Sacramental Abuses in Anointing of the Sick?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Oscarthecat
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

Oscarthecat

Guest
Is it appropriate for the priest, during the sacrament of Anointing of the sick, to invite those present to trace the sign of the cross on the sick person after he (the priest) does to signify that everyone present is actively participating?

His justification of this is the statement in the vatican II documents that encourages the full participation of the faithful in the sacraments.
 
Since no one else has taken a stab at this thread I will.

I don’t think that’s what was meant by “full participation of the faithful”. Perhaps, it is encouraging all the faithful to receive the sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick when seriously ill or when they feel the need.
 
Certainly does sound like carrying full participation too far.
What happens in my neghborhood parish church seems a pretty blatant abuse according to my reading of Canon Law.
We have a monthly blessing of the sick in which a priest and about a half-dozen laymen and laywomen administer the Sacrament of the Sick to those wishing to receive. This anointing is sometimes accompanied by a mild hysteria remeniscent of some televangelist’s “shows”.
 
The changes in this sacrament have always puzzled me. A case can be made that the old rite was the most beautiful of them all, especially in Latin. I have often wondered if it was not written by an individual in contrast to the syncretistic nature of the rituals for the other sacraments. In particular, I have no idea what motivated any pope to issue an apostolic constitution mandating a single anointing instead of the very beautiful multiple anointings in the prior ritual. But no, annointing by all present makes no more sense than laying on of hands by all present at an ordination.

Per istam sanctam unctionem, et suam piissimam misericordiam, indulgeat tibi Dominus quidquid per __________ deliquisti.
 
Actually, the chapter on Extreme Unction in Bugnini’s book reveals that a committee did, indeed, draft the 1972 volume.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top