--- Phyllis Jestice <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Isn't this a case of necessity? Anyone can baptize, because the
> sacrament
> is necessary for salvation---but even the most negative and lurid
> writers
> of the Middle Ages never denied entrance to heaven because a person
> hadn't
> been confirmed, married, ordained, anointed, reconciled, or given the
> eucharist.
No doubt this is so; although actually Communion (though not
necessarily at the moment of death) is usually regarded as necessary
for salvation, on good scriptural authority; cf. John 6:53,
"I tell you most solemnly, if you do not eath the flesh of the Son of
Man and drink his blood, you will not have life in you. Anyone who
does eat my flesh and drink my blood has eternal life, and I shall
raise him up on the last day."
Certainly there is a desire among the faithful to receive viaticum, and
at various times there have been various substitutes or approximations
provided by lay people in the absence of a priest. I have come across
the custom of placing two blades of grass (don't ask me why two) in the
mouth of someone killed in battle in the middle ages.
On a practical level, a dying person may reach the stage where it is
impossible for him or her to swallow communion; but anointing is
always possible right up to death.
Oriens.
____________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk
or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|