.
Typical of the Liberal outlook on things, modern psychobabble and likewise Newchurch equivocation will look to the EXCEPTION to the rule and finding it, will proceed to make that the NEW RULE.
The normal outlook on ѕυιcιdє is that the person who so died met his last moments in the act of committing murder, which is to die in mortal sin.
Only by EXCEPTION can it be otherwise, and since by the nature of the 'crime' we can't interview the participants, we are left to philosophy and moral theology to resolve our questions. In the final analysis, it is in God's hands what becomes of such a one.
But it should be rather obvious that anyone having just received Extreme Unction is not very likely to turn around and kill himself. Rather, it is those who do NOT live in communion with the Church, who do NOT frequent the sacraments and who are NOT baptized and who DEFY THE WILL OF GOD who are most likely to commit ѕυιcιdє. A perfect example of this is Judas Iscariot.
Judas had everything going for him. He was an Apostle of Our Lord, in person. Who among us would not want to trade places with him on that account alone? But of him Our Lord said, it would be better for him had he never been born. Suddenly we're not so eager to take his place!
But it is exactly this one, Judas the Traitor, that progressives in Newchurch are wont to idolize, when they have 12 other good Apostles to choose from (including Matthias, who took his place). That alone tells you a lot. It tells you where these innovators are headed. They want to hold up ѕυιcιdє as some kind of thing to be admired. The Church has never done so.
Rather, the Church has historically condemned ѕυιcιdє, and teaches that our greatest penance is to accept the pains of our final agony, whatever they may be, as God's justice in our regard, as our sentence for the penance we owe for our own sins, and that by so doing, we would perhaps merit a plenary indulgence at the moment of death, which is the ultimate achievement of any penitential endeavor.
But how could one committing ѕυιcιdє be doing that?
He would have to NOT commit ѕυιcιdє in order to qualify, and so, by the fact that he went through with his own murder would seem to exclude him from the possibility of having offered up his own final agony toward his works of penance. Modernists would argue that he could have had a change of heart at the last moment. Okay, and maybe the burglar who pulls the trigger on his Colt .45 and thereby kills you really had a moment of remorse the instant before the hammer struck the cartridge primer. Sure.
The Liberal way of thinking always looks for the exception to the rule, no matter how ridiculous it is.
.