Extreme Unction Chapter I §2: Matter and Form

§2: Matter and Form

SECTION 2 MATTER AND FORM The matter of a Sacrament, generally speaking, is the natural act which has been raised by our Lord to the supernatural sphere. In certain of the Sacraments, however, which make use of material, tangible objects, these are sometimes called “the matter” of the Sacrament, in the sense of remote matter, while the application of them is the proximate matter. The remote matter of Extreme Unction is pure olive oil blessed by a bishop. The proximate matter is the act of anointing the organs of sense. The sacramental form lies in the words: “By this holy unction,” etc. i. The Remote Matter of the Sacrament. — St. James, in saying, “Anointing him with oil,” employs the word &aiov, which literally means oil of olives. Consequently oil of olives is the remote matter of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction. This deduction is expressly confirmed by the Decretum pro Armenis.1 1 * Materia est oleum olivae per episcopum benedictum.* (DenzingerBannwart, n. 700). 16 a) All other oils, such as that derived from nuts, sesame, etc., are not valid matter for Extreme Uhction.2 The olive oil used in the administration of this Sacrament must furthermore be pure, without admixture of any other substance, such as perfume, for the oil used in anointing the sick is simply called olewm (from olea, olive), or in Greek, IXavov, — not chrisma (i6pov, chrism), like that employed in Confirmation. The Nestorians add a little water and a pinch of ashes or dust from the sepulchre of some saint This mixture they call hanana or taibutha and the rite of applying it to the sick — a mere sacramental among these heretics — has gradually usurped the place of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction.4 In Russia a little wine is added to the oil in memory of the good Samaritan, but this custom cannot be very ancient because the Archpriest Archangelsky, who has made a study of the subject, says that no such mixture is mentioned in the Russian rituals of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.* In the Greek Church, this custom is undoubtedly older, as it is mentioned in the ” profession of faith ” of Metrophanes Kritopulos, composed in the year 1625,* and by Simeon of Thessalonica, who died in 1429. Olive oil is soothing, penetrating, and invigorating, and thus aptly symbolizes the healing and strengthening power of the Sacrament. “The unction,” says the Tridentine Council, “very aptly represents the grace of the Holy Ghost, with which the soul of the sick person is invisibly anointed.” 1 * On the ute, by dispensation, of 5 Archangelsky, Inquisitio d* Eve cottonseed oil, see Herder’s Kirchen- lutione Historic a Ritus Benediclexihon. Vol. IX, 2nd ed., coL 712, tionis Olei, pp. 113 sqq., St PetersFreiburg 1895. burg 1895. a ” Gratia talis soncti.” • Cfr. Kimmel, Libri Symbolici £c4Cfr. Benedict XIV, Opera Ine- clesiae Orientalis, Appendix, p. 154, dita, published by Heiner, p. 359, Jena 1843. Freiburg 1904. T Cone. Trid., Sess. XIV, Dg i8 EXTREME UNCTION b) That the oil must be blessed or consecrated before use is the unanimous testimony of all ages. The question arises whether such consecration is merely a matter of precept or whether it is an essential requisite for the validity of the Sacrament. Tradition since Pope Innocent I insists on the oil being blessed by a bishop, which indicates that this blessing is a condition of validity. ” The Church has understood the matter thereof [i. e. of Extreme Unction] to be oil blessed by a bishop,” says the Council of Trent.8 Though the question has never been authoritatively decided, it is advisable to use no other oil than that blessed by a bishop, in order not to endanger the validity of the Sacrament. A decree of Paul V (1611) proscribes as ” rash and bordering on error ” the proposition that Extreme Unction may be validly administered with oil not consecrated by a bishop.0 In 1842, the Congregation of the Holy Office, reaffirming a previous decree, replied negatively to the query whether a parish priest, in case of necessity, could validly use oil blessed by himself. Though theologians agree that the blessing of the oil used for Extreme Unction is an episcopal prerogative, most of them hold 10 that priests can be empowered by the Pope to perform this function. In the East they have Extr. Unci., cap. x: “Nam unctio aptissime Spirit us Sancti gratiam, qua invistbiliter anima ae grot ant is inungitur, repraesentat” — On the fitness of the use of olive oil see Gihr, Die hi. Sakramente der kath. Kirche, pp. 245 sqq.; Kern, De Sacr. Extr. Unci., pp. 115 sq. 8 Sess. XIV, De Extr. Unci., cap. 1 : * Intellexit enim Ecclesia, materiam esse oleum ab episcopo benedictum* (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 908). 0 ” [Propositionem] quod nempe sacramentum extremae unctionis oleo episcopali benedictione non consecrate ministrari valide possit … esse temerariam et errori proximam.” (Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 1628). 10 See, for instance, Suarez, Comment, in Summam Theol., Ill, disp. 40, sect. 1, n. 8. done so for many years, and the custom among the Uniats has the express approval of the Holy See.11 In regard to the schismatics “one may say either that they have the tacit approbation of the Pope or that the reservation of episcopal power does not extend to them.” 12 2. The Proximate Matter of Extreme Unction. — St. James says that the sick are “anointed with oil/’ but gives no hint how or to what parts of the body the oil is applied. The ancient rituals show a great diversity of practice in this regard.13 In the Eastern Church,14 the parts usually anointed are the forehead, chin, hands, and knees (sometimes the forehead, nostrils, knees, mouth, breast, and both sides of the hands; or the forehead, knees, lips, breast, and hands).15 The Roman Ritual says the oil should be applied to the organs of the five external senses (eyes, ears, nostrils, lips, hands), to the feet, and, in the case of male patients, where the custom exists and the condition of the subject permits of his being moved, to the loins or reins.16 As the unction of the loins is always omitted in the case of women, and generally also of men, it 11 See the Constitution of Clement VIII, of Aug. 30, 1595, which ■ays: ” Non sunt cogendi presbyteri graeci, olea sancta praeter chrisma ab e pise 0 pis latinis dioecesanis accipere, quum huiusmodi olea ab eis in ipsa oleorum et sacratnentorum exhibitions ex veteri ritu conficiantur sen benedieantur.” (Bullarium Romanum, ed. Taur., Vol. X, p. 212). Cfr. Benedict XIV, De Synodo Dioecesana, VIII, i, 4; Kern, De Soar. Extr. Unct., pp. 119 sqq. 12 Cfr. P. J. Toner in the Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. V, p. 724. 18 Cfr. Martene, De Antiquis Ecclesiae Ritibus, I, 7, 3. 14 Cfr. Goar, Euchol, p. 440. is Cfr. G. Jaquemier, ” UExtrhne Onction chest les Grecs” in the Echos d* Orient, 1899, p. 194. 15 Deer, pro Armenis (1439): . . qui [infirmus] in his locis ungendus est: in oculis propter visum, in auribus propter auditum, in naribus propter odoratum, in ore propter gustum vel hcutionem, in mani20 EXTREME UNCTION cannot belong to the essence of the Sacrament. The same holds true, according to the common opinion of theologians, of the anointing of the feet.17 Whether the remaining five unctions are necessary for the validity of the Sacrament iure divino or merely by ecclesiastical precept, is a controverted question. The older Scholastics held with St. Thomas Aquinas18 that all five are strictly essential. Modern theologians differ on this point. The best of them incline to the view favored by Blessed Albertus Magnus,19 that a single unction is sufficient for the validity of the Sacrament In taking this ground they are impelled by a number of reasons, which Dr. Toner briefly summarizes as follows: “No ancient testimony mentions the five unctions at all, much less prescribes them as necessary, but most of them speak simply of unction in a way that suggests the sufficiency of a single unction ; the unction of the five senses has never been extensively practiced in the East, and is not practiced at the present time in the Orthodox Church, while those Uniats who practice it have simply borrowed it in modern times from Rome; and even in the Western Church down to the eleventh century the practice was not veiy widespread, and did not become universal till the seventeenth century, as is proved by a number of sixteenthcentury rituals that have been preserved.” 20 Since, however, Probabilism is inadmissible in the administration of bus propter tectum, in pedibus prop’ que sensui quasi de necessitate eater gressum, in renibus propter de- cramenti.” lectationem ibi vigentem.” (Den*- i» Comment, in Sent, IV, dUt inger-Bannwart, n. 700). Cfr. To- 2%, art 16. Cfr. Kern, De Sacram. tier. Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol V, Extr. Unct., p. 138. p. 75. 20 Cath. Encyclopedia, V, 724. — IT Cfr. Suarez, Comment, in S. Cfr. Kern, De Sacram. Extr. Unct., Tkeol., Ill, disp. 40, «ect 2, n. 6. pp. 133 Q«; Ballerhri-Palmieri, Op. isSumma Theol., Supplementum, Theol. Moral., Vol. V, 3rd ed.v pp. qu. 32, art. 6: ” Ilia unctio ab 686 sqq., Prati 1900. omnibus obstrvatur, quae fit ad quinMATTER AND FORM 21 the Sacraments, the prescribed rite must be strictly observed and the opinion quoted may be taken advantage of in cases of extreme necessity only. 3. The Form of the Sacrament. — In the Latin Church, for the past five hundred years, the form employed at each unction, with mention of the corresponding sense or faculty, has been that prescribed by Eugene IV in the Decretum pro Artnenis. It runs as follows: “Through this holy unction and His own most tender mercy, may the Lord pardon thee whatever faults thou hast committed by sight (hearing, smell, taste, touch, walking, carnal delectation ).” 21 a) This form was not always in use. Many others, substantially different in both sense and wording, were at various times employed in the West and in the East ; 22 whence it may be concluded that our Lord specifically determined the form of Extreme Unction only in so far as it must be a prayer for the sick. This demand is complied with in the shorter formula permitted in urgent cases by decree of the Holy Office of 1906 : ” By this holy unction may the Lord pardon thee whatever faults thou hast committed.” 28 Hence neither mention of the senses, severally or in globo, nor any express reference to the divine mercy is essential for 21 Decretum pro Armenis: “Per 22Cfr. Martene, De Antiquis Ecistam sanctam unctionem et suam cles. Ritibus, I, 7, 4; a selection in piissimam misericordiam indulgeat Kern, De Sacrum. Extr. 13 net., pp. tibi Dominus, quid quid pgr visum, 146-152. (audit um, odoratum, gustum et lo- 28 ” Per istam sanctam unctionem cutionem, factum, gressum, lumbo- indulgeat tibi Dominus, quid quid derum delectationem) deliquisti.”— liquisti.” (Acta S. Sedis, Vol. Cfr. Cone. Trid., Sess. XIV, cap. 1. XXXIX, p. 273). 22 EXTREME UNCTION the validity of the Sacrament. Neither of these ideas, in fact, is expressed in the present Greek or in any of the ancient Latin formulas. If the ” prayer of faith 99 spoken of by St. James is the sole requisite of validity, it follows that a priest would probably administer the Sacrament validly (though not, of course, licitly) if he were to omit the words prescribed by the Roman Ritual for each separate unction and simply, after giving all the unctions, pronounce the first oration following them in the Ritual, which embodies the prayer that formerly constituted the essential form of Extreme Unction in the Church of Narbonne. b) Another controverted question is whether a merely indicative form, such as “I anoint thee,” etc., would be sufficient for the validity of the Sacrament. Albertus Magnus, Paludanus, Durandus, and other eminent Scholastics, followed by a number of modern writers (Morinus, Becanus, Tournely, etc.), hold that the indicative form is sufficient. The Thomists and the Scotists maintain the opposite view, basing their contention chiefly on the Jacobean demand : ” Orent (wpwrcvgdaStaaav) super eum” But the problem cannot be solved by a priori reasoning; it must be dealt with historically. History tells us that the indicative form has been widely used in the East and still more widely in the West.24 This form occurs in the most ancient ritual that has come down to us, that of the Celtic Church: “I anoint thee with sanctified oil in the name of the Trinity, that thou 24 See, e. g„ the so-called Am- Domini, ut more miliiis unctus praebrosiano, apud Martene, De Anti- paratus ad luctam aereat possis suquis Ecclesiae Ritibus, I, 7, 4: perare catenas.” * Ungo te oleo sanctiUcato in nomine MATTER AND FORM n mayest be saved for ever and ever. 28 Pope Benedict XIV insists on the validity of the indicative form, but at the same time admonishes parish priests to employ the form prescribed in the Roman Ritual, ” which,” he says, ” most assuredly cannot be altered by private authority without committing a grave crime.” 25 The congruity of the deprecative form is shown by the Roman Catechism,21 and its necessity is defended by De Augustinis.28 It should be noted, however, that an indicative sentence may be virtually deprecatory,28 and that all the formulae of Extreme Unction which we know to have been used at some time or other in the Church, have in fact virtually embodied a petition.80 Hence Fr. Kern is fully justified in concluding that the validity of the form in itself, i. e. necessitate sacramenti, does not require an explicit mention of the act of anointing, or of any sacramental effect, or of the divine mercy, or of the organs anointed, but that the sole essential requisite is a (formal, or at least virtual) prayer for the recipient.81 26 * Ungo te de cleo sanctiUcato in nomine Trinitatis, ut soiveris in saecula saecuhrum. (A pud Warren, The Liturgy and Ritual of the Celtic Church, p. 168). 2« De Synodo Dioecesana, VIII, 2, 3. 27 P. II, c. 6, n. 7. 28 De Re Sacrament aria, Vol. II, and cd., pp. 375 «qq. 29Cfr. John XI, 3: “Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick.” 80 E. g.f the ancient formula of the Church of Tours: * Ungo te oleo sancto in nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, obsecrans misericordiam* etc. 81 See Kern, De Sacram. Extr. Unct., pp. 152-166.