Divorced and remarried - access to the anointing of the sick

[CatholicSheila]

Generally the sacraments are closed to those who are remarried without an annulment but I’ve often wondered if this is also true for the anointing of the sick? Given that it is traditionally given to those close to death, I tend to think that it would be reasonable to allow this sacrament to be open to them.

 

[MaryT777]

Good question, I’d like to know the answer as well…

Mary.

 

[pianistclare]

I imagine many priests don’t ask these questions. Our pastor anoints anyone who comes to him asking. But I’ll wait for the “official” and rubric quoting members to chime in.

 

[thistle]

Generally the sacraments are closed to those who are remarried without an annulment but I’ve often wondered if this is also true for the anointing of the sick? Given that it is traditionally given to those close to death, I tend to think that it would be reasonable to allow this sacrament to be open to them.

Can. 1007 The anointing of the sick is not to be conferred upon those who obstinately persist in a manifestly grave sin.

 

[ProVobis]

Can. 1007 The anointing of the sick is not to be conferred upon those who obstinately persist in a manifestly grave sin.

Yes, but one who is on his deathbed at a hospital or hospice isn’t exactly in a position to manifest grave sin. Not trying to be funny but just sayin…

 

[thistle]

Yes, but one who is on his deathbed at a hospital or hospice isn’t exactly in a position to manifest grave sin. Not trying to be funny but just sayin…

Annointing of the Sick is not just a deathbed Sacrament. However, in the case of someone in danger of death such a person, if conscious, aware and able to speak, would have to make a sincere confession of their existing mortal sins.

 

[Neofight]

Can. 1007 The anointing of the sick is not to be conferred upon those who obstinately persist in a manifestly grave sin.

Sigh…yet another reason why laity should refrain from blindly regurgitating the CCL, with pseudo authority…the good news is that you elaborated correctly about deathbed situations, but still its dangerous to make such frivolous, blanket proclamations unless you are a canon lawyer…thankfully, Jesus, the only one who’s opinion matters told us he came not to condemn but to save…your initial assessment rigidly defies the Good News of the gospel.

 

[ThankUJP2]

Yes, but one who is on his deathbed at a hospital or hospice isn’t exactly in a position to manifest grave sin. Not trying to be funny but just sayin…

What difference does it make if someone willingly remains in a state of mortal sin, and ignores Church teachings on the reception of sacraments? I suppose a lot. Does someones physical condition mitigate teaching of ccc 1007? I think not.

For example, if one has lived in a state of adultery (never received an annulment, because their first marriage was valid), refuses to confess this sin and refuses to make the life changes that are necessary to bring them to a proper state in the eyes of the Church, should that person reserve themselves from the sacraments? I have to say yes.

Thinking along with the clear mind of the Church. Ask yourself, does the Church teach that one should not receive any sacrament to punish them or rather to protect her children and promote due reverence for the sacraments in both the individual and the Church?

 

[ThankUJP2]

Sigh… …your initial assessment rigidly defies the Good News of the gospel.

Inclusive of innumerable parts like Mathew 25 When Christ shows himself as the just judge separating the sheep from the goats? We are told by Christ to walk the narrow and difficult way, to take up our cross and follow him, to die to our own wills.

 

[z_0101]

For death-bed this is a simple answer:
Call the priest,
Priest hears confession of and absolves the dying patient
Patient is now in state of grace provided valid confession made
Patient can receive the Sacrament.

really not too different than Constantine on his death-bed…

 

[Neofight]

Inclusive of innumerable parts like Mathew 25 When Christ shows himself as the just judge separating the sheep from the goats? We are told by Christ to walk the narrow and difficult way, to take up our cross and follow him, to die to our own wills.

Yeah, I understand…the Pharisees were holy people too, who thought the letter of the law was more important than the intent.

Peace and all good!

 

[CatholicSheila]

I imagine many priests don’t ask these questions. Our pastor anoints anyone who comes to him asking…

I imagine that is true for a lot of priests. Isn’t that the same way that Holy Communion is handled however? It is up to each individual to have a properly conformed conscious and to know whether or not they are in a state to receive. The priest isn’t going to question you if you present yourself.

So, in and of itself that priests act like this doesn’t answer the question.

Can. 1007 The anointing of the sick is not to be conferred upon those who obstinately persist in a manifestly grave sin.

Thank you for the answer. I’ve been wondering for a while.

Assuming someone isn’t conscious and able to make a confession, this would mean someone who is close to death and in this situation wouldn’t be given last rites? I’m not sure I like the answer been “no”, but I’ll accept the wisdom of the Church.

 

[Pax2u]

I would think that a priest would never refuse to anoint someone who asked (or whose family asked if the person wasn’t able to ask). The efficacy of the sacrament would hinge on the person receiving, I suppose…if there was no purpose of amendment for sin, what graces are received from it? I’m thinking out loud here…not sure of the answer. It just seems to me it would be like receiving any sacrament not properly disposed…what good will it do you? Only God knows our heart, and in His justice and mercy, He decides.

 

[Neofight]

Only God knows our heart, and in His justice and mercy, He decides.

Yes, and that is the reason no good priest would deny the sacrament.

 

[Vico]

Generally the sacraments are closed to those who are remarried without an annulment but I’ve often wondered if this is also true for the anointing of the sick? Given that it is traditionally given to those close to death, I tend to think that it would be reasonable to allow this sacrament to be open to them.

It seem to be available when unconscious or irrational, otherwise a confession is made on the spot. This is according to Comparative Sacramental Discipline in the CCEO and CIC, Canon Law Society of America, 2003, there are requirements for reception of this sacrament. The section in the book on The Sacramental Mysteries of Healing is written by the Very Rev. Francis J. Marini, J.D., J.C.O.D.

(CCEO is the eastern Catholic canon law and CIC is the Latin Catholic canon law.)

Page 149 , E. The recipient of the Mystery – CCEO cc 737.1 and 740 (CIC cc. 998; 1006 and 1007) explains that there are three requirements:1) that the sick person be a member of the Christian Faithful (christifideles), i.e., a baptized person;
2) that the sick person be “gravely ill” (morbo gravi affecti); and
3) that the sick person be “sincerely contrite” (corde [que] contriti).

… The third requirement of being “sincerely contrite” reflects the authentic tradition of the Church which regards the Mystery of the Anointing of the Sick as preapatory for death, and therefore requires that the recipient have true contrition, much as the Mystery of Penance.

… It is unclear how the requirement of sincere repentance specified in CCEO c. 737.1 can be met as to either an unconscious or irrational person; … the intent of the canon that such persons be anointed is clear. The correlative provision to CCEO c. 737.1 in the Latin code is CIC c. 998 which establishes only two requirements for the sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick:

1. that the sick person be a member of the faithful (not the Christian Faithful), i.e., be a Catholic; and
2. that the sick person bey “dangerously ill” (periculose aegrotantes);
   there is no mention of a requirement of sincere contrition as in CCEO 737.1, although such a requirement can reasonably be implied from the provisions of CIC c. 1007 that “the Anointing of the Sick is not to be conferred upon those who persevere obstinately in manifest grave sin.”

The requirement of being a Catholic is not absolute as has been pointed out in the discussion of CCEO c. 738.

The requirement that the sick person be “dangerously ill” is essentially the same standard as the “gravely ill” standard of the CCEO.

… Naturally the prudent pastoral practice under CIC c. 1006 would be to be very liberal in finding an implicit request in all situations except those in which the sick person, while in control of his or her faculties definitively expressed an intention to refuse the sacrament under any circumstances."

 

[pianistclare]

I would think that a priest would never refuse to anoint someone who asked (or whose family asked if the person wasn’t able to ask). The efficacy of the sacrament would hinge on the person receiving, I suppose…if there was no purpose of amendment for sin, what graces are received from it? I’m thinking out loud here…not sure of the answer. It just seems to me it would be like receiving any sacrament not properly disposed…what good will it do you? Only God knows our heart, and in His justice and mercy, He decides.

Exactly. We are to cooperate with God’s grace.

 

[FrDavid96]

I imagine that is true for a lot of priests. Isn’t that the same way that Holy Communion is handled however? It is up to each individual to have a properly conformed conscious and to know whether or not they are in a state to receive. The priest isn’t going to question you if you present yourself.

So, in and of itself that priests act like this doesn’t answer the question.

A priest must always offer to hear the person’s confession before Anointing (so far as this is possible).

Thank you for the answer. I’ve been wondering for a while.

Assuming someone isn’t conscious and able to make a confession, this would mean someone who is close to death and in this situation wouldn’t be given last rites? I’m not sure I like the answer been “no”, but I’ll accept the wisdom of the Church.

Here’s the canon again
Can. 1007 The anointing of the sick is not to be conferred upon those who obstinately persist in a manifestly grave sin.

The word manifest means (by definition) that the sin itself is public. It’s on display, so to speak. When we look at the sentence as a whole, the criteria is “obstinately persists” in a “manifest” grave sin.

So there are 3 conditions:

1. grave sin
2. obstinately persists (not merely persists, but obstinately/stubbornly so)
3. the sin (and/or the persistence to continue the sin) is manifest

Those 3 combined make for a very high standard to cause the priest to not-confer (delay) the sacrament of Anointing. Circumstances such as these (all 3 together) are very rare indeed.

Does that help?

 

[MaryT777]

A priest must always offer to hear the person’s confession before Anointing (so far as this is possible).

Here’s the canon again
Can. 1007 The anointing of the sick is not to be conferred upon those who obstinately persist in a manifestly grave sin.

The word manifest means (by definition) that the sin itself is public. It’s on display, so to speak. When we look at the sentence as a whole, the criteria is “obstinately persists” in a “manifest” grave sin.

So there are 3 conditions:

1. grave sin
2. obstinately persists (not merely persists, but obstinately/stubbornly so)
3. the sin (and/or the persistence to continue the sin) is manifest

Those 3 combined make for a very high standard to cause the priest to not-confer (delay) the sacrament of Anointing. Circumstances such as these (all 3 together) are very rare indeed.

Does that help?

Yes it helps me at least It would be sad to think it would be near impossible to receive the sacrament of Anointing if you had a contrite heart.

Mary.

 

[FrDavid96]

Yes it helps me at least It would be sad to think it would be near impossible to receive the sacrament of Anointing if you had a contrite heart.

Mary.

And that’s exactly the point. A person with a contrite heart is indeed anointed.

It’s those who do not have a contrite heart (and far beyond that, persistently manifest grave sin) for whom the sacrament is delayed.

 

[CatholicSheila]

Here’s the canon again
Can. 1007 The anointing of the sick is not to be conferred upon those who obstinately persist in a manifestly grave sin.

The word manifest means (by definition) that the sin itself is public. It’s on display, so to speak. When we look at the sentence as a whole, the criteria is “obstinately persists” in a “manifest” grave sin.

So there are 3 conditions:

1. grave sin
2. obstinately persists (not merely persists, but obstinately/stubbornly so)
3. the sin (and/or the persistence to continue the sin) is manifest

Those 3 combined make for a very high standard to cause the priest to not-confer (delay) the sacrament of Anointing. Circumstances such as these (all 3 together) are very rare indeed.

Does that help?

It definitely does helps me as well.

Thanks.