138. On the Minister and Subject of Extreme Unction

1. Petrus, a parish priest, was called to a dying man so that he might minister to him Viaticum and Extreme Unction. Since death was pressing, he thought that he would act better and more usefully if he first ministered Extreme Unction and then Viaticum, both lest that sick man lack the peculiar grace of that sacrament of Extreme Unction, and because already in the morning he had received Holy Communion from devotion, whence Viaticum seemed to him less necessary. The matter having been done, Petrus anxiously asked whether he acted rightly by ministering Viaticum after Extreme Unction.

It is asked: What is to be said to the question of Petrus?

R. Petrus acted rightly. For 1.º in the Roman Ritual it is thus had: "From the general custom of the Church, if time and the condition of the sick man permit, before Extreme Unction the sacraments of Penance and Eucharist are to be furnished to the sick." But in the aforesaid Case of Petrus, death was pressing. Therefore the condition of the sick man prudently advised that Extreme Unction could be ministered first, lest the sick man lack the peculiar grace of that sacrament, which is useful especially at the time of proximate death. 2.º Since that sick man had received Communion in the morning from devotion, he indeed could, but was not bound to, receive Viaticum; and therefore, death pressing, Extreme Unction could be ministered to him first, lest he lack that sacrament; and then, if time should suffice, Viaticum also could be ministered. But if time were lacking, no inconvenience would have redounded from this to that sick man. 3.º St. Alphonsus, l. 6, n. 716, says openly: "To receive Extreme Unction before Viaticum will either be no sin, or scarcely venial, as Suarez, d. 44, s. 1, n. 2, and Croix, n. 2120, say; nor does Benedict XIV disapprove it, de Syn., l. 8, c. 8, n. 2, because the custom of placing Viaticum before it has not been received at least under grave obligation." Therefore, a reasonable cause standing for the inversion made by Petrus, that inversion is free from every aforesaid fault. - I. M. 562, 872.

2. "In the kingdom of Buganda, lest a new persecution be stirred up against Christians, the faithful cannot publicly profess religion, and live as almost unknown among infidels. Hence there is the greatest difficulty for missionaries in visiting the sick; for from the presence of a missionary danger would arise for the sick man, and for those among whom he dwells; indeed even for all Christians, who are not tolerated, once their office has been known by the king. Therefore it is asked whether, to avoid this danger, missionaries can and ought not to visit the sick, or whether, despising any danger whatsoever, whether of private persons or of the Christian community, they can or ought to visit the sick constituted in grave danger of dying, so that they may refresh them with the sacraments of the Church.

R. According to the mind; and the mind is that the faithful are to be admonished by the missionaries that, considering the difficulty of having the assistance of a missionary at the article of death, they strive with every zeal to avoid sins, and in danger of death furnish mutual assistance to themselves; and besides, that the missionaries instruct well the catechists, who in the exposed cases may in some manner fulfill the places of missionaries." S. O., Apr. 3, 1889.

3. Geminus, a parish priest, confers Extreme Unction even on dying infants before the use of reason. For, he says, why ought they to be deprived of grace, which they will certainly have ex opere operato? But he does not confer Extreme Unction on adults unless death is certain and proximately imminent. Otherwise, he says, the sacrament is exposed to the danger of nullity. - Does he act rightly?

R. Negatively. For first, "those who lack the use of reason are not apt to receive this sacrament, and children who admit no sins, the remains of which there is need to heal by the remedy of this sacrament." Roman Catechism, n. 9. The reason of Geminus proves too much, for then it ought also to be ministered to the healthy and to those not dangerously sick. Besides, as the same Catechism says in the same place, "they sin most gravely who are accustomed to observe that time for anointing the sick man when, all hope of health already lost, he begins to lack life and senses." But it is to be ministered to those "who seem to be sick so dangerously that it is to be feared lest the last day of life be upon them." Catechism 16. And if the last period of life is awaited, the sacrament of Extreme Unction is now perhaps frustrated of the effect of bodily health, which it does not work by way of miracle, which then would be necessary, but by a certain power, supernatural indeed, but in a certain manner ordinary, which aids natural causes. Wherefore the reason of Geminus rather proves the contrary. - I. M. 862, 871.