jump to navigation

Novus Ordo Anointing of the Sick Not a Sacrament – Not “Equivalent” to Extreme Unction? May 31, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, different religion, disaster, error, Four Last Things, General Catholic, horror, priests, religious, scandals, secularism, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.
trackback

A very interesting little bit of catechesis below from The Fatima Center.  The traditional Dominican priest who answers these questions (since Fr. Gruner’s demise, RIP), Father Albert, claims that not only is the modern, post-conciliar sacrament “Anointing of the Sick” deficient compared to the Sacrament of Extreme Unction in its practical application, the way “anointing of the sick” is done in most parishes is so bastardized in its minimalist reductio ad absurdam that it no longer even constitutes a Sacrament:

“There is an essential difference between “anointing of the sick” and the traditional Extreme Unction.” “Often, the anointing of the sick that is given in the Novus Ordo is not a sacrament at all.”

I was always gravely disturbed by the monthly “anointing of the sick” ceremonies that occurred in some local NO parishes.  Literally everyone lined up to receive an entirely perfunctory blessing, irrespective of their general health.  I mean 25 year old marathon runners were getting blessed.  There was no examination of conscience, no contrition expressed, only the most minimal of anointings, and, I long ago concluded, little grace conferred.  I have long wondered if such a truncated service could indeed be considered a Sacrament.  According to Father Albert, most of the time, it is not.

So, Extreme Unction, properly received, removes temporal debt due to sin.  It is a Sacrament ordered almost entirely towards aiding those in serious threat of death or with serious health problems in attaining Heaven at their particular judgment.  It is not a “sacrament of healing” as “anointing of the sick” is generally called now in the Novus Ordo world.  It was never a Sacrament intended to be received over and over again on a monthly basis in a totally perfunctory way.  And what is even more sad, is that I have seen the mentality of this bowdlerized group blessing translate into the hospital and sick bed, where only the most dilatory of blessings are conveyed on those who truly are gravely ill instead of the thorough preparation for death and blessing for the passage of the soul from the body which has traditionally been given in the Church.

As with so much in the Novus Ordo, and as Father Albert notes, the accidental aspect of the Sacrament has assumed the primacy, whereas its primary role has been reduced to distinctly secondary place.  In this case, the accidental healing qualities of Extreme Unction have become the focus in the “sacrament of healing”  – and note once again the humanistic nature of the change, with most all the focus on bodily healing in this life rather than the preparation of the soul for its real life, that is the next life, which shall be eternal.

I had long felt there were grave deficiencies with the anointing of the sick as it is practiced in most all Novus Ordo parishes but had never managed to put the concerns so precisely and succinctly.  Thanks to The Fatima Center for these helpful  catechetical videos.

 

Advertisements

Comments

1. Tim - June 1, 2017

Why would anyone need this Sacrament anyway? Doesn’t everyone in Novus Ordo world go to heaven anyway?

MrT - June 2, 2017

Exactly. That’s the mentality behind cheapening the ceremony. The anointing done in these “healing” rituals likens to a spiritual vitamin shot. If memory serves me, these anointings are done with minimally blessed oil, often by “commissioned” laity. Isn’t the sacramental oil only used for a truly seriously sick and/or dying person?

MrT - June 2, 2017

Ideally the NO Sacrament of the Sick uses oil blessed by the bishop, usually brought to the parish from the Chrism Mass and administered to the seriously sick and dying. It was explained to me one time that oil administered at a “healing” mass or some “healing” ceremony is oil blessed by a priest using the NO Blessing ritual book. A priest that follows the 1962 rites explained to me once that the NO Book of Blessing prayers do not emphasize Blessing the objects brought to the priest, but the people bringing the objects. Big diff. You non-traddies be the judge as to if that is an improvement.

2. Branch - June 1, 2017

If there is an essential, substantial difference between the Sacrament and the new version of the ‘Sacrament’, then it could not have possibly been from the true Church and so sedevacantism is true. Let’s starting thinking logically and honestly or stop complaining.

Tantumblogo - June 1, 2017

Or we could not overreact without really listening/reading, and figure out the priest was talking about how the sacrament is routinely presented, and not how it has been formally codified after Vatican II (Extreme Unction/Anointing of the Sick being one of the Sacraments for which entirely new forms were created after the Council).

The post title is deliberately provocative but it’s also hard to put such nuance into a title.

Tantumblogo - June 1, 2017

Or we could not overreact without really listening/reading, and figure out the priest was talking about how the sacrament is routinely presented, and not how it has been formally codified after Vatican II (Extreme Unction/Anointing of the Sick being one of the Sacraments for which entirely new forms were created after the Council).

The post title is deliberately provocative but it’s also hard to put such nuance into a title.

Another thought – is it easier to ignore what to me seems like very legitimate criticism by labeling it sede vacantist? FideCogitActio, before it went silent, dealt with these matters in depth. There are not easy answers. Using a label like sede vacantist smells a bit like “I don’t want to hear this.” Which, fine, but not for the reason you claim.

Tim - June 2, 2017

The old Novus Ordo heads, sedevacantism tails syndrome. The Novus Ordites and Sedevacantists hold the same error of papolatry….namely the pope is always right no matter what. The Novusordites think if a pope talks in his sleep it becomes dogma. The Sedes think if a pope says something that is incorrect then he can’t possibly be pope. It is these folks who hold to these crazy extremes that need to start thinking logically and honestly.

Branch - June 7, 2017

The priest said there is an essential difference–about 40 seconds into the video. And repeats it later about 2:45.

But Sacraments work ex opere operato, so it either is a Sacrament or it is not when it comes to “essences.” That a practical application could render an otherwise valid Sacrament invalid has nothing to do with the rites in themselves, which is what this video is addressing.

Tantumblogo - June 8, 2017

If I sprinkle water on someone and say “I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ” is it a baptism? Some protestants would say yes. But the Church says no.

Same issue here, simply putting oil on palms and saying “Be healed” is such an extreme reduction of and deviation from the sacramental norm/form that I think it a fair question to ask whether this really constitutes a Sacrament. And I have seen that done repeatedly.

3. tg - June 2, 2017

Interesting post. My parish had a monthly “healing Mass”. People would go up and get anointed. Since it was during the time I came back to the church, I went up there since everyone did. I thought that even though I wasn’t sick I had spiritual ills. However, the new priest did away with this. I went to the last healing Mass. He said the anointing was only for those with serious conditions, or having serious surgery. I stayed in the pew. That was the last one. No explanation just no healing Mass since then.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: