Paul6 says olive oil is Scriptural (i.e. created by God).  But then argues he can change it.

So, since Paul6 contradicts himself, which Paul6 are we to believe?
a.  His first statement, which agrees with all pre-V2 authorities and with Jєωιѕн customs of time immemorial (and with all 3 persons of the Blessed Trinity)?
b.  Or with his "change", which is novel, anti-scripture, anti-Florence, anti-Trent, anti-St Thomas, etc. 

If you notice, PPVI said:
"We thought fit to modify the sacramental formula in such a way that, in view of the words of Saint James, the effects of the sacrament might be better expressed."

So the reason for the change was because "We thought fit to modify" it, and why not? they modified everything, absolutely everything else, so with that it mind, it only makes sense to change the matter. Or to look at it another way, to *not* change the matter would make no sense.

Anointing of the Sick is not the same sacrament as Extreme Unction, so he could have made the Matter whatever substance he wanted. As he said:
"THE SACRAMENT OF THE ANOINTING OF THE SICK IS ADMINISTERED TO THOSE WHO ARE DANGEROUSLY ILL, BY ANOINTING THEM ON THE FOREHEAD AND HANDS WITH OLIVE OIL, OR, IF OPPORTUNE, WITH ANOTHER VEGETABLE OIL PROPERLY BLESSED..."

This whole debate is silly.

Christ promised he would be with us always - The Body of Christ - the visible Church.

Ok, but the Church has never defined (for all catholics) what this means, in detail.  You obviously have a personal-opinion as to what this means.  And it clouds your thinking, because you view everything through this pre-conceived, definition of "what Christ being with us" means.  Or, you have this OPINION on "the gates of hell not prevailing", and what lines God will not let His enemies cross.

But none of us knows EXACTLY what God will allow His enemies to do.  We just know the Church will never cease.
And none of us knows EXACTLY what the "visible" church means.  Some saints have said that as long as 1 bishop remains on earth, the church survives.

There are HUNDREDS of opinions.  But that's all they are.  The Apostles didn't expect the Messiah to be crucified and put to death.  They were scandalized and ran out of fear.  The current crisis in the Church is scandalous and shocking.  And it's not over.

Your personal views on the crisis are NOT part of the Faith.  Principles come first, then opinions.  You don't define principles via your OPINION on the crisis.

Pope Paul VI

"Further, since olive oil, which hitherto had been prescribed for the valid administration of the sacrament, is unobtainable or difficult to obtain in some parts of the world, we decreed, at the request of numerous bishops, that in the future, according to the circuмstances, oil of another sort could also be used, provided it were obtained from plants, inasmuch as this more closely resembles the matter indicated in Holy Scripture...."

If something is in Holy Scripture, then the Church didn't create it.  The Church cannot change Holy Scripture.

Jєωιѕн Law used olive oil ==  God the Father created Jєωιѕн Law
Holy Scripture says olive oil == God the Holy Ghost inspired Scripture
Christ's passion started in "Mount Olives" and Gethsemane (which means 'olive press') == God the Son

St James, Florence, Trent, St Thomas, etc all say olive oil is essential.

Paul6 says olive oil is Scriptural (i.e. created by God).  But then argues he can change it.

So, since Paul6 contradicts himself, which Paul6 are we to believe?
a.  His first statement, which agrees with all pre-V2 authorities and with Jєωιѕн customs of time immemorial (and with all 3 persons of the Blessed Trinity)?
b.  Or with his "change", which is novel, anti-scripture, anti-Florence, anti-Trent, anti-St Thomas, etc.  

 He is a Conciliar Catholic who praises the New Mass

 
Please provide the evidence.  In direct contradiction to your assertion, Fuentes has publicly voiced strong personal preference for (and support of) the traditional Latin (Tridentine) Mass, often contrasting it with the Novus Ordo and praising its reverence, aesthetics, and connection to pre-conciliar Catholic identity.


Below are timestamped locations where Nick Fuentes explicitly praises or endorses the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM). All clips are publicly viewable on his co-host Allen “RapMusicMeltdown” Roth’s Odysee channel.

• Cozy Waiver Stream (29-May-2023)
  
  
  Title: “Nick & Milo React to Orthodox Liturgy”
  
  
  Odysee link [https://odysee.com/@rapmuzikmeltdown] → drop-down menus at 02:14:30 – 02:16:10
  
  
  Quote (cleaned): “…nothing compares to the High Mass in the Extraordinary Form—beauty, reverence, and theology in one…. Give me the 1962 Missal or give me death.”
• Friday Night White (28-Oct-2022)
  
  
  Title: “Cozy Clips #33 – Politics of the Latin Mass”
  
  
  33:43 – 34:55
  
  
  Fuentes fields a Super-Chat: “Would you attend a diocesan TLM parish?”
  
  
  Reply, verbatim: “Absolutely. I actually go out of my way so I can attend a diocesan-approved TLM when I’m in Chicago or Florida. It’s the only liturgy I trust.”
• Baseball & Barstools (11-Jul-2021)
  
  
  Title: “America First Ep. 958 – Save the Latin Mass”
  
  
  45:20 – 47:12
  
  
  He reads Pope Francis’ Traditionis Custodes live on air, then says:
  
  
  “This is an attack on Tradition itself. Supporting the Latin Mass is now a low-key act of resistance against Modernism. Count me in—100 %.”

All three segments are intact, searchable on Odysee/by title, and demonstrate his consistently favorable stance toward the Tridentine Mass.

Do you have an update?

More prayers coming your way.