Annotation CCCXXXIX

”Is anyone sick among you? Let him bring in the presbyters of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with holy oil.” — James 5:14

Whether extreme unction can be ministered by any layman whatsoever.

Bede the presbyter, in the commentaries on the epistle of James, elucidating this saying, seems to think that the sacrament of extreme unction can be conferred not only by presbyters, but also by any layman [a quouis laico]; for he says: “THIS also we read the Apostles to have done in the Gospel; and now the custom of the church holds, that the sick be anointed with consecrated oil by presbyters, and healed with accompanying prayer. Nor [is it lawful] to presbyters only, but — as Pope Innocent writes — it is even lawful for all Christians to use the same oil in anointing, in their own or their [household’s] necessity. Which oil, however, it is not lawful to confect [prepare] except by bishops. For [as to] that which he says, ‘With oil in the name of the Lord,’ it signifies oil consecrated in the name of the Lord.” The words cited by Bede are extant in the epistle of Pope Innocent the First to Decentius, bishop of Gubbio [Eugubium].

Thomas Cajetan, in the commentaries, examining this passage, thus writes: “NEITHER from the words, nor from the effect, do these words speak of the sacramental unction of extreme unction, but rather of an unction which the Lord Jesus instituted in the gospel to be exercised upon the sick, etc. For the text does not say, ‘Is anyone sick unto death?’ but absolutely, ‘Is anyone sick?’ And it says the effect [is] the alleviation of the sick; and of the remission of sins it speaks only conditionally. Since extreme [unction] is not given except on account of the point of death, and directly (as its form sounds) tends to the remission of sins — besides this, [namely] that James commands many presbyters to be called to one sick man, both praying and anointing, which is alien from the rite of extreme unction.” This opinion of Thomas [Cajetan], Ambrose [of Compsa], [in] the fifth book, confutes with these words: “I GRIEVE vehemently, that he has attempted to take away from us the testimonies of the sacred unction, which are received from Mark, and from James the Apostle.¹ For [as to] that which Mark testifies of the disciples — that they anointed the sick with oil — he denies that this can be understood of the sacrament which the church uses. But why it cannot be so under- stood, he proves no otherwise than by this: ‘He himself said [it]’ — which was [the manner] of the Pythagoreans — ‘is to be observed toward him’ — especially since Bede and Thomas and many others contradict [him]. Similarly, concerning that which the blessed James says, ‘Is anyone sick among you,’ he thus judges: ‘Neither from the words, nor from the effect, do these words speak of the sacramental unction of extreme unction, but rather of an unction which the Lord Jesus instituted to be exercised upon the sick, etc.’ But these [things], as they are surely ineptly [said] (for what is it that he says, ‘the unction of extreme unction’? what is ‘the unction of an unction’?), so are they also falsely said. For why do the words not agree? ‘Because,’ says he, ‘it is not there said, “If anyone is sick unto death.”’ Likewise, because the effect of that unction is the alleviation of the sick. But does this repugn to that sacrament? Nay, it agrees [with it], as Thomas teaches, and others. Add, that of the remission of sins he speaks only conditionally: but that condition — namely, ‘if he be in sins’ — is tacitly present. For does he wish sins to be forgiven to those who wholly lack them? He added, that James bids many presbyters to be called to one sick man, both praying and anointing — which is alien from the rite of extreme unction. But the Apostle commanded that for solemnity, not for necessity; which, if it also were observed, would rightly be done. Which is even observed by the regulars [religious], that many pray, although one anoints; but the others also seem to anoint through him. Therefore, although I have grieved that these [things] are taught by this man, and against the doctrine of Augustine and the divine Thomas, and the tradition and persuasion of other doctors and of the church: nevertheless I have rejoiced, that he brought these reasons, which it will be no trouble to refute. Whereby it comes to pass, that while they strive to obscure the truth, they rather in fact illustrate [it]. But I do not wish to be superfluous in the allegations, and tiresome to a reader skilled and learned from the books of other Catholics.” These [things] Ambrose against the error of Cajetan, lately rejected in the Council of Trent, session 14, canon 1, in these words: “IF ANYONE shall say, that extreme unction is not truly and properly a sacrament instituted by Christ our Lord, and promulgated by the blessed James the Apostle, but only a rite received from the fathers, or a human figment: let him be anathema” [the print reads “Anathesima,” for Anathema].