Dist. 23, Art. 2, Q. 4
Book IV: On the Sacraments · Distinction 23
Quaestio IV. Quoties debeat hoc Sacramentum dari.
Quarto et ultimo quaeritur, quoties debeat hoc Sacramentum dari; et quaeritur, utrum debeat iterari. Et quod non, videtur:
1. Primo, quia «nulli Sacramento facienda est iniuria1»; sed qui iterat Sacramentum facit ei iniuriam: ergo etc.
2. Item, per simile videtur: quia unctio episcopalis sive confirmationis non iteratur: ergo nec unctio extrema iterari debet ratione consimili.
3. Item, hoc videtur per denominationem: quia dicitur unctio extrema; sed unius hominis una est mors et unum extremum2: ergo tantum semel debet inungi.
Contra: 1. Quoties iteratur morbus, et medicina; sed tam morbus corporalis quam spiritualis iteratur, scilicet veniale peccatum et corporalis infirmitas3: ergo etc.
2. Item, aliquis, qui est in periculo secundum humanum iudicium et opinionem medicorum, est inungendus, quia praesumitur, quod laboret in extremis: si ergo ille idem in extremis alias4 laborare potest, videtur, quod inungi debet.
Iuxta hoc quaeritur, si aliquis sacerdos incipit inungere et in unctione deficit, utrum debeat a capite incipi, vel perfici.
Et iterum, utrum aliquis in eadem infirmitate5 debeat bis inungi, ut puta in infirmitate incurabili.
Conclusio
Conclusio. Cum in hoc Sacramento nec imprimatur character, nec detur effectus perpetuus, potest et debet ipsum iterari.
Respondeo: Dicendum, quod istud Sacramentum, sicut innuitur aperte in littera6, et debet et potest iterari. — Si autem quaeratur ratio huius, dicendum est, quod generalis ratio, quare Sacrap. 601mentum non debeat iterari, est, quia effectus eius est perpetuus, qui non iteratur. Unde characteris impressio non est generalis ratio, sed potius effectus perpetuatio. Unde ex quo panis semel consecratus est, non debet amplius consecrari, quamvis non imprimatur ibi character; et similiter oleum benedictum non debet amplius benedici, sive consecratum non debet amplius consecrari. Quoniam igitur in unctione extrema non imprimitur7 nec datur effectus perpetuus, maxime si homo ab infirmitate resurgat; ideo secunda operatio Sacramenti est necessaria, et ideo iterari potest et debet medicina absque aliqua contumelia Sacramenti.
1. Ad illud ergo quod obiicitur, quod sibi8 fiat iniuria in iteratione; dicendum, quod hoc verum est, quando iteratur Sacramentum, et nihil novum efficitur; hoc autem in proposito non habet locum.
2. Ad illud quod obiicitur de unctione confirmationis, dicendum, quod non est simile, quia non utrobique est effectus characteris, qui est perpetuus, propter quem amplius Sacramentum iterari non debet9.
3. Ad illud quod obiicitur de denominatione, dicendum, quod unctio extrema est dupliciter: aut secundum veritatem, aut secundum nostram opinionem. Primo modo non iteratur, sed secundo modo sic; et ita frequenter accidit multos inungi10.
Ad illud quod quaeritur, si sacerdos deficit, utrum sit initiandum; dicendum, quod potius est supplendum quod inchoatum est, pro eo quod quaelibet unctio habet specialem sibi formam, sicut patet aspicienti11 ordinarium, attamen generaliter conveniunt in remissione peccati.
Ad illud quod quaeritur de infirmitatibus prolixis, aliqui voluerunt dicere, quod post annum iterari potest, pro eo quod completa est revolutio corporum superiorum12. Sed absurdum valde videtur, Sacramenta regulari secundum motum astrorum. — Et ideo potest aliter dici, quod nullus in aliqua infirmitate inungendus est, nisi cum praesumitur ad exitum propinquare; et hoc est in infirmitatis aggravatione, quem statum natura diu sustinere non potest, immo aut vincit, aut vincitur. Si ergo infirmus melioretur13, ut diutius vivat; etsi non perfecte curetur, curatur tamen aliquo modo ab intensione morbi; et ideo, quia venialia iterum redire possunt, et iterum infirmitas corporalis aggravatur, potest et debet Sacramentum unctionis iterari. — Et sic patet responsio ad obiecta14.
---
Question IV. How often this Sacrament ought to be given.
Fourthly and lastly it is asked how often this Sacrament ought to be given; and it is asked whether it ought to be repeated. And that it ought not, it seems:
1. First, because "no injury is to be done to any Sacrament1"; but he who repeats a Sacrament does it injury: therefore, etc.
2. Likewise, it seems so by a similar case: because the episcopal anointing, or [the anointing] of confirmation, is not repeated: therefore neither ought extreme unction to be repeated, by a like reasoning.
3. Likewise, this seems [so] by denomination: because it is called extreme unction; but of one man there is one death and one "extreme"2: therefore he ought to be anointed only once.
On the contrary: 1. As often as the disease [returns], so also the medicine; but both bodily and spiritual disease is repeated, namely venial sin and bodily infirmity3: therefore, etc.
2. Likewise, someone who is in danger according to human judgment and the opinion of physicians is to be anointed, because it is presumed that he labors in his last extremity: if therefore that same man can at another time4 labor in his last extremity, it seems that he ought to be anointed.
Alongside this it is asked: if some priest begins to anoint and fails in the midst of the anointing, whether it ought to be begun again from the head, or [merely] completed.
And again, whether someone in the same infirmity5 ought to be anointed twice, as for instance in an incurable infirmity.
Conclusion
Conclusion. Since in this Sacrament neither is a character imprinted, nor is a perpetual effect given, it can and ought to be repeated.
I respond: It must be said that this Sacrament, as is plainly intimated in the text6, both ought to and can be repeated. — But if the reason for this be sought, it must be said that the general reason why a Sacrament ought not to be repeated is that its effect is perpetual, which is not repeated. Hence the imprinting of a character is not the general reason, but rather the perpetuation of the effect. Hence, once bread has been consecrated, it ought not to be consecrated further, although no character is imprinted there; and similarly blessed oil ought not to be blessed further, nor what has been consecrated be consecrated further. Since therefore in extreme unction no [character] is imprinted7 nor is a perpetual effect given — especially if the man should recover from his infirmity — therefore a second operation of the Sacrament is necessary, and so the medicine can and ought to be repeated without any affront to the Sacrament.
1. To that, then, which is objected — that an injury is done to it8 in the repetition — it must be said that this is true when a Sacrament is repeated and nothing new is effected; but this has no place in the case at hand.
2. To that which is objected concerning the anointing of confirmation, it must be said that it is not similar, because the effect of a character, which is perpetual, is not present in both cases — [the character] on account of which a Sacrament ought not to be repeated further9.
3. To that which is objected concerning the denomination, it must be said that extreme unction is [so called] in two ways: either according to truth, or according to our opinion. In the first way it is not repeated, but in the second way it is; and thus it frequently happens that many are anointed [more than once]10.
To that which is asked — if the priest fails, whether it ought to be begun anew — it must be said that it is rather to be supplied [i.e. completed], what has been begun, for the reason that each anointing has its own special form, as is evident to one who examines11 the ritual [ordinarium]; yet they generally agree in the remission of sin.
To that which is asked concerning prolonged infirmities, some have wished to say that after a year [the Sacrament] can be repeated, for the reason that the revolution of the higher bodies is [then] completed12. But it seems utterly absurd that the Sacraments should be regulated according to the motion of the stars. — And therefore it can be said otherwise, that no one is to be anointed in any infirmity unless when he is presumed to be drawing near to his exit [i.e. death]; and this is in the aggravation of an infirmity, a state which nature cannot long sustain, but either conquers or is conquered. If therefore the sick man improves13, so that he lives longer — even if he is not perfectly cured, he is nonetheless cured in some measure from the intensity of the disease — and therefore, because venial [sins] can return again, and again bodily infirmity is aggravated, the Sacrament of unction can and ought to be repeated. — And thus the response to the objections is evident14.
---
- 1Secundum August., hic in lit. Magistri, c. 4. et supra pag. 293, nota 1.According to Augustine, here in the text of the Master, c. 4, and above p. 293, note 1.
- 2Hebr. 9, 27: Statutum est hominibus semel mori.Heb. 9:27: It is appointed unto men once to die.
- 3Vide hic lit. Magistri, c. 4.See here the text of the Master, c. 4.
- 4Cod. K iterum.Codex K [reads] iterum (again).
- 5Codd. R S T addunt si est prolixa.Codices R S T add si est prolixa (if it is prolonged).
- 6Hic c. 4.Here, c. 4.
- 7Vat. addit character.The Vatican edition adds character.
- 8Ed. I ibi.Edition I [reads] ibi (there).
- 9Cfr. supra d. 7. dub. 6. — Pro non utrobique, quod habet cod. O, alii perperam utrobique, quod edd. mutaverunt in ibi.Cf. above, d. 7, dub. 6. — For non utrobique (not in both cases), which codex O has, others wrongly [read] utrobique (in both cases), which the editions changed to ibi (there).
- 10Vat. addit pluries.The Vatican edition adds pluries (several times).
- 11Cod. aa inspicienti. Mox pro conveniunt multi codd. convenerunt.Codex aa [reads] inspicienti (to one inspecting). Presently, for conveniunt (they agree), many codices [read] convenerunt (they agreed).
- 12Vide supra pag. 542, nota 6. — Inferius voci astrorum Vat. praemittit solis et.See above p. 542, note 6. — Below, before the word astrorum (of the stars) the Vatican edition prefixes solis et (of the sun and).
- 13Pro melioretur, ut, quod praebent codd. I K, codd. G H L V moveretur, ut, alii codd. et edd. non moriatur [cod. F moritur, cod. aa moreretur], sed. Inferius pro et ideo cod. H et iterum.For melioretur, ut (should improve, so that), which codices I K provide, codices G H L V [read] moveretur, ut (should be moved, so that), the other codices and the editions non moriatur (should not die) [codex F moritur (dies), codex aa moreretur (should die)], sed (but). Below, for et ideo (and therefore) codex H [reads] et iterum (and again).
- 14Vide scholion ad I. huius articuli quaest.See the scholion on question I of this article. ---