Anointing of the Sick: Supersacrament

[Neithan]

I’ve been doing a little reading, and I was amazed to find out that the Anointing of the Sick remits not only the guilt of sins mortal **and **venial but also the temporal punishment due to them and their effects! This is an awesome Sacrament! What I’m wondering is: doesn’t this make penances and indulgences superfluous? Since the Sacraments work ex opere operato, couldn’t a contrite Catholic simply receive this Sacrament regularly?

Also, how exactly does the health of the recipient influence the effect? Is it absolutely, theologically necessary that some serious physical illness be present or else it is null and void? Where is that line drawn? Since this is primarily a Sacrament for spiritual, rather than bodily health, couldn’t one who is in a state of sin be considered sick, and in need of Anointing, regardless of their physical condition? Seeing as this not only absolves a Christian of guilt, but even their temporal punishment, it seems that it would be much more efficacious and merciful of the Church to extend this Sacrament to whomever desires it.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation of course is still essential as it is the only sure way to absolve mortal sins where perfect contrition is not present in those who have full use of their reason, as well as bestow grace to strengthen the Christian in virtues and avoid future sin; however, I don’t see why a Priest could not Anoint the penitent immediately afterward, thereby remitting a significant portion of their temporal punishment ex opere operato as well as potentially all temporal punishment ex opere operantis. Prescribing a penance would be seen less as a way to avoid Purgatory (although this is certainly still the case) and more a means of building positive virtue (i.e. encourages love rather than servile fear of God). I would find this particularly merciful on the part of the priest when he is dealing with intensely scrupulous Christians, to ease their burdened consciences.

 

[Dr.Colossus]

According the the Code of Canon Law:

Can. 998: The anointing of the sick, by which the Church commends the faithful who are dangerously ill to the suffering and glorified Lord in order that he relieve and save them…

(emphasis mine)

Notice that the text says “dangerously ill”. In other words, in danger of death. The text continues:

Can. 1004: The anointing of the sick can be administered to a member of the faithful who…begins to be in danger due to sickness or age.

The Sacrament is meant to prepare a soul for their meeting with the Heavenly Father. It is not meant to be used as a common replacement for Confession. The Sacrament may, however, be conferred on those who, while not presently ill, are about to undergo serious surgery where there is possibility of death.

 

[msproule]

Thank you for pointing that out, Doctor!

Much like so-called “Communal Penance” services, I see the so-called “Healing Masses” (AKA Mass with the Annointing of the Sick administered) as misleading. In my region, most are misled to believe that communal penance provides full absolution with no further obligation to seek individual confession ASAP. It is the one time a year that most people actually go to confession. Furthermore, everybody and their brother with merely a headache show up for the Annointing of the Sick “Healing Masses”.

The requirements for these Sacraments to be efficacious when applied to large groups are rather similar. Essentially, the recipients must be in immediate danger of death (like an army of soon-to-be martyrs). This applies to very few of my suburban middle-class neighborhood, yet they still show up in droves!

I just don’t get it…

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

Neithan:

I’ve been doing a little reading, and I was amazed to find out that the Anointing of the Sick remits not only the guilt of sins mortal **and **venial but also the temporal punishment due to them and their effects! This is an awesome Sacrament! What I’m wondering is: doesn’t this make penances and indulgences superfluous? Since the Sacraments work ex opere operato, couldn’t a contrite Catholic simply receive this Sacrament regularly?

Also, how exactly does the health of the recipient influence the effect? Is it absolutely, theologically necessary that some serious physical illness be present or else it is null and void? Where is that line drawn? Since this is primarily a Sacrament for spiritual, rather than bodily health, couldn’t one who is in a state of sin be considered sick, and in need of Anointing, regardless of their physical condition? Seeing as this not only absolves a Christian of guilt, but even their temporal punishment, it seems that it would be much more efficacious and merciful of the Church to extend this Sacrament to whomever desires it.

The Sacrament of Reconciliation of course is still essential as it is the only sure way to absolve mortal sins where perfect contrition is not present in those who have full use of their reason, as well as bestow grace to strengthen the Christian in virtues and avoid future sin; however, I don’t see why a Priest could not Anoint the penitent immediately afterward, thereby remitting a significant portion of their temporal punishment ex opere operato as well as potentially all temporal punishment ex opere operantis. Prescribing a penance would be seen less as a way to avoid Purgatory (although this is certainly still the case) and more a means of building positive virtue (i.e. encourages love rather than servile fear of God). I would find this particularly merciful on the part of the priest when he is dealing with intensely scrupulous Christians, to ease their burdened consciences.

The Sacrament forgives Mortal sins when the recipient is unable to confess their sins in the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Such as from being gravely ill or unconscious.

To receive the Anointing of the Sick knowingly in Mortal sin and intentionally not Confessing first would be another grave sin.

The Forgiveness of Temporal punishment is a Indulgence granted by the Apostolic Blessing granted by the priest when one is near death. It can only be received once is my understanding.