Thoughts on Anointing of the Sick

[runningdude]

My parish had a healing mass today. While it is the Church’s sole prerogative to bind or loose the conditions one may receive the sacraments, I have been reflecting deeply on why the sacrament of anointing was once reserved for those near death.

My conclusion was that this sacrament is terribly powerful, similar to that of Baptism itself. It shares its name with the title of Our Lord, The Christ, The Anointed, The Messiah. Upon its reception, one’s souls is radically purified; all lingering sin and doubt baptized, cleansed away.

All temporal punishments, consequences, penances due are fulfilled. Should one close his eyes for the last time after receiving, his next view would be the loving face of God welcoming him home. No indulgence, no purgation, no prayers for the dead necessary.

Why then, do I hesitate to receive this powerful, miraculous, holy sacrament?

My first motivation to receive a few years ago was to avoid vocalizing persistent sins that I fall into repeatedly; bad habits that gnaw at may soul. I never did seek for this reason, but I reflected long on this sacrament, studying its form and its history.

To be so radically purified, so close to God, so innocent, and then to be so casually stained again seems tragic. To sin again, even if subjectively venial, after achieving the kingdom of heaven through the faith and merit’s of the Anointed One’s cross, is much to much for me…

 

[FrDavid96]

A few words of caution.

While the Sacrament of Anointing/Unction is no longer reserved for the dying, it is only legitimately conferred on those who are seriously ill. One who is not seriously ill is not a candidate for the sacrament. The Church is quite clear on this.

Anointing is not, by any means, a substitute for Confession. The Sacrament of Anointing brings about the forgiveness of sins only “if necessary” meaning that Confession is not available for some reason. If Confession is indeed available and one attempts to use Anointing as a substitute, this is a cause for great concern.

These words you wrote:
“My first motivation to receive a few years ago was to avoid vocalizing persistent sins that I fall into repeatedly…” seem to be saying that you are using Anointing to avoid Confession. If that’s the case, you’re putting yourself into a very precarious situation.

 

[GLam8833]

It seems to me that you are looking to
“mortify the flesh” by the Extreme Unction!
Paul said in his epistle “Christ died so that
Those who live should not live for themselves
but for Him”(2 Cor 5:15) We must be careful
not to wish for death before our time, but have
an attitude of submission to the Holy Spirit
(Rom 8:10) Our flesh HAS BEEN CONDEMNED
by the coming of Christ “to be a sin offering”(Rom
8:3) We are to serve God, not our appetitites!!!
(Phil 3:18)
Jesus Himself spoke against looking for fleshly
satisfaction when in the Sermon on the Mount
he said: “No one can serve two masters… FOR
THIS REASON do not worry about your life, what
you will eat…”(Matt 6:24-25) I’ve heard a lot of
people affirm the latter but missed the former
part of that passage!

 

[Vico]

…

All temporal punishments, consequences, penances due are fulfilled. Should one close his eyes for the last time after receiving, his next view would be the loving face of God welcoming him home. No indulgence, no purgation, no prayers for the dead necessary.

…

Oh, it is not the same as baptism! Penance is still due for the temporal effects of sins forgiven through the sacrament of Reconciliation or Annointing, and Annointing of the Sick is given in conjunction with the sacrament of Reconcilliation if the person is able to.

 

[malphono]

While the Sacrament of Anointing/Unction is no longer reserved for the dying, it is only legitimately conferred on those who are seriously ill. One who is not seriously ill is not a candidate for the sacrament. The Church is quite clear on this.

Sorry to butt in, Father, (and no, I’m not sparring for another go-round), but I would like to offer a comment. As I remember it from pre-conciliar times, Extreme Unction was never reserved for the dying, but was even then for those who were seriously ill. I still have fond memories of Mère Bernadette saying one didn’t have “to be knocking at death’s door to be anointed, but it has to be more than a toe-ache.” And as I recall, tales abounded of those who were seriously ill having recovered, or at least taken a positive turn, after having been anointed.

 

[runningdude]

A few words of caution.

…
Anointing is not, by any means, a substitute for Confession. The Sacrament of Anointing brings about the forgiveness of sins only “if necessary” meaning that Confession is not available for some reason. If Confession is indeed available and one attempts to use Anointing as a substitute, this is a cause for great concern.
…

Thank you, Father, for making this clear to any readers.

I had read the requirement to receive confession first, and that was indeed my primary reason for refraining from receiving anointing at that time.

 

[runningdude]

Oh, it is not the same as baptism! Penance is still due for the temporal effects of sins forgiven through the sacrament of Reconciliation or Annointing, and Annointing of the Sick is given in conjunction with the sacrament of Reconcilliation if the person is able to.

Catholic Encyclopedia:

The relics or effects of sin mentioned by the Council of Trent are variously understood by theologians to mean one, or more, or all of the following: spiritual debility and depression caused by the consciousness of having sinned; the influence of evil habits induced by sin; temporal penalties remaining after the guilt of sin has been forgiven; and venial, or even mortal, sins themselves. Of these only the remission of temporal punishment is distinct from the other effects of which the council speaks; and though some theologians have been loath to admit this effect at all, lest they might seem to do away with the raison d’être of purgatory and of prayers and indulgences for the dying and dead, there is really no solid ground for objecting to it, if passing controversial interests are subordinated to Catholic theory. It is not suggested that extreme unction, like baptism, sacramentally remits all temporal punishment due to sin, and the extent to which it actually does so in any particular case may, as with baptism, fall short of what was Divinely intended, owing to obstacles or defective dispositions in the recipient. Hence there is still room and need for Indulgences for the dying, and if the Church offers her prayers and applies Indulgences for adults who die immediately after baptism, she ought, a fortiori, to offer them for those who have died after extreme unction. And if temporal punishment be, as it certainly is, one of the reliquioe of sin, and if extreme unction be truly what the Council of Trent describes (Sess. XIV, De Extr. Unct., introduct.) as “the consummation not merely of [the Sacrament of] Penance, but of the whole Christian life, which ought to be a perpetual penance”,** it is impossible to deny that the remission of temporal punishment is one of the effects of this sacrament.**

newadvent.org/cathen/05716a.htm

 

[FrDavid96]

Sorry to butt in, Father, (and no, I’m not sparring for another go-round), but I would like to offer a comment. As I remember it from pre-conciliar times, Extreme Unction was never reserved for the dying, but was even then for those who were seriously ill. I still have fond memories of Mère Bernadette saying one didn’t have “to be knocking at death’s door to be anointed, but it has to be more than a toe-ache.” And as I recall, tales abounded of those who were seriously ill having recovered, or at least taken a positive turn, after having been anointed.

This is one of those issues that has several different responses. Throughout the centuries, the criteria of “just how sick is sick enough?” has varied. Probably the most extreme would be in certain places in medieval times where it was the practice that if one recovered, he would be obligated to spend the rest of his life in a monastery. But of course, that’s not within recent memory.

Yes, in the time leading up to Vatican II the Church was indeed re-thinking the Anointing, and moving away from the notion of “only for the dying.”

Here are some texts that might help put things in perspective:
Introduction to Anointing
sanctamissa.org/en/resources/books-1962/rituale-romanum/32-the-sacrament-of-the-anointing-of-the-sick-introduction.html
and
The general rules for administering it
sanctamissa.org/en/resources/books-1962/rituale-romanum/32-the-sacrament-of-the-anointing-of-the-sick-general-rules.html
This is from the 1964 Roman Ritual, which is really the 1962 Roman Ritual, with some minor editing. However, just how much was edited, I do not know. What I can say is that generally, in the 1964 ritual, any changes that reflect Vatican II (for those who might not be aware, the Council was ongoing at that time), were made in specific notes printed as additions to the text or in footnotes—otherwise, the text itself is the same as it was before the Council.

Here is a selection from the Introduction
Formatting is mine.
Last anointing is the sacrament of Christian consolation, through which a member of Christ is made ready to share mystically by his suffering and bodily death in the suffering and sacrificial death of the head of the human race. It is the sacrament of consolation for the subject directly concerned as well as for his brethren in the faith. The note of consolation is so marked a feature that any illness which could prove fatal calls for its administration, long before the death rattle announces that the end is at hand. As the rubric below directs: “It must be received if possible while the sick person is still conscious and rational, so that the recipient himself, in order to receive the sacrament more fruitfully, may assist with faith and devout intention while he is being anointed with the holy oil.” Hence it is utterly reprehensible to delay this sacred anointing until the last agony has begun. Rather than delay until the final moments of illness, the rubrics provide that, should there be any doubt about the illness being critical, the sacrament may be administered conditionally. Better too early than too late! Moreover, the last sacraments are three. Penance may, and the holy Eucharist should ordinarily accompany the anointing. And instead of the sorry and unbecoming spectacle of the priest racing with death to the bedside of the sick, the Church prescribes a devout and dignified procession from church to home, with the minister assisted by clergy and acolytes and accompanied by devout layfolk, all of whom are to assist in imparting the consoling mysteries to the one afflicted on his bed of pain, and by their prayerful attendance give comfort and encouragement to him in the loneliness of suffering or of the final combat.

 

[GLam8833]

Thanks FrDavid for the info, my wife had the anointing done
twice, once in the emergency and another time after I asked
OUR priest to impart the anointing. She was conscious at that
time, but never had the benefit of the Sacraments of Penance
and Eucharist. Her sister, Anne never had the anointing even
tho she was Catholic at the time, it was a very sad story.

 

[Irishgal49]

This is one of those issues that has several different responses. Throughout the centuries, the criteria of “just how sick is sick enough?” has varied. Probably the most extreme would be in certain places in medieval times where it was the practice that if one recovered, he would be obligated to spend the rest of his life in a monastery. But of course, that’s not within recent memory.

Yes, in the time leading up to Vatican II the Church was indeed re-thinking the Anointing, and moving away from the notion of “only for the dying.”

Here are some texts that might help put things in perspective:
Introduction to Anointing
sanctamissa.org/en/resources/books-1962/rituale-romanum/32-the-sacrament-of-the-anointing-of-the-sick-introduction.html
and
The general rules for administering it
sanctamissa.org/en/resources/books-1962/rituale-romanum/32-the-sacrament-of-the-anointing-of-the-sick-general-rules.html
This is from the 1964 Roman Ritual, which is really the 1962 Roman Ritual, with some minor editing. However, just how much was edited, I do not know. What I can say is that generally, in the 1964 ritual, any changes that reflect Vatican II (for those who might not be aware, the Council was ongoing at that time), were made in specific notes printed as additions to the text or in footnotes—otherwise, the text itself is the same as it was before the Council.

Here is a selection from the Introduction
Formatting is mine.
Last anointing is the sacrament of Christian consolation, through which a member of Christ is made ready to share mystically by his suffering and bodily death in the suffering and sacrificial death of the head of the human race. It is the sacrament of consolation for the subject directly concerned as well as for his brethren in the faith. The note of consolation is so marked a feature that any illness which could prove fatal calls for its administration, long before the death rattle announces that the end is at hand. As the rubric below directs: “It must be received if possible while the sick person is still conscious and rational, so that the recipient himself, in order to receive the sacrament more fruitfully, may assist with faith and devout intention while he is being anointed with the holy oil.” Hence it is utterly reprehensible to delay this sacred anointing until the last agony has begun. Rather than delay until the final moments of illness, the rubrics provide that, should there be any doubt about the illness being critical, the sacrament may be administered conditionally. Better too early than too late! Moreover, the last sacraments are three. Penance may, and the holy Eucharist should ordinarily accompany the anointing. And instead of the sorry and unbecoming spectacle of the priest racing with death to the bedside of the sick, the Church prescribes a devout and dignified procession from church to home, with the minister assisted by clergy and acolytes and accompanied by devout layfolk, all of whom are to assist in imparting the consoling mysteries to the one afflicted on his bed of pain, and by their prayerful attendance give comfort and encouragement to him in the loneliness of suffering or of the final combat.

I wrestled with how sick is sick. I asked various priests and laity (and a deacon) if I could receive it for my crippling anxiety attacks and mental illness. I can barely stay for mass and end up leaving due to serious panic attacks. I have medication but it can become addictive and I use it sparingly. After discussing it with a spiritual director (priest) we decided it was appropriate and I discussed my situation with my pastor and received the sacrament. I had suffered with incidents where I became suicidal so it was decided that it was serious enough to merit anointing. It helped me a great deal. If you have doubts talk to your pastor and/or confessor. I went to confession first and then received anointing. It was very powerful and there were signs that God was answering prayers for healing in relationships which helped my fear and anxiety a lot.

 

[Vico]

…

The remission of temporal punishment is one of the effects of the sacrament of reconcilliation and of annointing of the sick. There is no guarantee that it will be plenary. From the Catechism:***1496 *The spiritual effects of the sacrament of Penance are:
- reconciliation with God by which the penitent recovers grace;
- reconciliation with the Church;
- remission of the eternal punishment incurred by mortal sins;
- remission, at least in part, of temporal punishments resulting from sin;
- peace and serenity of conscience, and spiritual consolation;
*- an increase of spiritual strength for the Christian battle.

**1532 The special grace of the sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick has as its effects:

• the uniting of the sick person to the passion of Christ, for his own good and that of the whole Church;
• the strengthening, peace, and courage to endure in a Christian manner the sufferings of illness or old age;
• the forgiveness of sins, if the sick person was not able to obtain it through the sacrament of Penance;
• the restoration of health, if it is conducive to the salvation of his soul;
• the preparation for passing over to eternal life.*

**1263 **By Baptism all sins are forgiven, original sin and all personal sins, as well as all punishment for sin.66 In those who have been reborn nothing remains that would impede their entry into the Kingdom of God, neither Adam’s sin, nor personal sin, nor the consequences of sin, the gravest of which is separation from God. **

1264** Yet certain temporal consequences of sin remain in the baptized, such as suffering, illness, death, and such frailties inherent in life as weaknesses of character, and so on, as well as an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence, or metaphorically, “the tinder for sin” (fomes peccati); since concupiscence "is left for us to wrestle with, it cannot harm those who do not consent but manfully resist it by the grace of Jesus Christ."67 Indeed, "an athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules."68

 

[runningdude]

The remission of temporal punishment is one of the effects of the sacrament of reconcilliation and of annointing of the sick. There is no guarantee that it will be plenary. …

It is a sacrament that could be plenary, but by defect of intention might not be, which is pretty well in line with my origin post.

 

[Vico]

It is a sacrament that could be plenary, but by defect of intention might not be, which is pretty well in line with my origin post.

You must be thinking of the plenary indulgence at the point of death, norm 12 of Enchiridiion Indulgentiarum, which requires the proper intention and exclusion of all attachment to sin.

 

[Petaro]

I have been given the sacrament of the sick three times now, as I have been seriously sick for the last ten years. I thought it was different to just a mass of healing. Still, I hope I can line up again when the time comes.