The Communion of the Sick.

SECTION I.-The Title of the Office.

IN the First Book of Edward this Office is expressly appended to the Office used at the visitation of the sick; for the full title of the latter is, "The Order for the Visitation of the Sick and the Communion of the same." This is followed by Haddon. They are separated, however, by the heading still prefixed to the present Office. The title of the Order for the Visitation was curtailed in 1552, but a paragraph of the last Rubric, which recognises the union of the two offices, was, and is still, with some change, retained, viz., "When the sick person is visited, and receiveth the holy Communion all at one time," etc. See the note on that Rubric.

SECTION II.—The Unction and Communion of the Sick.

I. The Order for the Visitation of the Sick in the first reformed Book began (after the Peace) with Psalm cxliii. The rest was in substance like our present form down to the final Blessing. Instead of that, however, i.e. after "The Almighty Lord, who is a most strong tower," etc., we find an Order for the Unction of the sick person, if he desired it. The Priest was to "anoint him upon the forehead or breast only, making the sign of the Cross, saying thus, As with this visible oil thy body outwardly is anointed, so our heavenly Father, Almighty God, grant of His infinite goodness that thy soul inwardly may be anointed with the Holy Ghost, who is the Spirit of all strength, comfort, relief, and gladness. And vouchsafe for His great mercy (if it be His blessed will) to restore unto thee thy bodily health and strength, to serve Him; and send thee release of all thy pains, troubles, and diseases, both in body and mind," etc. This benediction was only followed by Psalm xiii. In the same Book the last Rubric in the Order for the Communion of the Sick ran thus:-"And if the sick desire to be anointed, then (i.e. after beginning with a prescribed portion of the Visitation Office1) shall the Priest use the appointed Prayer without any Psalm."

It is difficult to understand why the Unction was altogether omitted in the Revision of 1552. It might have

1 See after, p. 1039.

been desirable to express more clearly that its design was to serve, if it were God's will, in conjunction with the prayers of the Church, to the restoration of the bodily health of the sick person; but it could hardly be right to remove from her formularies all recognition of a rite prescribed and practised by the Apostles, and preserved, though much distorted both in meaning and observance, through fifteen centuries of the world's chance and change. In less despotic times such an act as this might have led to the extensive use of various unauthorized formularies with the Unction. As it is, the rite has dropped out of general knowledge in this country. But if a sick person, having faith in the prayers of the Church, were to send for his Parish Priest or Priests (the Presbyters or "elders of the Church "), and, appealing to the Scripture, were to request them, on its authority, to "pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord,"1 I do not see how they could refuse com

1 S. James v. 14, 15. It may be thought superfluous to say that the unction prescribed by S. James, having for its sole end the recovery of the sick, is entirely different from the Extreme Unction of the later Church of Rome, which assumes that the sick will not recover. Yet, as S. James is with strange persistency appealed to in favour of Extreme Unction, it may be well to state the truth in the honest language of a Roman Divine, Thomas de Vio, Cardinal Caietan :-"Neither to judge from the words nor from the effect, does this saying (of S. James) speak of the sacramental anointing of Extreme Unction; but rather of the unction which the Lord Jesus appointed in the Gospel to be used by His disciples in the case of the sick. For the text does not say, Is any one sick unto death? but absolutely, Is any one sick? and it declares the effect to be, the healing of the sick; and it speaks of the remission of sins only conditionally; whereas Extreme Unction is only given near the point of death, and tends directly (as the Form of it intimates) to the remission of sins."-Comment. in S. Jac. Ep. c. v. p. 419; Lugd. 1556.

Although the practice of anointing the sick with a view to their recovery was kept up after the example of the Apostles (S. Mark vi. 13), and in obedience to the precept of S. James, the allusions in early writers to the authority of the Apostle are singularly few. The earliest is by Origen, who, however, only refers to the passage for its bearing on the absolution of a sinner :-"There is yet a seventh way to obtain remission of sins, though hard and laborious, viz., through repentance, when the sinner washes his bed with tears, and tears become his bread day and night, etc. And when he is not ashamed to show his sin to the Priest of the Lord, and to seek the remedy, etc. In which case that also which the Apostle James says is fulfilled, If any man be sick, let him call for the Elders of the Church, and let them lay their hands on him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith shall save the sick; and if he is in sins, they shall be remitted to him."-Hom. ii. in Lev. § 4, tom. ix. p. 193. The author is speaking of a true penitent, whether sick or in health, and is so intent on the thought of Confession and Absolution that he is inadvertently led to substitute let them lay their hands on him for the Apostle's let them pray over him. S. Chrysostom is

pliance without incurring the guilt of disobedience to the voice of God in holy Scripture.

Speaking of Medieval Offices for the sick, Morinus says, "The reader will observe that almost all the Orders of Extreme Unction combine three things,-the Order of Confession and Reconciliation; secondly, the Order of the Unction ;

the next, and (beyond the healing of the body) he sees in the passage only the power of Absolution :-"Not only do they (i.e. Priests by their ministry) regenerate us, but they have the power of forgiving sins afterwards. For, saith he, Is any sick among you? let him," etc.-De Sacerdotio, L. iii. c. vi. p. 47; Oxon. 1844. Victor of Antioch, 401 (or some epitomizer of S. Cyril of Alexandria, writing somewhat later), in a comment on S. Mark vi. 13:-" S. James, in his General Epistle, says the like to this, viz., Is any among you sick? etc. The oil both relieves fatigue, and is a source of light and cheerfulness. Therefore the oil used in anointing signifies both the mercy from God, and the healing of the disease, and the enlightenment of the heart. For that the prayer effected it all is clear to every one, but the oil, as I think, was a symbol of these things."-Cramer's Catena, p. 324. The author of the Epistle to Decentius, long ascribed to Innocent, A.D. 402, in reply to questions put by his correspondent, says: "There is no doubt that it (the passage of S. James) may be received or understood of the sick Faithful, who may be anointed with the sacred oil of Chrism; which, being made by the Bishop, it is lawful not for the Priests only, but for all Christians to use in anointing in their own or their friends' need. But that which is added we consider needless, viz., the doubt whether a Bishop may do what Presbyters certainly can. For it was said of Presbyters, because Bishops, being hindered by other employments, cannot go to all the sick. But if the Bishop either can do it, or deems any one worthy to be visited by himself, he whose office it is to make the Chrism itself can both bless and touch him with the Chrism without delay. For that cannot be poured on Penitents, because it is a kind of Sacrament."-§ viii. Cigheri, tom. iv. p. 179. Some gross errors in facts, and other blemishes in this Epistle, have led many to think that it could not have been written by a man of Innocent's reputation and position, and the above passage among others appears to me to savour strongly of a later age; but Roman Catholic authors receive it, and Daillé on the other side has laboured to prove it genuine. However that may be, it is simply impossible that one Bishop could gravely have put, and another as gravely answered, such questions, if the Roman doctrine and practice of Extreme Unction had been established in their day. S. Cyril of Alexandria, A.D. 412, after condemning the superstition of those who resorted to charms in sickness, proceeds thus:" But do thou, if thou hast pain in any part of the body, and truly believest that the words 'Lord of Sabaoth,' and such names as Holy Scripture gives to Him who is God by nature, will be able to dispel the evil, thyself pronounce those words, praying for thyself. For thou wilt do better than they, giving the glory to God and not to unclean spirits. I will mention also the Scripture inspired by God, which says, Is any sick among you?" etc.-De Ador. in Sp. et Ver. L. vi. tom. i. p. 211. Here again the writer had no thought of an allusion to anything but the healing of the sick through the unction prescribed by the Apostle.

There are many notices of the use of oil in healing the sick in the early records of the Church. Thus Tertullian, Ad Scap. c. iv., tells us

thirdly, the Order of the Communion of the Eucharist. As often as Extreme Unction was conferred on the sick, his confession and reconciliation preceded, and the reception of the Eucharist immediately followed. Sometimes, however, the Eucharist only was given to the sick person, not Extreme Unction, and then Confession only [with Absolution] pre

that the Emperor Severus "sought out and kept in his palace till his death Proculus a Christian, who had once cured him by the use of oil” According to S. Jerome, during a plague of serpents in Palestine, a multitude of husbandmen and shepherds, who had been bitten, "touching their wounds with oil blessed" by S. Hilarion, "recovered their health without fail." He records of the same Saint also that he "delivered from death, by the unction of oil," the son-in-law and daughter of a holy woman named Constantia.-Vita Hilar. Opp. tom. iv. P. ii. pp. 85, 90. S. Augustine says that he "knew a damsel at Hippo, who, having anointed herself all over with oil, upon which the Presbyter, when praying for her, had dropped his tears, was soon healed of an evil spirit.” -De Civit. Dei, L. xxii. c. viii. § 8, tom. ix. col. 874. Palladius, A.D. 401, affirms that oil blessed by the Abbot Benjamin never failed to heal (Hist. Laus. c. xiii. Biblioth. PP. Auct. Gr. et Lat. tom. ii. p. 915); and that Macarius "prayed over and anointed with holy oil" a paralysed woman and a boy vexed by an evil spirit, and thus healed them.-Ibid. c. xI pp. 930-1. Sulpitius Severus, 401, relates the cure, through the same means, by S. Martin of Tours, of two girls, one dumb from her birth, the other paralysed.—Dial. iii. § ii. and Vita B. Mart. § xv. pp. 553, 460. S. Gregory of Tours, A.D. 573, affords several instances of similar cures ; as of one, in a fever; of another, deaf and dumb from the effects of fever; of a third, blind from infancy.-Hist. Franc. L. i. § xli. L. vi. § vi. coll. 31, 279, 280. S. Eloy, A.D. 640, is said to have anointed a withered arm with oil and restored it.-Vita L. i. c. xxiii. Spicil. Dach. tom. v. p. 179. In our own country, Bede, 701, relates how a pious woman, long sick, had it made known to her that, if the Priest "sprinkled oil consecrated for the sick" on the remedy employed, she would recover.-Comm. in S. Luc. Ev. L. iii. cxxxii. This looks like a distorted tradition of the original use. Theodulf of Orleans, A.D. 794:-" This unction is not to be given to the Clergy only, but to the laity also; and not only to men, but to women too, if it be needful; for we read that certain holy men have anointed paralytic girls with holy oil and have healed them. We also read that energumens have been anointed with holy oil and been healed. . . . For children (pueris) too is this anointing necessary; since we read that some holy men have anointed the limbs of children with consecrated oil, and recalled them to their former health."-Capitul. ii. Baluz. Miscell. tom. ii. p. 104.

We may observe in conclusion that a practice which began in the age of miracles, and was connected with a particular, if not always miraculous, interposition of the hand of God, could hardly escape corruption or extinction, from the ignorance and superstition that prevailed everywhere for so many centuries. The Unction of the Sick has retained, indeed, more or less of its old significance among the Greeks, but it need not excite surprise that it is altogether unknown to the Nestorians (see Badger's Nestorians, vol. ii. p. 161; and Synod. Diamp. Ad. vi. Decr. i. Raulin, Ed. Malab. p. 177), or that it is kept up on new and false grounds by the Church of Rome.