Case 1. Repetition of Extreme Unction

Caius, a missionary, during Eastertide visits a certain village five or six miles distant from the church where some Catholics live. There he comes upon a previously unknown Catholic family whose members never come to church, either because of the distance or because of negligence. The mother of the family, perhaps forty years of age, evidently suffers from consumption, although she is not confined to bed; indeed, she attends to her ordinary occupations. When she says that she cannot come to church because of her domestic duties, Caius warns her to be ready at home on the following morning to receive the Easter sacraments. When she agrees, early on the following day he successively administers Penance, Communion, and Extreme Unction. After eight months he is called to the same woman, now dying, and when he finds her deprived of her senses and at the very point of death, without delay he anoints her again on the forehead under a general form; a little afterwards the woman expires. Hence it is asked:

1. Who is the subject of Extreme Unction?

2. Can Extreme Unction be repeated in the same illness?

3. What is to be said of Caius’s manner of acting in all these things?

1. Who is the subject of Extreme Unction?

To receive Extreme Unction validly one must be baptized, have attained the use of reason, and must be in probable danger of death from sickness.¹

1 Manual of Moral Theology, vol. ii, 238.

2. May Extreme Unction be repeated during the same sickness?

The Ritual lays down that this sacrament ought not to be repeated in the same sickness, unless it is prolonged, as when the sick man has got better and he is again brought into the danger of death. Many approved authors hold that in practice it may be repeated after a month’s interval.²

2 Ibid., 238.

3. What about the actions of Caius?

Caius found a mother of a family who never came to church, partly on account of distance, partly on account of negligence. She was now far advanced in consumption, but still attending to her household duties. He told her to prepare herself to make her Easter next morning, and then came again to the house and administered Penance, the Eucharist, and Extreme Unction. There is little difficulty about the administration of Penance. It is forbidden to take Holy Communion out of the Church except to the sick. The woman in question was apparently sufficiently ill for Easter Communion to be brought to her. Extreme Unction should not be given except to the sick who are in danger of death. If Caius judged that the woman was probably in danger, he did right to administer Extreme Unction, otherwise he did wrong.

Eight months afterward Caius was called to the same woman and found her dying in a state of unconsciousness. He anointed her on the forehead with the general form, and then she died. Caius should first of all have given her conditional absolution, for Penance should always precede Extreme Unction, as this sacrament is the complement of Penance. He did right after such an interval to repeat Extreme Unction, for although the sickness was the same, still without doubt there had been a change in the sick person’s state.¹

1 Génicot, vol. ii, n. 423.