Extreme unction and anointing of the sick--what's the difference

[tori2323]

I have heard from a lot of sedevacantists that the anointing of the sick is a made-up invention by “Vatican 2 Church” that replaces extreme unction, and that it’s not a real sacrament because the rites are different from the ones used at Extreme Unction.

So, I would appreciate some more info on this, so I can be able to answer back to my fellow sede friends and family. I don’t know much about that topic, so that’s why I’m asking.

Why did the Church introduce Anointing of the Sick, instead of just continuing with Extreme Unction? Is there a difference? Are they the same, just with different titles? Does the Church even have the authority to do something like that?

Thank you in advance!

 

[Vico]

…

The name Extreme Unction did not become technical in the West till towards the end of the twelfth century, and has never become current in the East. …

In previous ages the sacrament was known by a variety of names, e.g., the holy oil, or unction, of the sick; the unction or blessing of consecrated oil; the unction of God; the office of the unction; etc. In the Eastern Church the later technical name is euchelaion (i.e. prayer-oil); but other names have been and still are in use, e.g. elaion hagion (holy), or hegismenon (consecrated), elaion, elaiou Chrisis, chrisma, etc.

Toner, P. (1909). Extreme Unction. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05716a.htm

 

[phil19034]

I think it’s simply a name change because very few people (esp non-Catholics) had any idea what “Extreme Unction” meant.

With that said, I would be curious to know what the sacrament was called in other languages before/after Vatican II? Are there any languages where the common name is the same today as it was before Vatican II?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

It’s the same sacrament, renamed. Sort of like how the Church renamed the Sacrament of Penance to the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

One reason it was renamed is to emphasize that while you need to be in some danger of death, such as elderly or having some life-threatening illness, you don’t need to be dying to get the sacrament. Extreme Unction was associated with dying people, to the point where some of the sick people or those tending them would get agitated and upset seeing the priest come in the door because it meant death was not far off. The Church wanted to encourage people who weren’t necessarily knocking on death’s door to receive the sacrament.

And yes, the Church can rename sacraments. The Church administers the sacraments, why would it not have the power to change the name?

 

[Genesis315]

It’s the same sacrament. As Vatican II itself says:

1. “Extreme unction,” which may also and more fittingly be called “anointing of the sick,” is not a sacrament for those only who are at the point of death. Hence, as soon as any one of the faithful begins to be in danger of death from sickness or old age, the fitting time for him to receive this sacrament has certainly already arrived.

Evidently, there has long been a problem of waiting too long to use this sacrament. Maybe there was a thought that the name gave that impression? For example, the Catechism of Trent warned:

Catechism of Trent:

It is, however, a very grievous sin to defer the Holy Unction until, all hope of recovery being lost, life begins to ebb, and the sick person is fast verging into a state of insensibility.

Let’s compare a pre- and post-Vatican II source:

Catechism of Pius X:

3 Q. When should Extreme Unction be received?
A. Extreme Unction should be received when the illness is dangerous, and after the sick person has received, if possible, the sacraments of Penance and the Blessed Eucharist; it is even well to receive it while he has the use of his senses, and has still some hope of recovery.

The current canon law reflects the same:

Can. 1004 §1. The anointing of the sick can be administered to a member of the faithful who, having reached the use of reason, begins to be in danger due to sickness or old age.

Where’s the change supposed to be? The rites before and after Vatican II use oil and the prayer of the priest (the matter and form described by St. James) with a general meaning to provide sanctification and bodily strengthening. That’s all that’s needed. As the Catechism of Trent notes, it also the only sacrament whose form is a kind of petitionary prayer asking for mercy (which it still is) since unlike other sacraments, the effect of bodily healing is not always given.

 

[Zaccheus]

They are the same thing. Only different names for it.

 

[Diaconia]

It’s the same sacrament, renamed. Sort of like how the Church renamed the Sacrament of Penance to the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

Yes, Extreme Unction and Anointing of the Sick are the same sacrament.

And, by the way, the Sacrament of Penance was not renamed Reconciliation. Its correct name is still the Sacrament of Penance, (as shown in the 1983 Code of Canon Law). The Catechism calls it by a bunch of other names, including reconciliation, conversion, confession, and forgiveness. But the canonical name and the name of the ritual books correctly identify it by its proper name: the Sacrament of Penance. (cf. CCC., § 1421)

Tori - you may be wasting your breath with sede vacante friends who give you this objection, and that objection. Do you honestly think they will change their minds just because we give you something to repeat to them?

Another way to posit it is to ask your friend(s): If I explained it to you in detail would you change your mind? If I explained to you in detail why John XXIII, Paul VI, JPI, JPII, Benedict XVI and Francis are all legitimate popes would you change your mind?

Of course not, if they don’t think the pope is the pope, they certainly aren’t going to listen to your second-hand explanation of why Extreme Unction and Anointing of the Sick are the same.

Better to win them back through the example of your life: holiness, kindness and quiet witness.

After all, sede vacante types thrive on authority, but refuse to accept the lawful authority of the Supreme Pontiff.

Deacon Christopher

 

[JanR]

It’s the same sacrament, renamed. Sort of like how the Church renamed the Sacrament of Penance to the Sacrament of Reconciliation.

One reason it was renamed is to emphasize that while you need to be in some danger of death, such as elderly or having some life-threatening illness, you don’t need to be dying to get the sacrament. Extreme Unction was associated with dying people, to the point where some of the sick people or those tending them would get agitated and upset seeing the priest come in the door because it meant death was not far off. The Church wanted to encourage people who weren’t necessarily knocking on death’s door to receive the sacrament.

And yes, the Church can rename sacraments. The Church administers the sacraments, why would it not have the power to change the name?

This is one more way in which Vatican II has made our Church better.

But, I recall even prior to Vatican II, when it was still called “extreme unction”, the nun teaching the Catechism class I was in telling us that it was among the sacraments we could receive more than once. She used the example of someone very close to death who pulled through after receiving the sacrament, then receiving it again before they actually died.

 

[otjm]

I have heard from a lot of sedevacantists that the anointing of the sick is a made-up invention by “Vatican 2 Church” that replaces extreme unction, and that it’s not a real sacrament because the rites are different from the ones used at Extreme Unction.

Sedevacantists are the last group I would look to for any explanation of what the Church teaches. As far as they are concerned, the Holy Spirit has abandoned the Church.

I think otherwise.

The Church is ultimately the arbiter of the sacraments, meaning the sacraments were given to the Church; and the Church has the ability to bind and loose; it cannot do away with the sacraments, but it can extend the sacraments as it sees appropriate.

I always enjoy it when one who has separated themself off from the Church chooses to tell the Church how it needs to act.

James 5 14-15: “Is anyone among you sick? He should summon the presbyters of the church, and they should pray over him and anoint [him] with oil in the name of the Lord, and the prayer of faith will save the sick person, and the Lord will raise him up. If he has committed any sins, he will be forgiven.”

The passage does not say that one has to be dying.

The sedes do say it. They obviously know neither sacramental history nor Scripture.

 

[Phemie]

I think it’s simply a name change because very few people (esp non-Catholics) had any idea what “Extreme Unction” meant.

With that said, I would be curious to know what the sacrament was called in other languages before/after Vatican II? Are there any languages where the common name is the same today as it was before Vatican II?

In French it was known as “l’extrème onction” and now it’s known as 'l’onction des malades" so pretty much the same thing as in English.

 

[dochawk]

One reason it was renamed is to emphasize that while you need to be in some danger of death, such as elderly or having some life-threatening illness, you don’t need to be dying to get the sacrament.

And even that is the RCC stance; EC practice is quite different.

After the byzantine liturgy commemorating the Institution of the Eucharist on Holy and Great Thursday, this sacrament is administered to everyone present . . .

 

[Anesti33]

Tis_Bearself:

One reason it was renamed is to emphasize that while you need to be in some danger of death, such as elderly or having some life-threatening illness, you don’t need to be dying to get the sacrament.

And even that is the RCC stance; EC practice is quite different.

After the byzantine liturgy commemorating the Institution of the Eucharist on Holy and Great Thursday, this sacrament is administered to everyone present . . .

The actual Roman Rite praxis in many places is that everyone lines up to receive the sacrament, even weekly.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Not in USA. If you’re a Latin Catholic in USA, you have to either be visibly elderly/ unwell, or have your name on a list to get the sacrament prior to the priest handing it out. I’ve never seen it just given to everybody at the healing Mass or whatever.

There are healing Masses where Latin Catholics line up to receive some kind of anointing or blessing by the priests, but it’s not the sacrament. It’s just a blessing that may include some kind of anointing.

 

[Anesti33]

I’ve never seen it just given to everybody at the healing Mass or whatever.

I have. Plenty of times.

 

[Diaconia]

We do anointing Masses a couple of times per year here; after the final blessing anyone who is ill or elderly is invited to stay and are anointed by the priests.

Typically 40-50 people or so stay per Mass. (Our parish skews older)

Your mileage may vary,
Deacon Christopher

 

[Phemie]

Tis_Bearself:

I’ve never seen it just given to everybody at the healing Mass or whatever.

I have. Plenty of times.

It’s been done a couple of times in my parish. I was there for the first one and stayed in my pew because, well, I wasn’t elderly, and I wasn’t unwell. I’m the only one who didn’t go up for the sacrament. Even as a teenager was protesting “But, Mom, I’m not sick,” mom was berating her about thinking she was perfect. In the end, even non-Catholics lined up for this. I avoided the next couple.

 

[InThePew]

The actual Roman Rite praxis in many places is that everyone lines up to receive the sacrament, even weekly.

Not actual but all too common (sadly). Not being a doctor I have no idea of anyone’s condition but simply explain the purpose of the sacrament and its qualifying criteria and leave it up to those present to decide if they apply. Aside from that, I take the view that if you’re sick enough to be in hospital you’re probably sick enough to be anointed!

As far as the difference with “extreme unction”,m as others have said the name change was intended to stop people leaving it too long - although it’s easily the least appreciated or understood sacrament and I often have to explain that it’s not just for the dying! There is though an add on part in the Rite for the dying including the Apostolic Pardon and the Commendation of the Dying.

 

[phil19034]

Not in USA. If you’re a Latin Catholic in USA, you have to either be visibly elderly/ unwell, or have your name on a list to get the sacrament prior to the priest handing it out. I’ve never seen it just given to everybody at the healing Mass or whatever.

There are healing Masses where Latin Catholics line up to receive some kind of anointing or blessing by the priests, but it’s not the sacrament. It’s just a blessing that may include some kind of anointing.

I know of a parish down the street from me where once a month they offer the Anointing of the Sick in a group to anyone who wants it 20/30 minutes after mass.

The priest there is a big fan of the Sacrament and is always telling people that you don’t have to be personally sick and/or dying to receive this Sacrament. He says people can receive it if members of their family or loved ones are sick/dying too.

As FYI - another priest gave me the Sacrament in the confessional once when I confessed sinning in part due to the stress of my mother-in-law having stage 4 cancer. I didn’t ask for it, he simply started the Sacrament of the Atonement of the Sick after the Sacrament of Confession was over.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

The priest there is a big fan of the Sacrament and is always telling people that you don’t have to be personally sick and/or dying to receive this Sacrament. He says people can receive it if members of their family or loved ones are sick/dying too.

Woah, that seems rather messed up.

I know when we had these discussions on here before, Fr. David would always emphasize that you had to be seriously ill and not just having a cold or something.

My dad was partially paralyzed from a stroke and my mom would take him to get anointing but the priest didn’t give it to her just for being his caregiver. He might have given her a blessing.

I go once or twice a year to one of the big charismatic healing Masses, usually with Fr. Blount, and he will bless anybody who wants (and is willing to stand in line for 1 to 2 hours) with holy relics or (pre-COVID) with holy oil, but it wasn’t extreme unction.

 

[phil19034]

I know when we had these discussions on here before, Fr. David would always emphasize that you had to be seriously ill and not just having a cold or something.

Yes, the priest would not give it for just a cold or something.

My dad was partially paralyzed from a stroke and my mom would take him to get anointing but the priest didn’t give it to her just for being his caregiver. He might have given her a blessing.

Sorry to hear this about your father. However, yes, this priest (and a few others I’ve met) would give the Atonement of the Sick to the caregiver (assuming it’s a loved one not a professional). Their view is that the illness causes great mental sickness to families, esp the loved ones who are charged with caring for the sick.