Is remote danger or proximate danger of death required for Anointing of the Sick?

[Holly3278]

Hey everyone. I was just wondering. Is proximate or remote (both) danger of death a requirement for the Anointing of the Sick? Can one receive the Anointing of the Sick if they have an illness and/or injury that makes one miserable?

 

[InThePew]

Short answer is no to both!

While it should be reserved for “serious” illness, that doesn’t mean that the person needs to be dying before the sacrament can be administered to them. So for example, residents of rest homes are often regularly anointed regardless of the particular state of health simply because of their age. On the other hand, an illness that just makes a person feel miserable (such as flu) but isn’t serious wouldn’t justify administration of the sacrament in an otherwise healthy individual.

 

[stephe1987]

Maybe you could try holy water or ask for a blessing from the priest, or have your name listed in the bulletin so people know to pray for you.

 

[Elizium23]

Maybe you could try holy water or ask for a blessing from the priest, or have your name listed in the bulletin so people know to pray for you.

Maybe you could try anointing of the sick.

Of course it does not hurt to use these other things, but they are not a substitute for the Sacrament of healing which is an encounter with the Living God.

And the proper way to have your name listed in the bulletin is to make an offering for a Mass intention. This is a very good idea if you are sick. A small donation is requested so that the priest can be paid. The parish office will be happy to assist you in scheduling it.

 

[devoutchristian]

Anointing of the sick is for those with potentially terminal illnesses. It’s also often given to those who are very old and to those who are about to undergo surgery to fix a life-threatening disease.

 

[Holly3278]

Hi everyone. I just want to know what the official teaching of the Church is? My priest has Anointed me in the past due to an injury or something which was extremely painful although there was no danger of death, not even remote. Is this allowed?

 

[pollynova]

I’ve received the anointing of the sick twice in my life and I’m not even 20 years old yet.

The first time was when I was 11 years old and I had a really bad infection and I almost died.

The second time was when I was 15. It was during a stay at a mental hospital.

 

[devoutchristian]

Is this allowed?

No. If there was no possibility that the injury could lead to death (immediately or in the future) then Anointing is not allowed.

 

[Holly3278]

No. If there was no possibility that the injury could lead to death (immediately or in the future) then Anointing is not allowed.

Well that kind of sucks. I really think that the Anointing of the Sick would comfort me and give me the graces I need to get through this injury.

All well, maybe I can get a blessing instead.

 

[Defend_Truth]

Well that kind of sucks. I really think that the Anointing of the Sick would comfort me and give me the graces I need to get through this injury.

All well, maybe I can get a blessing instead.

The Catechism states: "1514 The Anointing of the Sick "is not a sacrament for those only who are at the point of death. Hence, as soon as anyone 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."130

 

[Phemie]

  			Originally Posted by **Holly3278**

Something has developed in recent years that I would call ‘consumer Catholicism’. We’ve gone from a time when people feared ‘Extreme Unction’ because it meant they were likely to be dead in a matter of hours, to a point where people want the Sacrament of the Sick for a hangnail. It isn’t helped by priests who celebrate a Healing Liturgy (whether at Mass or another occasion) on a monthly basis and administer the Sacrament of the Sick every month to the same people who aren’t even sick.

I recall one I attended a few years ago when I was the only person who didn’t go forward for the Sacrament. Healthy teenagers went up and were anointed. When you do that you obscure the meaning for this sacrament. It creates a culture of 'I can’t miss out on something that’s being offered." Kind of like the guy who has no need for a plaid jacket but will buy one he won’t wear because it’s on sale for $10.00. Can you really benefit from this sacrament if you don’t need it? I mean, it’s a sacrament that’s not supposed to be administered to children unless they have enough of an understanding of it that they can be comforted by it.

 

[newlywed8]

Something has developed in recent years that I would call ‘consumer Catholicism’. We’ve gone from a time when people feared ‘Extreme Unction’ because it meant they were likely to be dead in a matter of hours, to a point where people want the Sacrament of the Sick for a hangnail. It isn’t helped by priests who celebrate a Healing Liturgy (whether at Mass or another occasion) on a monthly basis and administer the Sacrament of the Sick every month to the same people who aren’t even sick.

I recall one I attended a few years ago when I was the only person who didn’t go forward for the Sacrament. Healthy teenagers went up and were anointed. When you do that you obscure the meaning for this sacrament. It creates a culture of 'I can’t miss out on something that’s being offered." Kind of like the guy who has no need for a plaid jacket but will buy one he won’t wear because it’s on sale for $10.00. Can you really benefit from this sacrament if you don’t need it? I mean, it’s a sacrament that’s not supposed to be administered to children unless they have enough of an understanding of it that they can be comforted by it.

Just wanted to clarify a bit about your post. Whether or not the services you are seeing are an abuse of this Mystery (sacrament) according to Latin understanding I cannot answer, but administering the Anointing of the Sick to people who are not in danger of death does not automatically create a spirit of ‘consumer Catholicism’. In the Byzantine Churches (Catholic and Orthodox), the Mystery is regularly administered to people who are physically healthy because we do not distinguish between people who are physically ill and spiritually ill. In fact, it is typically administered to all at PreSanctified Liturgy on Great and Holy Weds (the Weds of Holy Week) to those who are prepared to receive it, and everyone, even my 1 yr old, is anointed.

 

[Phemie]

Just wanted to clarify a bit about your post. Whether or not the services you are seeing are an abuse of this Mystery (sacrament) according to Latin understanding I cannot answer, but administering the Anointing of the Sick to people who are not in danger of death does not automatically create a spirit of ‘consumer Catholicism’. In the Byzantine Churches (Catholic and Orthodox), the Mystery is regularly administered to people who are physically healthy because we do not distinguish between people who are physically ill and spiritually ill. In fact, it is typically administered to all at PreSanctified Liturgy on Great and Holy Weds (the Weds of Holy Week) to those who are prepared to receive it, and everyone, even my 1 yr old, is anointed.

Obviously the discipline is different between the Eastern and Western Churches.

Canon Law says

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.
§2. This sacrament can be repeated if the sick person, having recovered, again becomes gravely ill or if the condition becomes more grave during the same illness.
Can. 1005 This sacrament is to be administered in a case of doubt whether the sick person has attained the use of reason, is dangerously ill, or is dead.
Can. 1006 This sacrament is to be conferred on the sick who at least implicitly requested it when they were in control of their faculties.

 

[devoutchristian]

Just wanted to clarify a bit about your post. Whether or not the services you are seeing are an abuse of this Mystery (sacrament) according to Latin understanding I cannot answer, but administering the Anointing of the Sick to people who are not in danger of death does not automatically create a spirit of ‘consumer Catholicism’. In the Byzantine Churches (Catholic and Orthodox), the Mystery is regularly administered to people who are physically healthy because we do not distinguish between people who are physically ill and spiritually ill. In fact, it is typically administered to all at PreSanctified Liturgy on Great and Holy Weds (the Weds of Holy Week) to those who are prepared to receive it, and everyone, even my 1 yr old, is anointed.

General reception of Anointing of the Sick is a grave abuse regardless of Rite.
jgray.org/codes/cceo90eng.html
Canon 738

 

[Defend_Truth]

It isn’t helped by priests who celebrate a Healing Liturgy (whether at Mass or another occasion) on a monthly basis and administer the Sacrament of the Sick every month to the same people who aren’t even sick.

Yet, one must be careful on this issue. I am 83 years old and have a minor heart condition. Therefore, it is perfectly proper for me and others in like situations to attend a healing mass. At 80 death can occur at most anytime time.

 

[Phemie]

Phemie;10564562:

It isn’t helped by priests who celebrate a Healing Liturgy (whether at Mass or another occasion) on a monthly basis and administer the Sacrament of the Sick every month to the same people who aren’t even sick.

Yet, one must be careful on this issue. I am 83 years old and have a minor heart condition. Therefore, it is perfectly proper for me and others in like situations to attend a healing mass. At 80 death can occur at most anytime time.

True enough. But once administered, Canon Law says that it should only be administered again if the illness gets worse, or if you heal and then get sick again. While we could say that getting older is a ‘worsening of the condition’, I still don’t think that the Church envisions you receiving the Sacrament of the Sick on a monthly basis, when the only reason for it is that you are one month older than you were last month.

 

[newlywed8]

General reception of Anointing of the Sick is a grave abuse regardless of Rite.
jgray.org/codes/cceo90eng.html
Canon 738

1. We are not rites, we are churches. Self governing churches, who are in communion with Rome.
2. The Eastern faith is not defined by canons, but by tradition which is handed down to us through the liturgies and services of the church. You cannot learn what our faith does or does not contain by reading some code of canon law. If you actually want to learn what the Byzantine tradition teaches, start by reading the services of the church.
3. That cannon only specifically says that it is to be given freely to those who are gravely ill, it does not forbid it from them from receiving it at other times. It is the tradition to receive it on Great and Holy Weds, as I said, and is done throughout the world in both Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic churches.
4. I did not mention this tradition to argue, I simply did it to disprove the idea that offering it freely indicated some kind of consumerism Catholicism. If offering it to those who are not on death’s doorstep is an abuse in the West, it should be taken up with the priest for an explanation.

 

[devoutchristian]

Newlywed, this isn’t the place to peddle your “Eastern Catholics get to ignore canon law” nonsense. So please let’s return to the original topic.

 

[newlywed8]

[edited]

You are simply incorrect with your interpretation of the CCEO, it does not forbid the giving of the Mystery to people outside of grave illness. And I trust that the abbots, bishops, professors, scholars, and seminary leaders who subscribe to what I have described are not peddling nonsense. To say such a thing is not in the spirit of Christian charity or the Easter season and I thank you not to refer to the Eastern tradition as nonsense.

As I said, I mentioned this only even brought this up to point out that free administration does not lead to consumerism Catholicism. As I have said in every post, abuses of their own Tradition within their own churches should be taken up with a priest.

 

[devoutchristian]

To say such a thing is not in the spirit of Christian charity or the Easter season and I thank you not to refer to the Eastern tradition as nonsense.

I wasn’t referring to Eastern Catholicism as a whole but to the idea spread by you and others that Eastern Catholics are simply Orthodox who aren’t in officially declared schism with Rome.