Extreme Unction Chapter I §3: Sacramental Effects

§3: Sacramental Effects

SECTION 3 SACRAMENTAL EFFECTS The fact that Extreme Unction produces internal grace is clearly stated in St. James’ Epistle (salvabit, alleviabit, remittentur peccata). Nevertheless it is not easy to decide wherein the principal effect of the Sacrament (effectus primarius) consists. Our only safe guide in the matter are the decisions of various councils. The Decretum pro Armenis merely says: “The effect [of this Sacrament] is the healing of the mind and, so far as is expedient, of the body also.”1 This is more fully explained by the Council of Trent, which defines: “If anyone saith that the sacred unction of the sick does not confer grace, nor remit sin, nor comfort the sick, but that it has now ceased, as though it had been of old only the grace of working cures, let him be anathema/’ 2 According to this authentic declaration the l ” Effectus veto est mentis sanatio, et inquantum autem expedit, ipsius etiam corporis/’ (DenzingerBannwart, n. 700). a Sew. XIV, De Extr. Unct., cap. a: “Si quis dixerit, sacram infirmorum unctionem non conferre gratiam nec remittere peccata nec alleviate infirmos. sed iam cessasse, quasi olim tantum fuerit gratia curationum, anathema sit.” (Den* zinger-Bannwart, n. 927). SACRAMENTAL EFFECTS 25 Sacrament of Extreme Unction produces three principal effects : (1) It confers grace and forgives sin; (2) It comforts the sick, and ( 3 ) It conditionally restores health to the body. 1. The First and Principal Effect of Extreme Unction : Healing and Strengthening the Soul. — According to the Decretum pro Armenis Extreme Unction “heals the mind.” This effect must have reference to the impending death struggle, for the Sacrament was instituted for the dying. a) How is this effect produced in the soul? Extreme Unction, be it remembered, belongs to the Sacraments of the living and therefore presupposes sanctifying grace. Hence, when the Tridcntine Council says that this Sacrament ” confers grace,” it must mean an increase of sanctifying grace and a claim to all those actual graces that flow from the nature of the Sacrament. Now it belongs to the nature of the Sacrament that it (1) alleviates or comforts the sick and (2) strengthens the soul. These two effects (alleviatio — confirtnatio), according to the Tridentine definition, are produced simultaneously, since the Sacrament excites a great confidence in the divine mercy, which in turn “supports” the recipient and enables him to ” bear more easily the inconveniences and pains of his sickness ” and to ” resist more readily the temptations of the devil.” 8 The reality of the first-mentioned effect can be shown Conc. Trid., Sess. XIV, De Extr. VncU, cap. a. from the scriptural use of the terms salvare (cnJCciv) and alleviare (cyetpciv). These words designate absolute effects of the Sacrament, and hence cannot have reference to the body alone, because the Sacraments are intended primarily for the soul. In so far as it strengthens the soul for the final conflict, Extreme Unction is related to Confirmation, which enables the recipient to sustain the battle of life. In so far as it alleviates, i. e. comforts the sick, it has a special relation to Penance. Both these features constitute Extreme Unction a consecratory as well as a medicinal rite. The fact that it cannot readily be repeated seems to indicate that this Sacrament imprints a sort of character (quasi-character). b) Father Joseph Kern, S. J., in a remarkable treatise De Sacramento Extremae Unctionis, published at Innsbruck in 1907,4 insists that the proper object of Extreme Unction is the perfect healing of the soul imperfecta sanitas animae) with a view to its immediate entry into glory, unless indeed it should happen that the restoration of bodily health were more expedient. He holds that this view may be traced to the Fathers, that it is expressed in the ancient rituals, clearly propounded by Bl. Albertus Magnus, St. Bonaventure, St. Thomas, Durandus, Innocent V, and practically all pre-Tridentine theologians up to Ruardus Tapper.5 This teaching, says the learned Innsbruck Jesuit, far from being opposed to, is in full conformity with, that of Trent. It was only under the influence of the Protestant Reformation that it began to wane. The denial of purgatory with its corollary that the souls of the just enter immediately into glory, led 4 Pages 81-1x4. For an extended was one of the most eminent theoreview, with a synopsis, of this book logians who took part in the Council see the Irish Theological Quarterly, of Trent See Buchberger, KirchVol. II (1907), No. 7, pp. ‘330-345. Itches Handlexikon, s. v. 6 Born 1488, died X559 Tapper to an attenuation of the traditional teaching on the part of Catholic theologians. This tendency is particularly noticeable in the writings of Suarez. Jansenism with its rigoristic notions and its exaggerated views of divine justice and vengeance, did not improve the situation. As the older view gradually fell into desuetude, theologians forgot that Extreme Unction remits temporal punishments and preserves the soul from purgatory, which, according to the ancient Fathers, really was its main object; — ut anima eius aeque pura sit post obitutn ac infantis, qui statim post baptisma moritur as the socalled Penitential of St. Egbert of York has it.e To gain all the fruits of Extreme Unction, the recipient must be rightly disposed. If he is rightly disposed, it follows from Father Kern’s argument that the remission of all temporal punishments still due to his sins must be one, indeed the principal, effect of the Sacrament. Of course this full effect is gained only by those who receive the sacred unction with due preparation and great devotion at a time when they are still able to cooperate with the sacramental grace. The objections raised against his view are effectively refuted by Father Kern.7 Most important among them are these four: (1) If Extreme Unction had for its main object the remission of temporal punishments, the Mass, prayer, and indulgences for the dead would lose their value and importance. Answer: No one ever knows for certain whether a departed person has observed all the conditions necessary for gaining the full sacramental effect of Extreme Unction, and therefore it will still remain a duty of Christian • Poenit. Egb., I, c 15 (Migne, 7 De Sacram. &rtr. Unct,, pp. 190 f. L, LXXXIX, 416), m charity to offer up Masses, prayers, and indulgences for the departed. (2) The plenary indulgence granted by the Church to the dying would be useless. Answer: That the dying man gains this indulgence may be a secondary effect of Extreme Unction. (3) Extreme Unction would be on a level with martyrdom. Answer: By no means. It is the peculiar privilege of a martyr to go straight to Heaven, provided he has imperfect contrition for his sins, no matter how defective his disposition may otherwise be.8 This privilege is not claimed for Extreme Unction. (4) Extreme Unction, in Father Kern’s hypothesis, is not sufficiently differentiated either in character or purpose from Baptism. Answer: Extreme Unction, in order to obtain its complete effect, requires more of the recipient than Baptism, namely, faithful cooperation with the grace of the Sacrament. The two Sacraments differ essentially in the following points: (a) That Extreme Unction demands more of the recipient than Baptism, follows from the fact that (b) Baptism is (a) the Sacrament of spiritual regeneration; (ft) the mystic representation of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ; and (y) the efficient cause of our incorporation with the mystical body of Christ ; whereas Extreme Unction is none of these things. It is consoling to have a truth so long forgotten restored to its proper place in dogmatic and moral theology. 8 Hence the ancient ecclesiastical maxim: ” Jniu rfem foot mortyri, qni SACRAMENTAL EFFECTS 29 Father Kern’s thesis is apt to arouse interest and sharpen the sense of duty in the clergy as well as the faithful, thereby leading to a more frequent and devout reception of the Sacrament of the dying. At the same time it is calculated to increase the confidence of the living in the fate of their brethren who have departed this life fortified by a Sacrament which, if properly received, will spare them the sufferings of purgatory. Since, however, the counsels of Divine Providence are inscrutable and the ways of men obscure and tortuous, we must never cease to pray for the poor souls. 1 2. The Second Effect of Extreme Unction: Cure of the Spiritual Debility Caused by Sin, and Remission of Sins, Venial as Well as Mortal. — St. James expressly teaches: If he [the sick man who is anointed with the sacred unction] be in sins, they shall be forgiven him. 9 The Tridentine Council says : “[Extreme Unction] blots out sins, if there be any still to be expiated, as also the remains of sins.” 10 The question arises : What sins does Extreme Unction blot out — venial sins, mortal sins, or merely the debility and depression caused by the consciousness of having sinned? Theologians are not unanimous on this subject. A distinction must be drawn between “the remains of sin” (reliquia peccati) and sins (peccata). Both are remitted by the Sacrament. 9Et si in peccatis sit, rtmit- pianda, ac peccati reliquias abstertentur ei (Jac V, 15). git* (Sew. XIV, De Extr. Unci., 19 * DilictM, si qm$ tint ad hue cap. a), 30 EXTREME UNCTION a) That Extreme Unction cures the soul and strengthens it against the debility caused by sin, — it is this debility which the Tridentine Council calls “the remains of sin,” — is the unanimous teaching of all theologians. “Another advantage of the sacred unction,” says the Roman Catechism,11 ” is that it frees the soul from the languor and infirmity which it has contracted from sins, and from all the other remains of sin.” Sin, especially if it has grown to be a habit, leaves in the soul a certain debility or moral weakness, which makes the last battle with the powers of darkness more difficult. This weakness the Tridentine Council means by ” the remains of sin,” as can easily be shown by exclusion. The remains of sin mentioned by the Council may mean one, or more, or all of the following: (1) The eternal punishment of sin. But this cannot properly be called a relic of sin because it stands and falls with sin and is not forgiven unless the guilt has first been blotted out. (2) The temporal punishments due to sin. These are a real remnant of sins forgiven, and are cancelled by Extreme Unction according to the disposition of the recipient, ex opere operator However, this is not the primary object for which Extreme Unction was instituted, but rather appertains to indulgences and works of satisfaction, and hence we are dealing with a merely secondary effect of the Sacrament, though if the recipient is properly disposed, this effect is infallible. 11 Cat, Rom,, De Exfr. Unci,, qu. traxit, et a ceteris omnibus peccati 14: Altera est socrae unctionis reliquiis liberat. utilitas, quod animam a Umguore et 12 Cfr. St. Thomas, Summo con{nfirmitate, quern ex peccatis con* tra Gentiles, IV, 73. (3) Concupiscence. Concupiscence is a relic not of actual but of original sin, and hence can no more be removed by Extreme Unction than by Baptism. (4) Former mortal sins omitted in confession, or new ones committed since the last confession. Mortal sins unconsciously omitted in confession are forgiven together with those actually confessed. Freshly committed mortal sins belong before the tribunal of Penance. Of course, this proves no more than that the remission of mortal sins is not a primary and proper effect of Extreme Unction. b) Does Extreme Unction remit mortal sins, or only venial sins? There can be no doubt that St. James has reference to personal or actual sins when he says that sins are forgiven in Extreme Unction. It is not so clear whether he means venial sins, or mortal sins, or both. The Scotists limit the efficacy of Extreme Unction to venial sins. Extreme Unction, they say, is essentially a Sacrament of the living, and mortal sins committed after Baptism can be forgiven only in the tribunal of Penance. While this interpretation is not directly opposed to the Tridentine decree, it leaves open the question whether the Council did not also have in mind mortal sins. The general term peccata or delicto seems to indicate that it did A careful study of St. James* Epistle renders this interpretation certain. Mere sins of weakness are to the Apostle a matter of course. In speaking of them he says, For in many things we all offend. 18 In speaking of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction, however, he employs the hypothetical lajai. Ill, 2: In multis enim offendimns omnes. 32 EXTREME UNCTION phrase : * If he [the sick man] be in sins,* thereby evidently meaning mortal sins. Bellarmine, Tournely, Sainte-Beuve, Tepe, Kern, and other theologians probably go too far when they assert that Extreme Unction is intended perse and directly for the remission of mortal sins, even though only ex secundaria institutione. If this were true, Extreme Unction would not be a Sacrament of the living, but a Sacrament of the dead ; Penance could not in justice be termed “a second plank after shipwreck,” 14 and the power of the keys could be dispensed with. We can imagine only one case in which Extreme Unction could forgive mortal sins without trenching on the Sacrament of Penance, namely, if a dying man were unable to confess his sins and had at least imperfect contrition. In that case Extreme Unction, as a sacramental rite, would remit his sins ex opere operato, though only per accidens. The necessitas medii of Penance is safeguarded by the condition that if the patient recovers, he must submit himself to the power of the keys, i. e. go to confession and ask for the priestly absolution. With this limitation we may subscribe to Oswald’s dictum : * Extreme Unction not only completes the Sacrament of Penance, but in certain cases takes its place.* 15 3. Third (Conditional) Effect: The Restoration of Bodily Health. — The restoration of bodily health is a secondary and purely conditional effect of Extreme Unction. The condition upon which it depends is expressed thus by the Decretum pro Armenis and the Council of i4Cfr. Cone. Trid., Sess. XIV, menten, II, 282; cfr. Kern, De SoDe Poenit., can. 2. cram. Extr. Unci., pp. 169 tqq. it Die Lehre von den M. SdkraSACRAMENTAL EFFECTS 33 Trent : “When it is expedient for the soul’s salvation.” 16 Does the Sacrament always restore health when it is expedient for salvation ? ” Sanitatem corporis interdum, ubi saluti animae expedient, consequitur” says the Tridentine Council How are we to interpret interdum? St. Thomas holds that the patient will surely recover after receiving Extreme Unction if his recovery will redound to his spiritual benefit.17 Dr. Oswald goes so far as to assert that the Sacrament of the dying has a charismatic effect similar to that produced by the gratia curationutn. However, it is more reasonable to assume that the restoration of bodily health, if it lies in God’s plan, is effected by the powers of nature, stimulated supernaturally by the Sacrament. We prefer the explanation given by the older Scholastics and approved by the Council of Trent, vis.: that the Sacrament of Extreme Unction, by relieving anxiety, banishing fear, giving comfort, and inspiring confidence in God’s mercy and humble resignation to His will, reacts favorably on the physical condition of the patient. If this explanation is correct, the sacramental effect in question can be expected only when the priest is called in time and the body not too badly ravaged by disease.18 The reality of this effect is proved by theologians from the words of St. James : ” And the prayer of faith shall save (owra) the sick man : and the Lord shall raise him up (tyipd)” Though, as we have seen,19 these expresie ” Ubi saluti animae expeditrit.” favorite disciple Reginald of Pi(Denzinger-Bannwart, n. 909). perno, undoubtedly reflects his opin17 Cfr. the Supplement to the Sum- ions, mo Theologica, which, while it was 18 Cfr. Kern, De Sacram. Extr. not written by the Angelic Doctor Vnct, pp. 205 sqq., 194-205. himself, but presumably by his is V. supra, No. 1. sions refer primarily to the soul, it is the constant belief of Tradition that they also include the body. The Apostle employs positive rather than hypothetic terms, because he regards the supposition that the recovery of bodily health must redound to the patient’s spiritual benefit as a matter of course, and, secondly, because the spiritual ” saving ” and ” raising up 99 of the sinner are absolute effects which, by reacting upon the body, may restore bodily health.20 20Cfr. J. Schmitz, De Effectibus Sacrament* Estremat Unctionti, Freiburg 1893; Kern, Dt Sacram. Extr. Unci., pp. 194-215.