� 4? ?XT? ?mCT?O.?. [BO0? IL tamen severa eat, nee improhabilia senteutia Haberti, Petri Collet, et aliorum qui volunt extremam unctionera administrari ctebere omnibus fidelibus cognitione destitutis, sire pi?, sire male vixerint, modo spa* tium habuerint l?enitendi priusquam rationes imputes fierint. Ratio eartim eat: 1. Quia fideles jure quod habent ad sacramenta privandi non aunt, nisi constet cos jure suo cecidisse per manifeatam tentiara. 2. Quia cure sint (?hristisni ac fidei priucipiis imbuti, prmsu- mendurn eat ip9o8 ultimo quo ruerunt 8ui ipsins compotes momento, fuisae, fuisae pmnitenti?1 tactos... Illam sententiam in praxi vuigo quntur ecclesim pastures. ?* It is in vain that this author, in the next sentence, says that extreme unction is not to be a?tered to those who are deprived of their reason, in the very act of sin, when it is ma- nifest that they were impenitent. The distinction which he makes between irapenitence and penitence is so small, that they cannot be distinguished from each other. Those of whom he speklot as t&m#, or the faitA.?d, may have lived ?ly, or m?/?, u?c]md�, and yet be properly enough called by the names of Christians and faithful. VI. TI? e?'?ts of e?treme unction. These, as eelleered from the Council of Trent, (sew. 14, cap. 2,) the five following: 1. Sanctifying grace. 2. Sacramental, or actual g?zces. ?. Cleansing from the remains of sin, and alleviati6n of mind. 4. Remission of sins. 5. Bodily healing. The d?po?it?ons necessary for ?alid� receiving th? sacr,?ment are: Baptism, intention, dangerous ?ickness, personal sin formerly com- mitted. In order to receive it.fruitful?y/, a state of ?ancfifying grae? necessary. Hence, if any one is conseiuu? of mortal sin, ho is r?quir? to confess and receive ab?lution before the reception of 1. $anet/f?ing grace. Extreme unction is said, per se, to confer eondary habitual grace, and, per ace/dens, sometimes primary gnus. ? following question and answer will present their views on ? "W?n is tAis Aabit?ud graco infused ? An?. There ar? ? opi- nions concerning this: The first teaches that this grace is wholly in- fu?ed tzt the first unction." "The second contends, that it is only infuse] at th? l?t, y?z by power of the preceding unctions; so that in the last the ?�rmnent ?ems to be at length e?entially perfected." "The third teacbeth, that by each unction grace is conferred, effe�? eorrespend?ng to that sense which is ?nointed; for instance, ?mission of sins, committed through the ?ight, is obt?ne?l while eye? m'e being anointed; so that in every unction the eftecru are part obtained; and thus, in the last unction, the total and �omplet? effect i? accomplished. This opinion ? proved, because each unction in im own form is applied in the mode of �?ramental sign, which is conformable or adapted to it? proper end; therefor? the eorroapond?ng effect i? given in the last instant, ?o a? vo be compile in i?lf, when there i? no obetaele; for that form or preceding unction do?a not pre? the order for th? oth?r unctions, j?t as th? ?ffe? of th? eon?- cration of the brond i? not s? on th? follow?mg oon?a'?fion of
�
