Can. 1003 §1 Every priest, but only a priest, can validly administer the anointing of the sick.

§2 All priests to whom has been committed the care of souls, have the obligation and the right to administer the anointing of the sick to those of the faithful entrusted to their pastoral care. For a reasonable cause, any other priest may administer this sacrament if he has the consent, at least presumed, of the aforementioned priest.

§3 Any priest may carry the holy oil with him, so that in a case of necessity he can administer the sacrament of anointing of the sick.

 

[Digitonomy]

One must be physically present… I suspect the same is true for all the sacraments. The one exception I know of is the Sacrament of Matrimony. The consent may be given by proxy

Certainly you are correct regarding annointing of the sick, and I think you’re also correct on the other sacraments. You do raise an interesting point on matrimony, although in the Latin Church the priest is merely a required witness, and the couple themselves are the ones performing the sacrament, and by consummating it they are indeed physically present.

However, blessings can apparently be given at a distance (e.g. the pope often gives blessings to those watching or listening to a broadcast). I’m not sure what other sacramentals do not require close proximity.

I’m also curious whether Eastern Catholics or some of the other Apostolic Churches have a different view on these issues, since

1. 
   *]They require a priest to perform a valid marriage, not just witness it, and
   *]They tend not to see as big a distinction between what we call sacramentals and sacraments.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

…

However, blessings can apparently be given at a distance (e.g. the pope often gives blessings to those watching or listening to a broadcast). I’m not sure what other sacramentals do not require close proximity…

I think the Pope’s Urbi et Orbi [To the City and to the World] blessings are the only ones that can be received remotely. That is the exception because it is addressed to the whole World.

I’m not sure of the details. I think one has to be watching the live broadcast on TV, or maybe hearing it live on the radio. Replays do not convey the blessing.

I do recall that at some retreats and missions, the blessing of objects extended to anything one had left in the car in the parking lot. They were considered to be in ones possession.

 

[FrDavid96]

As I see it here, the real problem with what the OP is describing is the way that this priest is treating the Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick. This isn’t just some casual ritual which is open to “anyone who feels like getting some oil on the forehead.” The Church calls it “Anointing of the Sick” for a reason. It is intended to be just that anointing…of the…sick. Not the healthy.

My personal opinion is that when it’s done this way, there’s no Sacrament at all. Instead, it’s a simulation of a Sacrament. If the person is not ill I don’t see how it could be valid.

How in the world any priest could justify the claim that a healthy person could receive the Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick and somehow “apply” that Sacrament to a 3rd party who isn’t there is completely beyond me. I want so say more about this, but just can’t bring myself to type the words. This is just a ridicule of the Sacrament. I’ll leave it at that.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

The problem is, that this person is passing on something he has been TOLD, and not anything that he has first hand knowledge of.

The appropriate thing to do would be to have asked the priest in question if what you heard was true.

I would be willing to bet that it is not true at all.

 

[promethius]

As I see it here, the real problem with what the OP is describing is the way that this priest is treating the Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick. This isn’t just some casual ritual which is open to “anyone who feels like getting some oil on the forehead.” The Church calls it “Anointing of the Sick” for a reason. It is intended to be just that anointing…of the…sick. Not the healthy.

My personal opinion is that when it’s done this way, there’s no Sacrament at all. Instead, it’s a simulation of a Sacrament. If the person is not ill I don’t see how it could be valid.

How in the world any priest could justify the claim that a healthy person could receive the Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick and somehow “apply” that Sacrament to a 3rd party who isn’t there is completely beyond me. I want so say more about this, but just can’t bring myself to type the words. This is just a ridicule of the Sacrament. I’ll leave it at that.

I think the confusion here is that the priest is probably offering some truncated version of the healing mass… which is actually a form of “deliverance” and not a sacrament at all. It isn’t annointing of the sick (aka, extreme unction, FKA last rites), but rather an entirely different thing.

However, I’m not sure if “deliverance” in the form of a blessing can be proffered to another. I’ve certainly never heard of such a thing regarding any sort of deliverance blessing (however, one does not have to be physically ill to receive a deliverance blessing)

 

[FrDavid96]

The problem is, that this person is passing on something he has been TOLD, and not anything that he has first hand knowledge of.

The appropriate thing to do would be to have asked the priest in question if what you heard was true.

I would be willing to bet that it is not true at all.

I hope you’re right. I do hope you’re right. In my experience, I’ve seen so much abuse of this particular Sacrament that it just…well…it really gets to me.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

I think the confusion here is that the priest is probably offering some truncated version of the healing mass… which is actually a form of “deliverance” and not a sacrament at all. It isn’t annointing of the sick (aka, extreme unction, FKA last rites), but rather an entirely different thing.

However, I’m not sure if “deliverance” in the form of a blessing can be proffered to another. I’ve certainly never heard of such a thing regarding any sort of deliverance blessing (however, one does not have to be physically ill to receive a deliverance blessing)

You are in error when you state that this is not a sacrament.

What many call the “Last rites” is actually the combination of three sacraments, annointing of the sick, confession, a Eucharist.

 

[promethius]

You are in error when you state that this is not a sacrament.

What many call the “Last rites” is actually the combination of three sacraments, annointing of the sick, confession, a Eucharist.

It is possible I am in error… which is why I used the words “I think”.

IF you are familiar with demonology, you will find that there is a prayer of blessing for deliverance which can be profferred to those who are not sick. Extreme unction (annointing of the sick) is not to be given to those who are not sick… which leads me to believe that, if anything, that what is being offered is not actually the sacrament, but something else, which either the OP or the person telling him has MISTAKEN for the sacrament. You can’t ALWAYS take what is being said at face value because people OFTEN don’t understand what is going on themselves.

 

[Phemie]

As I see it here, the real problem with what the OP is describing is the way that this priest is treating the Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick. This isn’t just some casual ritual which is open to “anyone who feels like getting some oil on the forehead.” The Church calls it “Anointing of the Sick” for a reason. It is intended to be just that anointing…of the…sick. Not the healthy.

My personal opinion is that when it’s done this way, there’s no Sacrament at all. Instead, it’s a simulation of a Sacrament. If the person is not ill I don’t see how it could be valid.

How in the world any priest could justify the claim that a healthy person could receive the Sacrament of Anointing of the Sick and somehow “apply” that Sacrament to a 3rd party who isn’t there is completely beyond me. I want so say more about this, but just can’t bring myself to type the words. This is just a ridicule of the Sacrament. I’ll leave it at that.

They do that monthly in my parish at the monthly Adoration, not the proxy bit but calling everyone up. The same people present themselves month after month.

The first time I ran into this kind of thing every single person in the church but me walked up to receive the anointing, including the Anglican gal who had just days before approached Fr. about becoming Catholic. One young woman was reluctant to go up and her mother admonished her with the words “I suppose you think you’re perfect!” She told me later, “I didn’t know what to do. I’m not sick so I didn’t want to go up for a sacrament I don’t need, but Mom insisted.” It surprised me because her mom was the parish catechist (yes, singular).

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

It is possible I am in error… which is why I used the words “I think”.

IF you are familiar with demonology, you will find that there is a prayer of blessing for deliverance which can be profferred to those who are not sick. Extreme unction (annointing of the sick) is not to be given to those who are not sick… which leads me to believe that, if anything, that what is being offered is not actually the sacrament, but something else, which either the OP or the person telling him has MISTAKEN for the sacrament. You can’t ALWAYS take what is being said at face value because people OFTEN don’t understand what is going on themselves.

The Sacrament Anointing of the Sick is no longer called Extreme Unction. It can be given to any seriously ill person and may be received multiple times during one’s life.

While you may be wrong, I have been to many Healing Masses where Anointing of the Sick was offered but yes, only those who where ill where called forward for the anointing.

I have also participated in two services of Anointing of the Sick with no Mass.

It is wrong to state that the Anointing of the Sick is not a Sacrament.

 

[promethius]

-]It is wrong to state that the Anointing of the Sick is not a Sacrament/-].

I’m sorry, but I MUST point out to you ***again ***that you are NOT reading what I’m saying.

What I AM saying is that what is being offered might NOT be annointing of the sick AT ALL… but rather might be a healing/deliverance blessing which is being MISTAKEN by either the OP or the source he got it from as a sacrament.

The Annointing of the Sick IS a sacrament. A healing and deliverance blessing falls under the same category of the rite of exorcism… NOT A SACRAMENT.

If you don’t understand what I’m saying, I invite you to message me privately so I can more fully describe the difference where it will not derail the topic of the thread.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

[edited] you said;

I think the confusion here is that the priest is probably offering some truncated version of the healing mass… which is actually a form of “deliverance” and not a sacrament at all. It isn’t annointing of the sick (aka, extreme unction, FKA last rites), but rather an entirely different thing.

However, I’m not sure if “deliverance” in the form of a blessing can be proffered to another. I’ve certainly never heard of such a thing regarding any sort of deliverance blessing (however, one does not have to be physically ill to receive a deliverance blessing)

You are not just saying this might be so, you are strongly implying that this is so.

I posted for others who might not be so knowledgeable so that they would not be mislead.

You also state that the Anointing of the Sick is the same as the Last Rites which is not correct, it is one of three Sacraments that are offered during the Last Rites.

 

[The_Old_Medic]

In the Latin Rite, the Sacrament of the Sick does NOT involve Confession or the Eucharist. It involves the anointing of the sick, and absolution of all sins is automatic. Eucharist may, or may not, be offered, but that has nothing to do with the Sacrament itself.

And using the term “Last Rites” is very incorrect. It is not reserved for the dying, it is offered to anyone with a serious illness, facing a major surgery, etc. I have personally received it four times in my life: Once when badly wounded in Vietnam, once before a major surgery on my hip (5 weeks after being wounded, and still in critical condition), and twice in the past 3 years before major surgeries (in both cases, I received this after Mass).

This is the way that this sacrament was utilized in the early Church, it was for anyone that was ill. Just as Jesus healed the sick, the Church offers this sacrament to anyone that believes they are ill enough to require it.

It was only in the Middle Ages that it somehow became twisted into being reserved for the dying (I suspect this may have happened during the Plagues, when the Priests were so overloaded that they could only offer it to the dying).

I would be amazed if the Eastern Catholic Rites only allow the dying to receive this sacrament.

 

[zab]

First, no need to yell and be impolite. Please imagine how you would look if you responded to someone in this manner in public.

In case you are not aware, typing in all caps on an internet forum is see as yelling, so is adding bold and underlining to that.

Second, you said;

You are not just saying this might be so, you are strongly implying that this is so.

I posted for others who might not be so knowledgeable so that they would not be mislead.

You also state that the Anointing of the Sick is the same as the Last Rites which is not correct, it is one of three Sacraments that are offered during the Last Rites.

I understood what he meant. And I can understand why he was driven to shout.

 

[FrDavid96]

Some clarification on the terminology here.

The name of the Sacrament is Anointing of the Sick–in English. In Latin, the term is the same that it’s always been, Unction. Unction is simply the Latin word for Anointing. The two words mean precisely the same thing. That’s why it makes no difference in English if we use the English word “Anointing” or the English word “Unction.” They are exactly the same.

The “Last Rites” remains what it has been for centuries: The Sacrament of Confession (at least in its minimal form of the priest pronouncing absolution), the Sacrament of Unction/Anointing, the Sacrament of the Eucharist as Viaticum (food the the journey), and the Apostolic Blessing given at the Hour/Time of Death. There is a false impression that “Last Rites” no longer exists or is no longer practiced. It is indeed still part of the liturgical life of the Church. All 4 (3 Sacraments and the Apostolic Blessing) together form the “Last Rites” but the term itself only applies when it is indeed administered shortly before death.

The misunderstanding arises because not every example of the Sacrament of Unction/Anointing is actually administered at the point of death. If and when (and only if/when) it is administered in an “extreme” situation it is indeed called “Extreme Unction” which simply means “unction at an extreme moment.” If it’s done at/near the moment of death, it is still called “Extreme Unction” if it is NOT administered when the person is near death, then it is not called “Extreme Unction.”

I mention this because there’s a general misunderstanding among Catholics (and non-Catholics) that somehow the Church has eliminated “The Last Rites” or “Extreme Unction.” This is simply not true.

Edit: in other words, “Extreme Unction” and “The Last Rites” are not the same thing. They never were, even though many people in conversation confuse the terms. Extreme Unction was, and still is, a part of the Last Rites.

The Sacrament of Unction/Anointing is no longer restricted to the time when death is imminent. It can and should be administered when a person is “seriously ill” (though not for minor illnesses, only serious ones) and well before the moment of death is expected. When it’s done that way, then naturally, it’s called Unction not Extreme Unction.