Biblia

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of James 5:14

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of James 5:14

Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:

14. Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church ] The rule is full of meaning. (1) As regards the functions of the Elders of the Church. Over and above special gifts of prophecy or teaching, they were to visit the sick, not merely for spiritual comfort and counsel, but as possessing “gifts of healing” (1Co 12:9). (2) The use of the term “Elders” exactly agrees with the account of the Jewish Church in Act 11:30; Act 15:6; Act 21:18. In the Gentile Churches the Greek title of Bishop ( Episcopos = overseer) came into use as a synonym for “Elder” (Act 20:28; Php 1:1; 1Ti 3:1; Tit 1:5; Tit 1:7), but within the limits of the New Testament the Church of Jerusalem has only “Apostles and Elders.” It may fairly be inferred from the position which he occupies in Acts 15 that St James himself was reckoned as belonging to the first of the two classes. St Paul’s way of mentioning him naturally, though not necessarily, implies the same fact (Gal 1:19).

anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord ] The context shews that this was done as a means of healing. It had been the practice of the Twelve during part, at least, of our Lord’s ministry (Mar 6:13). The Parable of the good Samaritan gives one example of the medical use of oil (Luk 10:34), another is found in Isa 1:6. Friction with olive oil was prescribed by Celsus for fever. Herod the Great used oil-baths (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 6. 5). The principle implied in the use of oil instead of the direct exercise of supernatural gifts without any medium at all, was probably, in part, analogous to our Lord’s employment of like media in the case of the blind and deaf (Mar 7:33; Mar 8:23; Joh 9:6). It served as a help to the faith of the person healed; perhaps also, in the case of the Apostles, to that of the healer. The position of the disciples was not that of men trusting in charms or spells and boasting of their powers, but rather that of those who used simple natural means of healing in dependence on God’s blessing. A sanction was implicitly given to the use of all outward means as not inconsistent with faith in the power of prayer, to the prayer of faith as not excluding the use of any natural means. “The Lord” in whose Name this was to be done is here, without doubt, definitely the Lord Jesus. Comp. Mat 18:5; Mar 9:39; Luk 9:49; Act 3:16; Act 4:10; Act 4:18; Act 4:30. The subsequent history of the practice is not without interest. It does not seem to have been ever entirely dropped either in the West or East. In the latter, though miraculous gifts of healing no longer accompanied it, it was, and still is, employed ostensibly as a means of healing, and the term “ extreme unction” has been carefully rejected. Stress is laid on the words of St James as pointing to the collective action of the elders, not to that of a single elder, and the legitimate number ranges from three as a minimum to seven. It is evident that here the idea of united prayer working with natural means has, in theory at least, survived. In the West, on the other hand, a new theory grew up with the growth of Scholasticism. If bodily healing no longer followed, it was because the anointing had become the sign and sacrament of a spiritual healing, and the special grace which it conveyed was thought of as being specifically different from that which came through other channels, adapted to the needs of the soul in its last struggles. So the term “Extreme Unction” came into use in the twelfth century, and the Council of Trent ( Catech. vi. 2. 9) limited its use to those who were manifestly drawing near unto death, and gave it the title of “ sacramentum exeuntium.” In the First Prayer Book of Edward vi. the rite was retained, partly, it would seem, by way of compromise (“if the sick person desire to be anointed”), partly, as the language of the prayer that was to accompany the act seems to indicate (“our heavenly Father vouchsafe for His great mercy (if it be His blessed will) to restore to thee thy bodily health”), with a faint hope of reviving the original idea. In the Prayer Book of 1552, the “unction” disappeared, and has never since been revived.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Is any sick among you? – In the previous verse the reference was to affliction in general, and the duty there urged was one that was applicable to all forms of trial. The subject of sickness, however, is so important, since it so often occurs, that a specific direction was desirable. That direction is to call in the aid of others to lead our thoughts, and to aid us in our devotions, because one who is sick is less able to direct his own reflections and to pray for himself than he is in other form of trial. Nothing is said here respecting the degree of sickness, whether it is that which would be fatal if these means were used or not; but the direction pertains to any kind of illness.

Let him call for the elders of the church – Greek presbyters. See the notes at Act 15:2; Act 11:30. It cannot be supposed that this refers to the apostles, for it could not be that they would be always accessible; besides, instructions like this were designed to have a permanent character, and to be applicable to the church at all times and in all places. The reference, therefore, is doubtless to the ordinary religious teachers of the congregation; the officers of the church intrusted with its spiritual interests. The spirit of the command would embrace those who are pastors, and any others to whom the spiritual interests of the congregation are confided – ruling elders, deacons, etc. If the allusion is to the ordinary officers of the church, it is evident that the cure to be hoped for Jam 5:15 was not miraculous, but was that to be expected in the use of appropriate means accompanied by prayer.

It may be added, as worthy of note, that the apostle says they should call for the elders of the church; that is, they should send for them. They should not wait for them to hear of their sickness, as they might happen to, but they should cause them to be informed of it, and give them an opportunity of visiting them and praying with them. Nothing is more common than for persons – even members of the church – to be sick a long time, and to presume that their pastor must know all about it; and then they wonder that he does not come to see them, and think hard of him because he does not. A pastor cannot be supposed to know everything; nor can it be presumed that he knows when persons are sick, any more than he can know anything else, unless he is apprized of it; and many hard thoughts, and many suspicions of neglect would be avoided, if, when persons are sick, they would in some way inform their pastor of it. It should always be presumed of a minister of the gospel that he is ready to visit the sick. But how can he go unless he is in some way apprized of the illness of those who need his counsel and his prayers? The sick send for their family physician; why should they presume that their pastor will know of their illness any more than that their physician will?

And let them pray over him – With him, and for him. A man who is sick is often little capable of praying himself; and it is a privilege to have some one to lead his thoughts in devotion. Besides, the prayer of a good man may be of avail in restoring him to health, Jam 5:15. Prayer is always one important means of obtaining the divine favor, and there is no place where it is more appropriate than by the bed-side of sickness. That relief from pain may be granted; that the mind may be calm and submissive; that the medicines employed may be blessed to a restoration to health; that past sins may be forgiven; that he who is sick may be sanctified by his trials; that he may be restored to health, or prepared for his last change – all these are subjects of prayer which we feel to be appropriate in such a case, and every sick man should avail himself of the aid of those who have an interest at the throne of grace, that they may be obtained.

Anointing him with oil – Oil, or unguents of various kinds, were much used among the ancients, both in health and in sickness. The oil which was commonly employed was olive oil. See the Isa 1:6 note; Luk 10:34 note. The custom of anointing the sick with oil still prevails in the East, for it is believed to have medicinal or healing properties. Niebuhr (Beschrieb. von Arabien, s. 131) says, The southern Arabians believe that to anoint with oil strengthens the body, and secures it against the oppressive heat of the sun, as they go nearly naked. They believe that the oil closes the pores of the skin, and thus prevents the effect of the excessive heat by which the body is so much weakened; perhaps also they regard it as contributing to beauty, by giving the skin a glossy appearance. I myself frequently have observed that the sailors in the ships from Dsjidda and Loheia, as well as the common Arabs in Tehama, anointed their bodies with oil, in order to guard themselves against the heat. The Jews in Mocha assured Mr. Forskal, that the Mohammedans as well as the Jews, in Sana, when they were sick, were accustomed to anoint the body with oil. Rosenmuller, Morgenland, in loc.

In the name of the Lord – By the authority or direction of the Lord; or as an act in accordance with his will, and that will meet with his approbation. When we do anything that tends to promote virtue, to alleviate misery, to instruct ignorance, to save life, or to prepare others for heaven, it is right to feel that we are doing it in the name of the Lord Compare, for such uses of the phrase in the name of the Lord, and in my name, Mat 10:22; Mat 18:5, Mat 18:20; Mat 19:29; Mat 24:9; Mar 9:41; Mar 13:13; Luk 21:12, Luk 21:17; Rev 2:3; Col 3:17. There is no reason to think that the phrase is used here to denote any peculiar religious rite or sacrament. It was to be done in the name of the Lord, as any other good deed is.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Jam 5:14-15

Is any sick among you?

let him call for the elders

The elders of the Church, the anointing Of the sick, and extreme unction


I.
The first thing to be noted in connection with this sending for the elders of the congregation by the sick man is, that in this Epistle, which is one of the very earliest among the Christian writings which have come down to us, we already find a DISTINCTION MADE BETWEEN CLERGY AND LAITY. St. James assumes as a matter of course, that every congregation has elders, that is a constituted ecclesiastical government. What the precise functions of the clergy were is not told us with much detail or precision; but it is quite clear that whatever the functions were they were spiritual rather than secular, and were duties which a select minority had to exercise in reference to the rest; they were not such as any one might exercise towards any one. In the present ease the sick person is not to send for any members of the congregation, but for certain who hold a definite, and apparently an official position. If any Christians could discharge the function in question, St. James would not have given the sick person the trouble of summoning the elders rather than those people who chanced to be near at hand. And it is quite clear that not all Christians are over all other Christians in the Lord; that not all are to rule, and all to obey and submit; therefore not all have the same authority to admonish others, or to watch in behalf of their souls, as they that shall give account. The reason why the elders are to be summoned is stated in different ways by different writers, but with a large amount of substantial agreement. As being those in whom the power and grace of the Holy Spirit more particularly appeared, says Calvin. Because when they pray it is not much less than if the whole Church prayed, says Bengel. St. James, says Neander, regards the presbyters in the light of organs of the Church, acting in its name; and, As the presbyters acted in the name of the whole Church, and each one as a member of the body felt that he needed its sympathy and intercession, and might count upon it; individuals should therefore, in cases of sickness, send for the presbyters of the Church. These were to offer prayer on their behalf. The intercession which St. James recommends, says Stier, is intercession for the sick on the part of the representatives of the Church, not merely the intercession of friends or brethren as such, but in the name of the whole community, one of whose members is suffering.


II.
The second point of interest is THE ANOINTING OF THE SICK PERSON BY THE ELDERS. What purpose was the oil intended to serve? Was it purely symbolical? and if so, of what? Was it merely for the refreshment of the sick person, giving relief to parched skin and stiffened limbs? Was it medicinal, with a view to a permanent cure by natural means? Was it the channel or instrument of a supernatural cure? Was it an aid to the sick persons faith? One or both of the last two suggestions may be accepted as the most probable solution. And the reason why oil was selected as a channel of Divine power and an aid to faith was, that it was believed to have healing properties. It is easier to believe when visible means are used than when nothing is visible, and it is still easier to believe when the visible means appear to be likely to contribute to the desired effect. Christ twice used spittle in curing blindness, probably because spittle was believed to be beneficial to the eyesight. And that oil was supposed to be efficacious as medicine is plain from numerous passages both in and outside of Holy Scripture (Isa 1:6; Luk 10:34). A mixture of oil and wine was used for the malady which attacked the army of AElius Gallus, and was applied both externally and internally. His physicians caused Herod the Great to be bathed in a vessel full of oil when he was supposed to be at deaths door. Celsus recommends rubbing with oil in the case of fevers and some other ailments. But it is obvious that St. James does not recommend the oil merely as medicine, for he does not say that the oil shall cure the sick person, nor yet that the oil with prayer shall do so; but that the prayer of faith shall save him that is sick, without mentioning the oil at all. On the other hand, he says that the anointing is to be done by the elders in the name of the Lord. If the anointing were merely medicinal, it might have been performed by any one, without waiting for the elders. And it can hardly be supposed that oil was believed to be a remedy for all diseases. On the other hand, it seems to be too much to say that the anointing had nothing to do with bodily healing at all, and was simply a means of grace for the sick. Thus Dollinger says, This is no gift of healing, for that was not confined to the presbyters; and for that Christ prescribed not unction, but laying on of hands. Had he meant that, St. James would have bidden or advised the sick to send for one who possessed this gift, whether presbyter or layman What was to be conveyed by this medium was, therefore, only sometimes recovery or relief, always consolation, revival of confidence and forgiveness of sins, on condition, of course, of faith and repentance. But although the gift of healing was not confined to the elders, yet in certain cases they may have exercised it; and although Christ prescribed the laying on of hands (Mar 16:18), yet the apostles sometimes healed by anointing with oil (Mar 6:13). And that shall save him that is sick, means shall cure him, is clear both from the context, and also from the use of the same word elsewhere (Mt Mar 5:23; Joh 11:12). And the Lord shall raise him up makes this interpretation still more certain. The same expression is used of Simons wifes mother (Mar 1:31). That St. James makes the promise of recovery without any restriction may at first sight appear to be surprising; but in this he is only following the example of our Lord, who makes similar promises, and leaves it to the thought and experience of Christians to find out the limitations to them. St. James is only applying to a particular case what Christ promised in general terms (Mar 11:24; Mat 17:20; Joh 14:14; Joh 16:23). The words in My Name point to the limitation; they do not, of course, refer to the use of the formula through Jesus Christ our Lord, but to the exercise of the spirit of Christ: Not My will, but Thine be done. The union of our will with the will of God is the very first condition of successful prayer. The apostles themselves had no indiscriminate power of healing (Php 2:27; 2Ti 4:20; 2Co 12:7-9). How, then, can we suppose that St. James credited the elders of every congregation with an unrestricted power of healing? He leaves it to the common sense and Christian submission of his readers to understand that the elders have no power to cancel the sentence of death pronounced on the whole human race. To pray that any one should be exempt from this sentence would be not faith, but presumption. Of the employment of the rite here prescribed by St. James we have very little evidence in the early ages of the Church. Tertullian mentions a cure by anointing, but it is not quite a case in point. The Emperor Septimius Severus believed that he had been cured from an illness through oil administered by a Christian named Proculus Torpacion, steward of Evodias, and in gratitude for it he maintained him in the palace for the rest of his life. Origen quotes the passage from St. James, and seems to understand the sickness to be that of sin. He interpolates thus: Let him call for the elders of the Church, and let them lay their hands on him, anointing him with oil, &c. This perhaps tells us how the rite was administered in Alexandria in his time; or it may mean that Origen understood the pray over him of St. James to signify imposition of hands. With him, then, the forgiveness of sins is the healing. A century and a half later Chrysostom takes a further step, and employs the passage to show that priests have the power of absolution. For not only at the time when they regenerate us, but afterwards also, they have authority to forgive sins. And then he quotes Jam 5:14-15. It is evident that this is quite alien to the passage. The sickness and the sins are plainly distinguished by St. James, and nothing is said about absolution by the elders, who pray for his recovery, and (no doubt) for his forgiveness. When we reach the sixth century the evidence for the custom of anointing the sick with holy oil becomes abundant. At first any one with a reputation for sanctity might bless the oil–not only laymen, but women. But in the West the rule gradually spread from Rome that the sacred oil for the sick must be made by the bishop. In the East this has never been observed. Theodore of Tarsus, Archbishop of Canterbury, says that according to the Greeks it is lawful for presbyters to make the chrism for the sick. And this rule continues to this day. One priest suffices; but it is desirable to get seven, if possible. But the chief step in the development is taken when not only the blessing of the oil, but the administering of it to the Kick, is reserved to the clergy. In Bedes time this restriction was not yet made, as is clear from his comments on the passage, although even then it was customary for priests to administer the unction. But by the tenth century this restriction had probably become general. It became connected with the communion of the sick, which of course required a priest, and then with the Viaticum, or communion of the dying; but even then the unction seems to have preceded the last communion. The name Extreme Unction (unctio extrema)

, as a technical ecclesiastical term, is not older than the twelfth century. Other terms are Last Oil (ultimum oleum)

and Sacrament of the Departing (sacramentum exeuntium)

. But when we have reached these phrases we are very far indeed from the ordinance prescribed by St. James, and from that which was practised by the apostles. And if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him. We ought perhaps rather to translate, Even if he have committed sinsit shall be forgiven him. The meaning would seem to be, even if his sickness has been produced by his sins, his sin shall be forgiven, and his sickness cured. It is possible, but unnatural, to join the first clause of this sentence with the preceding one: the Lord shall raise him up, even if he have committed sins. In that case It shall be forgiven him forms a very awkward independent sentence, without conjunction. The ordinary arrangement of the clauses is much better: even if the malady is the effect of the mans own wrong-doing, the prayer offered by faith–his faith, and that of the elders–shall still prevail. (A. Plummer, D. D.)

The sick sending for the elders of the Church

1. From the supposition, Is any among you sick? The note is obvious. Christs worshippers are not exempted from sickness, no more than any other affliction. Those that are dear to God have their share of miseries. Austin asketh, If he were beloved, how came he to be sick? In the outward accidents of life God would make no difference.

2. From that let him call for the elders. Note that the chief care of a sick man should be for his soul. Physicians are to be called in their place, but not first, not chiefly. Sickness is Gods messenger to call us to meet with God.

3. From that let him call. The elders must be sent for. A man that hath continued in opposition is loath to submit at the last hour and to call the elders to his spiritual assistance. Aquinas saith that this last office must not be performed but to those that require it. Possidonius, in the life of Austin, saith that Austin was wont of his own accord to visit the poor, the fatherless, and the widow, but the sick never till he was called. It is indeed suitable to true religion to visit the fatherless, (Jam 1:27); but thesick must call for the elders.

4. From that the elders. For our comfort in sickness it is good to call in the help of the guides and officers of the Church. They, excelling in gifts, are best able to instruct and pray. They can with authority, and in a way of office, comfort and instruct; the prayers of prophets have a special efficacy.

5. Again from that the elders. Visiting of the sick should be performed with the joint care of Church officers; it is a weighty work, and needeth many shoulders; the diversity of gifts for prayer and discourse seemeth to call for it; it is the last office we can perform to those of whom the Lord hath made us overseers.

6. From that let them pray. One necessary work in visiting is commending sick persons to God, and this prayer must be made by them, or over them, that their sight may the more work upon us, and our prayers may work upon them.

7. From that and anoint him with oil. From this clause observe the condescension of God. The first preachers of the gospel of Christ had power to do miracles: the doctrine itself, being so rational and satisfactory, deserved belief; but God would give a visible confirmation, the better to encourage our faith.

8. From that anoint with oil in order to cure, note that the miracles done in Christs name were wrought by power, but ended in mercy. In the very confirmation of the gospel God would show the benefit of it.

9. From that in the name of the Lord. All the miracles that were wrought were to be wrought in Christs name. The apostles and primitive Christians, though they had such an excellent trust, did not abuse it to serve their own name and interests, but Christs; teaching us that we should exercise all our gifts and abilities by Christs power to Christs glory Psa 51:16). (T. Manton.)

Let them pray over him

Praying for the sick

When we remember what prayer is, we cannot possibly deny its prevailing power.


I.
WE SHOULD ALWAYS BE HUMBLE IN OUR PRAYERS. The Times, in mentioning petitions which had been presented to the House of Lords, remarked of one, that it was rejected on the ground of an omission–after all, but a simple one–the word humble was left out. Doubtless, many a petition is rejected by a higher tribunal for lack of humility in the hearts of those who presented it. Of all trees, says Owen Feltham, I observe God hath chosen the vine, a low plant that creeps upon the helpful wall; of all beasts, the soft and patient lamb; of all fowls, the mild and guileless dove. When God appeared to Moses, it was not in the lofty cedar, nor the sturdy oak, but in a bush, a slender, lowly shrub: as if He would, by these elections, check the conceited arrogance of man.


II.
IMPORTUNATE EARNESTNESS is another characteristic of successful prayer. A clergyman who had been preaching to the young, closed with an appeal to parents, in these words: About two-and-twenty years ago, a small circle had gathered around the couch of an apparently dying infant; the man of God, who led their devotions, seemed to forget the sickness of the child in his prayer for his future usefulness. He prayed for the child, who had been consecrated to God at his birth, as a man, and a minister of the Word. The parents laid hold of the horns , f the altar, and prayed with him. The child recovered, grew toward manhood, and ran far in the ways of folly and sin. One after another of that little circle were called sway; but two, and one of them the mother, lived to hear him proclaim the everlasting gospel. It is no fiction, added the minister; that child, that prodigal youth, that preacher, is he who now addresses you!


III.
The prayers of the Church, when making special supplications for the sick, ALWAYS LEAVE IT TO THE WISDOM OF OUR HEAVENLY FATHER TO DETERMINE WHETHER RESTORATION TO HEALTH OR PREPARATION FOR A PEACEFUL DEATH SHALL BE BEST, and we beseech Him to grant the petition accordingly. Nothing could be more proper than this spirit of childlike submission. A father, once praying by the sick-bed of an only son, gave utterance to the rebellious petition, Let him become what he will; so he may live, I shall be satisfied. Years and years passed by; the child had been spared, grew up to manhood, passed through a course of crime too awful to be dwelt upon, and was tried, and condemned to die. As he went forth from the prison to the gallows, he said to his old, heartbroken father, with a careless air, Will you see me to the tree? What a lesson to those who, while beseeching the Lord for the removal of some bitter cup, have not learned to add in the Saviours submissive words, Nevertheless, not as I will, but as Thou wilt! (J. N. Norton, D. D.)

Prayer extending life

More than half a century since, Rev. T. Charles, of Bala, was evidently near death, when a prayermeeting of his friends was held, in which earnest prayer was offered by an aged Christian for his recovery; especially asking that fifteen years might be added to the useful life of his servant. The prayer was exactly answered. Mr. Charles filled up the fifteen added years in great usefulness and in full expectation of release at its end. On his last visit to some friends, he said that he could not expect to see them again, as he was now in the last year of his life. Strange as it may seem, his death occurred just at the termination of the fifteen years. (New Cyclopedia of Illustrations.)

Prayer saving the sick

There are cases on record in medical history, in which the perfect peace of a soul entirely prepared for either alternative has actually arrested the march of disease, and made the patient literally out of weakness strong. There are eases on record in which it has been said by the physician to the sufferer, desirous to depart and to be with Christ: Sir, in this state of joyous anticipation you cannot die. There are oases on record in which, according to promise, the prayer of faith has saved the sick; no other force even suggested as adequate to account for the victory of life over death, when physicians had withdrawn themselves from further effort, and could but watch inactive beside the bed of suffering. (C. J.Vaughan, D. D.)

Prayer for the sick

When one of his relatives was recovering from a dangerous illness, Bengel said: I did not regard outward appearances, unfavourable as they were. I prayed, and hoped for a favourable answer and it has been given. I said nothing about it to any one at the time, but it came to me as a positive assurance that God will hear prayer. (Bengels Life.)

Anointing him with oil

Anointing the sick


I.
EXAMINE THE PASSAGE. Epistle of James. The first epistle written. Point, the activity of faith. It must do something. Such active faith covers the whole life. This passage is found among practical directions. Affliction. Merry. Sick. Every natural and simple explanation has been given to this difficult and misused passage. Anointing the body with oil was the sign of health. Those who were sick might not be anointed; nor those passing through a time of mourning. The ancient customs in relation to anointing may be illustrated by our customs in relation to shaving the beard. The sick man will neither trouble himself, nor be troubled, about shaving; but as soon as he begins to recover he will return to his cleanly habits. So the ancients would neglect daily anointing while under sickness, and their return to their old ways was the sign of recovering. When, therefore, James enjoins the elders to anoint the sick man after prayer for his restoration, he really says, Pray for him in perfect faith, and show that you have such strong faith by acting towards him as if he were restored to health again. The elders were to help him rise, wash, and anoint.


II.
THINGS REQUIRING SPECIAL NOTICE. Age of miracles was not then passed.

1. The unconditional character of the promise. Not really without conditions. See the demand for faith, and for acts expressing faith. Rules should be stated without their exceptions. But all rules have such. Compare our Lords strong sentences about prayer.

2. The meaning of the anointing with oil. After the prayer. Idea.

(1) Symbolical of medicinal healing. Oil was a curative agent.

(2) Sacramental; a help toward realising the action of Divine grace.

Sight may be a help to the apprehension of spiritual things. Compare our Lords touching those whom He healed: or making clay to put on the eyes of the man whose sight He restored. This the true sacramental idea.

3. The sense in which forgiveness is blended with recovery.

(1) Sin regarded as scandal to the Church. Penitent, if sent for elders.

(2) Sin as before God. With this the man himself must deal. All recovery is sign of Divine forgiveness. Go and sin no more.


III.
REMOVING THE LOCAL AND TEMPORARY, WHAT MAY WE LEARN FROM THE PASSAGE FOR OUR TIMES?

1. The duty of showing sympathy with the sick. Example of Christ. Consider sickness from the Christian point of view. Issue of sin. Divine chastisement. Corrective discipline.

2. The duty of using means for the recovery of sick. Oil a curative agent in those days. So the elders were to use means. Anointing means rubbing the body, or the affected parts. Symbol of all healing agents. Show how science now takes the place of miracle.

3. The importance of recognising the power of the prayer of faith. This was needed for miracle: much more is it needed for science. What, then, is our duty? To the sick belonging to our Church. Note that the duty rests on the sick to send for the elders, and on the elders to go when sent for. To the sick in general. Provision made for their relief. Support during sickness required. Prayer-power–faith-power–still more needed, if the spiritual ends, for which all sickness is sent, are to be reached. (The Weekly Pulpit.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

Verse 14. Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders] This was also a Jewish maxim. Rabbi Simeon, in Sepher Hachaiyim, said: “What should a man do who goes to visit the sick? Ans. He who studies to restore the health of the body, should first lay the foundation in the health of the soul. The wise men have said, No healing is equal to that which comes from the word of God and prayer. Rabbi Phineas, the son of Chamma, hath said, ‘When sickness or disease enters into a man’s family, let him apply to a wise man, who will implore mercy in his behalf.'” See Schoettgen.

St. James very properly sends all such to the elders of the Church, who had power with God through the great Mediator, that they might pray for them.

Anointing him with oil] That St. James neither means any kind of incantation, any kind of miracle, or such extreme unction as the Romish Church prescribes, will be sufficiently evident from these considerations:

1. Be was a holy man, and could prescribe nothing but what was holy.

2. If a miracle was intended, it could have been as well wrought without the oil, as with it.

3. It is not intimated that even this unction is to save the sick man, but the prayer of faith, Jas 5:15.

4. What is here recommended was to be done as a natural means of restoring health, which, while they used prayer and supplication to God, they were not to neglect.

5. Oil in Judea was celebrated for its sanative qualities; so that they scarcely ever took a journey without carrying oil with them, (see in the case of the Samaritan,) with which they anointed their bodies, healed their wounds, bruises, c.

6. Oil was and in frequently used in the east as a means of cure in very dangerous diseases and in Egypt it is often used in the cure of the plague. Even in Europe it has been tried with great success in the cure of dropsy. And pure olive oil is excellent for recent wounds and bruises; and I have seen it tried in this way with the best effects.

7. But that it was the custom of the Jews to apply it as a means of healing, and that St. James refers to this custom, is not only evident from the case of the wounded man ministered to by the good Samaritan, Lu 10:34, but from the practice of the Jewish rabbins. In Midrash Koheleth, fol. 73, 1, it is said: “Chanina, son of the brother of the Rabbi Joshua, went to visit his uncle at Capernaum; he was taken ill; and Rabbi Joshua went to him and anointed him with oil, and he was restored.” They had, therefore, recourse to this as a natural remedy; and we find that the disciples used it also in this way to heal the sick, not exerting the miraculous power but in cases where natural means were ineffectual. And they cast out many devils, and anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them; Mr 6:13. On this latter place I have supposed that it might have been done symbolically, in order to prepare the way for a miraculous cure: this is the opinion of many commentators; but I am led, on more mature consideration, to doubt its propriety, yet dare not decide. In short, anointing the sick with oil, in order to their recovery, was a constant practice among the Jews. See Lightfoot and Wetstein on Mr 6:13. And here I am satisfied that it has no other meaning than as a natural means of restoring health; and that St. James desires them to use natural means while looking to God for an especial blessing. And no wise man would direct otherwise.

8. That the anointing recommended here by St. James cannot be such as the Romish Church prescribes, and it is on this passage principally that they found their sacrament of extreme unction, is evident from these considerations:

1. St. James orders the sick person to be anointed in reference to his cure; but they anoint the sick in the agonies of death, when there is no prospect of his recovery; and never administer that sacrament, as it is called, while there is any hope of life.

2. St James orders this anointing for the cure of the body, but they apply it for the cure of the soul; in reference to which use of it St. James gives no directions: and what is said of the forgiveness of sins, in Jas 5:15, is rather to be referred to faith and prayer, which are often the means of restoring lost health, and preventing premature death, when natural means, the most skillfully used, have been useless.

3. The anointing with oil, if ever used as a means or symbol in working miraculous cures, was only applied in some cases, perhaps very few, if any; but the Romish Church uses it in every case; and makes it necessary to the salvation of every departing soul. Therefore, St. James’ unction, and the extreme unction of the Romish Church, are essentially different. See below.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Is any sick? Or infirm, though not desperately and incurably.

Let him call for the elders; especially teaching elders, they being usually best furnished with gifts who labour in the word and doctrine, 1Ti 5:17. It is in the plural number, either by an enallage for the singular; q.d. Let him send for some or other of the elders; or, because there were in those times usually several elders (an ecclesiastical senate) in each church.

And let them pray over him; as it were setting him before God, and presenting him to him, which might be a means to stir up the greater affection and warmth in prayer; see 1Ki 17:21; 2Ki 4:33,34; Joh 11:41; Act 20:10; 9:40; or laying on their hands, as Act 28:8, which yet seems to be for the same end.

Anointing him with oil; an outward rite used in those times, in miraculous healing sick persons, which might then be kept up, while the gift whereof it was the symbol continued; but the gift ceasing, it is vainly used. These cures were sometimes wrought only with a word, Act 9:34; 14:10; 16:18; sometimes by taking by the hand, or embracing, Act 3:7; 20:10; sometimes by laying on of hands, Mar 16:18; Act 9:17; sometimes by anointing with oil, Mar 6:13; and so this is not an institution of a sacrament, but a command, that those elders that had the gift of healing, (as many in those days had), being called by the sick to come to them, should (the Spirit of the Lord so directing them) exercise that gift, as well as pray over them.

In the name of the Lord; either, calling upon the Lord, and so joining prayer with their anointing; or, in the name, is by the authority of the Lord, from whom they had received that gift.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

14. let him call for the eldersnotsome one of the elders, as Roman Catholics interpret it, tojustify their usage in extreme unction. The prayers of theelders over the sick would be much the same as though the wholeChurch which they represent should pray [BENGEL].

anointing him with oilTheusage which Christ committed to His apostles was afterwards continuedwith laying on of hands, as a token of the highest faculty ofmedicine in the Church, just as we find in 1Co6:2 the Church’s highest judicial function. Now that themiraculous gift of healing has been withdrawn for the most part, touse the sign where the reality is wanting would be unmeaningsuperstition. Compare other apostolic usages now discontinuedrightly, 1Co 11:4-15;1Co 16:20. “Let them use oilwho can by their prayers obtain recovery for the sick: let those whocannot do this, abstain from using the empty sign” [WHITAKER].Romish extreme unction is administered to those whose life isdespaired of, to heal the soul, whereas James’ unction wasto heal the body. CARDINALCAJETAN [Commentary]admits that James cannot refer to extreme unction. Oil in the East,and especially among the Jews (see the Talmud, Jerusalem andBabylon), was much used as a curative agent. It was also asign of the divine grace. Hence it was an appropriate sign inperforming miraculous cures.

in the name of the Lordbywhom alone the miracle was performed: men were but the instruments.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Is any sick among you?…. Which is often the case; the bodies of the saints, as well as others, are liable to a variety of diseases; they are sick, and sometimes nigh unto death, as Epaphroditus was: and then,

let him call for the elders of the church; in allusion to the elders of the congregation of Israel, Le 4:15. By these may be meant, either the elder members of the church, men of gravity and soundness in the faith, persons of long standing and experience; who have the gift and grace of prayer, and are not only capable of performing that duty, but of giving a word of counsel and advice to the sick. It was a kind of proverbial saying of Aristophanes the grammarian;

“the works of young men, the counsels of middle aged persons, and , “the prayers of ancient men” z:”

or rather officers of churches are meant, particularly pastors, who are so called in Scripture; these should be sent for in times of sickness, as well as physicians; and rather than they, since their prayers may be the means of healing both soul and body: so in former times, the prophets of God were sent to in times of sickness, for advice and assistance. It is a saying of R. Phinehas ben Chama a that

“whoever has a sick person in his house, let him go to a wise man, and he will seek mercy for him.”

And it follows here,

and let them pray over him; or for him, for the recovery of his health:

anointing him with oil, in the name of the Lord; which some think was only done in a common medicinal way, oil being used much in the eastern countries for most disorders; and so these elders used ordinary medicine, as well as prayer: or rather this refers to an extraordinary gift, which some elders had of healing diseases, as sometimes by touching, and by laying on of hands, or by expressing some words, and so by anointing with oil; see Mr 6:13 which extraordinary gifts being now ceased, the rite or ceremony of anointing with oil ceases in course: however, this passage gives no countenance to the extreme unction of the Papists; that of theirs being attended with many customs and ceremonies, which are not here made mention of; that being used, as is pretended, for the healing of the souls of men, whereas this was used for corporeal healing; that is only performed when life is despaired of, and persons are just going out of the world; whereas this was made use of to restore men to health, and that they might continue longer in it, as follows.

z Apud Harpocratian. Lex. p. 125. a T. Bab. Bava Bathra, fol. 116. 1.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Is any among you sick? ( ;). Present active indicative of , old verb, to be weak (without strength), often in N.T. (Mt 10:8).

Let him call for (). First aorist (ingressive) middle imperative of . Note change of tense (aorist) and middle (indirect) voice. Care for the sick is urged in 1Th 5:14 (“help the sick”). Note the plural here, “elders of the church, as in Acts 20:17; Acts 15:6; Acts 15:22; Acts 21:18; Phil 1:1 (bishops).

Let them pray over him (). First aorist middle imperative of . Prayer for the sick is clearly enjoined.

Anointing him with oil ( ). First aorist active participle of , old verb, to anoint, and the instrumental case of (oil). The aorist participle can be either simultaneous or antecedent with (pray). See the same use of in Mr 6:13. The use of olive oil was one of the best remedial agencies known to the ancients. They used it internally and externally. Some physicians prescribe it today. It is clear both in Mr 6:13 and here that medicinal value is attached to the use of the oil and emphasis is placed on the worth of prayer. There is nothing here of the pagan magic or of the later practice of “extreme unction” (after the eighth century). It is by no means certain that here and in Mr 6:13 means “anoint” in a ceremonial fashion rather than “rub” as it commonly does in medical treatises. Trench (N.T. Synonyms) says: “ is the mundane and profane, the sacred and religious, word.” At bottom in James we have God and medicine, God and the doctor, and that is precisely where we are today. The best physicians believe in God and want the help of prayer.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

1) Any sick (asthenei) “weak one” is charged to call for the elders, mature, ordained brethren of the church and admonished to let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord.

2) Oil was used as the base of practically all medicines in those days, whereas alcohol is used as a second major base today. James simply admonished that the brethren trust in the Lord, asking the elders of the church to pray for them, then use every medical means of the day available, trusting in the lord for the healing. For all true healing is of the Lord. However, He uses doctors, nurses, and the instrument and means of medicines to effect healing, Mar 7:33; Mar 8:23; Joh 9:6; Pro 17:22.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

14 Is any sick among you. As the gift of healing as yet continued, he directs the sick to have recourse to that remedy. It is, indeed, certain that they were not all healed; but the Lord granted this favor as often and as far as he knew it would be expedient; nor is it probable that the oil was indiscriminately applied, but only when there was some hope of restoration. For, together with the power there was given also discretion to the ministers, lest they should by abuse profane the symbol. The design of James was no other than to commend the grace of God which the faithful might then enjoy, lest the benefit of it should be lost through contempt or neglect.

For this purpose he ordered the presbyters to be sent for, but the use of the anointing must have been confined to the power of the Holy Spirit.

The Papists boast mightily of this passage, when they seek to pass off their extreme unction. But how different their corruption is from the ancient ordinance mentioned by James I will not at present undertake to shew. Let readers learn this from my Institutes. I will only say this, that this passage is wickedly and ignorantly perverted; when extreme unction is established by it, and is called a sacrament, to be perpetually observed in the Church. I indeed allow that it was used as a sacrament by the disciples of Christ, (for I cannot agree with those who think that it was medicine;) but as the reality of this sign continued only for a time in the Church, the symbol also must have been only for a time. And it is quite evident, that nothing is more absurd than to call that a sacrament which is void and does not really present to us that which it signifies. That the gift of healing was temporary, all are constrained to allow, and events clearly prove: then the sign of it ought not to be deemed perpetual. It hence follows, that they who at this day set anointing among the sacraments, are not the true followers, but the apes of the Apostles, except they restore the effect produced by it, which God has taken away from the world for more than fourteen hundred years. So we have no dispute, whether anointing was once a sacrament; but whether it has been given to be so perpetually. This latter we deny, because it is evident that the thing signified has long ago ceased.

The presbyters, or elders, of the church. I include here generally all those who presided over the Church; for pastors were not alone called presbyters or elders, but also those who were chosen from the people to be as it were censors to protect discipline. For every Church had, as it were, its own senate, chosen from men of weight and of proved integrity. But as it was customary to choose especially those who were endued with gifts more than ordinary, he ordered them to send for the elders, as being those in whom the power and grace of the Holy Spirit more particularly appeared.

Let them pray over him. This custom of praying over one was intended to shew, that they stood as it were before God; for when we come as it were to the very scene itself, we utter prayers with more feeling; and not only Elisha and Paul, but Christ himself, roused the ardor of prayer and commended the grace of God by thus praying over persons. (2Kg 4:32; Act 20:10; Joh 11:41.)

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

DIVINE HEALING,OR DOES GOD ANSWER PRAYER FOR THE SICK?

Jas 5:14-16.

TO properly interpret this text, or better still, not to interpret it at all, but to accept it for what it saysto believe it because God has uttered itis to preach what many eschew as false.

It requires no special courage to condemn the faiths that ones own folks condemn; but to set up as Scriptural what has long been overlooked by ones own people is to bring upon the speaker criticism, and, often, even rebuke. And yet no man is quite so safe in standing firmly by the text of Scripture as is the preacher, the first article of whose denominational faith reads like this: We believe that the Holy Bible was written by men divinely inspired, and is a perfect treasure of heavenly instruction; that it has God for its Author, salvation for its end, and truth, without any mixture or error, for its matter; and is the supreme standard by which all human conduct, creeds, and opinions should be tried.

I should hesitate for a long time to overthrow any dogma that had the support of a few sacred texts, but to cut the cable of tradition and set sail by the chart and compass of Gods Word is always a safe course for a believing soul.

To the Law and to the Testimony: if they speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them. And if those who hold another opinion speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them.

To the text then:

Is any ask among you? let him call for the elders of the Church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the Name of the Lord:

And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.

Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed.

Three great truths, with their minor and constituent suggestions, stand out in it.

SICKNESS IS REAL

First, the Scriptures speak of sickness as real. The Old Testament and the New know nothing of the modern illusion theory. Behold, thy father is sick: was said of Jacob (Gen 48:1). And the Lord struck the child that Uriahs wife bare unto David, and it was very sick, is said in II Samuel (2Sa 12:15). And I Daniel fainted, and was sick certain days; Daniel says (Dan 8:27).

These three samples of Old Testament statements might be followed by fifty passages out of that part of the Word that uses the same expression sick, and never once suggests that it is not a substantial fact, a bitter experience.

In the New Testament we read how a certain man was sick, named Lazarus, and to Jesus they said, Lord, behold, he whom Thou lovest is sick. And when Jesus heard that He did not say, This is not sickness, but a delusion. But He did say, This sickness is not unto death, but for the glory of God.

All through the New Testament Christ goes healing the sick, and never once does He explain to them that they are not sick, but are suffering from an illusion. On the contrary, it is reported that they were sick and that He healed all that were sick, and oppressed of the devil (Mat 8:16; Act 10:38).

The Scriptures teach that sickness is real, and to deny that is neither scriptural nor reasonable. The unreasonableness of the illusion theory appears at once in the face of a story I heard a few years since.

A gentleman down in the southern part of this state was sick. The wifea Christian Scientist was met on the street by a neighbor who said, Your husband is sick? Oh, no, she replied, he only thinks he is sick. The small boy of the family heard the mothers answer. Three days later the same neighbor met him on the street and said, Hows your father? To which the youth replied, He thinks hes dead!

The Scriptures commonly attribute sickness to Satan. Present-day preachers commonly attribute it to God. It would be well for those of us who stand in the pulpit to study the Scriptures upon the subject of sickness, and cease maligning our Father in Heaven who is not disease, but is health instead.

In all the cases of sickness reported in the Bible, I could count on my fingers those instances for which God assumes the responsibility.

Miriam was smitten by God of leprosy; Davids son was smitten of the Lord; Herod was smitten of God; and there are a few other instances. These are exceptions to the rule; they are dire judgments against sins. Satan is back of the ordinary sickness and suffering.

Job and his wife alike supposed that God had smitten him with loss of children, of property, and with loathsome disease. But the Scriptures expressly teach that Satan was back of the whole business.

In the New Testament it is said of Christ that He cast out the evil spirit in one, and compelled the dumb and deaf spirit in another to come out; and out of the lunatic He cast out the evil spirit. The woman who had an infirmity of eighteen years, He speaks of as one bound by Satan lo these many years. And then the general assertion is made that He healed all that were sick and oppressed of the devil.

When my children were small, suffering, it was impossible for me to keep my conception of God, as a God of goodness and of love, and yet believe that He was afflicting the innocent little ones with dread disease.

That the devil would delight in such business, is just like him; and so when I found them suffering I was not surprised, for Satan is the god of this world, including the flesh.

Along with this unscriptural teaching that God is the Author of disease is a common assertion that sickness is a means of grace.

Those who say this remind us of the Scripture, Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth (Heb 12:6). The son in my house that I loved best, perchance, I chastened oftenest; and yet I never put disease upon him, nor could I have, so long as a fathers heart was in my breast. Shall men be better than God?

Is it a means of grace? Are the sick people of this world, as a rule, its sweetest spirits, its most enthusiastic Christians? Nay, verily, the majority of them, I believe, are soured by their experience, and lose heart and hope in consequence. Impatience and selfishness are their common traits.

There are beautiful exceptions, but that is the rule.

Do we believe it to be from God, and a means of grace? Then why on earth do we send for a doctor to get us well as shortly as possible? Do we prefer health to holiness? You people who contend that it is a means of grace, why dont you encourage sickness for the sake of spiritual growth? Personally, I have not found it to be a means of grace, and I do not believe it to be from God, and hence I have no hankering for unhealth.

I feel about the sick-bed as the colored boy did about his place on a Southern plantation. Before the slaves were freed, he fled North. Reaching Boston, he took refuge with an abolitionist, who fell to talking with him and said, Didnt you have a good master in the South? Yes, sah. Did he let you sleep in the house? Yes, sah. Did he give you a good bed? Yes, sah. Give you plenty to eat? Yes, sah. Well, what did you want to run away from him then for?

Look heah, Boss, the black boy replied, if you thinks you wants the place, its open to you. And thats what I have to say concerning the sickbed. I believe it to be from Satan, as a rule, and so the Scriptures teach.

An old writer says, The Lord often sharpens His saints on the devils grind-stone, and concerning this Dr. Gordon adds, We admit the truth most fully, but we do not, therefore, advise that the grind-stone be set up as a part of the furniture of the Lords House.

The Lord may use sickness for the good of man, for He makes all things work together for good. Sometimes God has made sin to work our salvation. What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid (Rom 6:1-2).

Recently I have known two men whose salvation has resulted from the bitter experience of sin and its consequences. Shall we sanctify sin and sickness into ordinances of God? By no means, lest we make God the minister of each.

Christ is offered in the Word as the sickness-bearer. The Hebrew in Isa 53:4-5 reads:

Surely He has borne our sicknesses and carried our sorrows.

But He was wounded for our transgressions. He was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon Him; and with His stripes we are healed.

In Matthews GospelMat 8:16-17 we read:

When the even was come, they brought unto Him many that were possessed with devils: and He cast out the spirits with His word, and healed all that were sick:

That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the Prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses?.

Commenting upon this, Dr. Gordon remarks, The yoke of His Cross, by which He lifted our iniquities, took hold also of our disease, so that it is in some sense true that as God made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, so He made Him to be sick for us, who knew no sickness.

GODS PRESCRIPTION FOR SICKNESS IS ANOINTING AND PRAYER

The elders, by request of the sick, shall anoint.

Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the Church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the Name of the Lord,

You may ask, Where are the elders? And I am compelled to answer that, at this point, Baptist churches and others have likely departed from the Scripture, and today the deacons are doing the work that the elders were originally appointed to do, while the deacons office is filled by men named trustees.

The early Church had as its officersthe pastor, or bishop, elders and deacons. Now in my denominationthe Baptistwe have the pastor, deacons, and trustees. The deacons in such churches perform largely the same office as the elders in the New Testament Church; while the trustees have been assigned the work that gave rise, originally, to the appointment of deacons. So I reckon my deacons as the elders in my church.

According to this text, they are not to hunt out the sick, but are to respond to the request of the sick. For three centuries after Christ that was the universal custom. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Clement, and others tell us of cases of devils cast out, of tongues given, of poison failing of its effects, and of the sick raised to health in answer to prayer. Such authors as Waterland, Dodwell, and Marshall insist that miracles of healing did not fail until the rise of the Catholic Church, and we know from history that since that time they have appeared among Gods most devout peoplethe Waldenses, Moravians, Huguenots, Friends, Baptists, and Methodists, not to speak of the experience of the Scotch Covenanters, Knox, Wishart, Livingstone, Welsh, Baillie, Peden, Craig; as, also, with George Fox, the father of Quakerism, and our own Baptist fathers, Powell, Knollys, and Jessey; and these were men that followed the letter of our text.

The oil here is the symbol of the Holy Ghost; and is applied as such. It is hardly medicinal, for if God is any sort of a physician, He is not a quack who would prescribe oil for all diseases.

In the Old Testament and in the New, olive oil was used for anointing and, almost without exception, as a symbol of the Holy Ghost. The fact that the elders, and not physicians, were to apply it, makes this view the more reasonable, and the additional words, And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, puts beyond dispute the thought that the oil had any other significance than symbolizing the Spirit.

Lange, one of the greatest of Bible students and scholars, commenting on Mar 6:13, and they anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them, says, Oil here is simply a symbolic medium of the miraculous work, and that the anointing was a symbol of the bestowing of the Spirit as a prerequisite condition of healing.

Prayer and confession were the essentials to restoration. Five times in as many verses here prayer is divinely appointed. Is any among you afflicted? let him pray. Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the Church; and let them pray over him. The prayer of faith shall save the sick. Pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. Prayer! Prayer! Prayer! Prayer! Prayer!

The most of us never stop to pray when our people are taken ill. We have professed to believe in God, and insist that what He says in the Scripture is so, but how easily we forget Whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in My Name, He may give it you (Joh 15:16); That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of My Father which is in Heaven (Mat 18:19); and even the more specific promises: And these signs shall follow them that believe; * * they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover (Mar 16:17-18).

When I make this plea, I am not speaking against physicians, but I am speaking for God. I am not even saying that I would not, under any circumstances, call a physician; but I am saying that I have a scriptural warrant for prayer.

It is all right for the unbelieving world to make their first appeal to human help. It is all wrong for the followers of Jesus Christ to make their last appeal to Divine help. I have found Christian physiciansfriends of the doctrine of Divine healing. One of the first physicians in the city of Chicago, a man who was prominent in two medical institutions, one of them famed the world around, said to me years since, that the Scriptures plainly taught that God would raise the sick in answer to prayer; and at his request, I went into one of those institutions twice to speak to the medical students from this text.

As Gods men and women, we have not begun to understand the power of prayer.

And confession is also essential.

Confess your faults one to another

We readily understand the necessity of that. Crying to God is not praying! The man who has sin in his heart might cry to God forever, and receive no answer. Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God (1Jn 3:21).

I heard once the cries of a woman who died in the home where we boarded. For many days before her death she cried for peace of mind, but none ever came. At last she told me of a trouble she had had with a step-mother, and the bitter things that had been said. We sent for the woman. Mutual confessions were made, and the peace of God, which passeth all understanding possessed her, and her prayers, after that, availed for peace and grace.

Prayer and confession, they are Divine appointments.

GODS PROMISE IS RESTORATION AND FORGIVENESS

The Scripture plainly says, The prayer of faith shall save the sick. Mark you, it is not the oil that you use, but the prayer of faith.

It is not supposing that sickness is an illusion that is to save, but the prayer of faith.

It is not conversing with departed spirits that saves, but the prayer of faith.

Blessed the man who can make the prayer of faith.

That is a mighty tribute that Paul pays to Abraham, he believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness (Rom 4:3). To believe that is the climax of Christian blessedness. To believe Godthat is truly the divinest of all human accomplishments.

Russell Conwell, in his life of Charles Spurgeon, says: There are now living and worshipping in the Metropolitan Tabernacle, hundreds of people who ascribe the extension of their life to the effect of Mr. Spurgeons personal prayers. They have been sick with disease, and nigh unto death; he has appeared, kneeled by their beds and prayed for their recovery. Immediately the tide of health returned, the fevered pulse became less, the temperature was reduced, and all the activities of nature resumed their normal functions within a short and unexpected period.

The success of our own A. J. Gordon in this experience, the blessings that were upon the petitions of A. B. Simpson, and the wonderful things that have come into the work of many others, have, in my judgment, one explanationthey were men who believed God.

But I want you to notice the next sentence, and the Lord shall raise him up. The woman who comes to me saying that, as a medium, she can accomplish health, incites a reply that if so, you must do it through Satans power, for God has never given this to mortal man. He alone has this power.

The newspapers used to speak of Dr. Dowie, the Divine Healer. They used to apply a kindred term to Dr. Cullis, the Faith-cure Man; and to a multitude of others whose claims have better or poorer foundations. But such men as love the Scriptures reject instantly, and almost with insult, having any such abilities assigned to them.

When Peter and John, in the Name of Jesus Christ, had spoken the word of healing to the lame man at the Beautiful gate of the Temple, we read:

All the people ran together unto them in the porch that is called Solomons, greatly wondering.

And when Peter saw it, he answered unto the people, Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk? (Act 3:10; Act 3:12).

Some of the Lords people seem to think that if one teaches the doctrine of Divine Healing, he assumes to himself some peculiar power of holiness, but Peter utterly repudiated the thought,

as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk?

The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified His Son Jesus;

And His Name through faith in His Name hath made this mm strong, whom ye see and know: yea, the faith which is by Him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all (Act 3:13; Act 3:16).

We do not deny that Theosophy has its healing. We do not question that healing has come out of Spiritualism; nor can we doubt that Christian Science has seen much of physical improvement and health. But we say this, that any system that does not conform its teaching to the truth in Gods Word, must explain its healing upon some other ground than that of the intervention of the Divine One.

He would not, He could not cooperate with error. The author of sickness, even Satan, if he could, by associating healings with heterodoxy and all error, deceive Gods people and lead them into darknesswould delight himself in so doing.

We read in the Word that Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light, and would deceive the very elect.

If we be men of God, our faith ought to be firmly grounded in the Word of God. What it does not teach, we dare not accept; what it plainly teaches, we dare not reject.

And more blessed still, He who heals the sick, forgives sins.

And if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him.

Physical health is a good thing. Second to a saved soul, I count of consideration a sound body and a balanced mind, which is health. But it is second. The first thing in importance, the thing all-essential in importance, the thing without which life is a failure, the thing in the lack of which death is doomis sins forgiven and the soul saved.

Divine healing rests in Divine love. God is love. If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins. (1Jn 1:9).

There is no way in which to put God to pain, more effectually, than to call into question His Spirit of love, or disposition to forgive.

Henry Moorehouse was in Dublin one day, when a friend asked him to go and see an old lady who was in great trouble. He found the poor old woman in a modest cottage, rocking herself to and fro, and moaning as if her heart would break. Moorhouse asked her what the trouble was and she answered, My boy has broken my heart, and then explained, You must know, sir, that he went away and has done things that he thinks are wrong, but I could forgive him that, if only he would let me. But here is a letter that breaks my heart; and she picked it up and began to read and finally came to this sentence, Dear mother, if you can never forgive me for my sins, dont curse me. Then she broke out, I never knew how much I loved him until he went away, and now to think he should say, Mother dont curse me. That breaks my heart. She saw in that sentence the thought that she might refuse to forgive, and then, curse him; therein was the sorrow.

It must be an infinite sorrow to the infinite heart of God for the man, in whose behalf He has given His Son, to doubt that He will forgive. Dont do it, my friend! Come back to God, and come now, for the promise is, Him that cometh to Me I will in no wise cast out, and the invitation, Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley

CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES

Jas. 5:14. Call for.Summon to him. Elders.Officers usual in synagogues, and probably also found in the Jewish Christian congregations. Not priests, or even ministers. Anointing him with oil.Clearly not as a religious ceremony, but as an agency for the recovery of health. It is also suggested that the use of oil in the toilet was a recognised sign of recovery to health. Compare our Lords saying to the maiden Arise! as if she was actually restored to life and health.

Jas. 5:15. Prayer of faith.The only kind of prayer that ever is acceptable to God: chap. Jas. 1:6. The prayer that is answered in the restoration of a sick member in no way differs from the prayers for ordinary blessings. Christian prayer is the prayer of faith. Sins.Here specially thought of as the immediate cause of his sickness. The sin of a Christian man, which has brought on him a penalty of suffering. Not all his sins, or the sins of any sick man. The reference of the text is strictly limited.

Jas. 5:16. Faults.Referring to the immediate case of which St. James is treating. The occasions of sickness are often faults rather than wilful sins; the word used would be better rendered, transgressions. One to another.On the assumption that all ye are brethren, pledged to mutual helpfulness. By mutual confidence in one another we learn how, appropriately, to pray for each other. Availeth much.As the term effectual fervent is given in the participle (working), it is suggested to render, A righteous mans supplication is of great weight in its working.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Jas. 5:14-16

Christian Treatment of the Sick.The subject treated in this passage is made difficult by our ignorance of the customs of society, and especially of religious society, in the time of St. James. Our customs so materially differ from those with which he was familiar. It is also made difficult by the development of two doctrines in the Christian Church, both of whichthough they stand in marked contrastare made to rest upon, and draw their support from, this passage: the extreme unction of Catholics, and the faith-healing of sentimental Protestants.

I. Examine what the passage does really say.One ever-recurring point of St. Jamess teaching is, that faith is an active thing. It cannot rest. It must do something. The activity of faith covers the whole life, and concerns itself with every place and relation. This passage is found among practical directions for the guidance of Christian faith in its activity. What should be done by, and for, the afflicted, the merry, the sick? Observe that, just as the afflicted man, and the happy man, are expected to act for themselves, so the sick man is expected to act for himself. Let him call for the elders of the Church. This is important, because it indicates that the man had gained the spiritual blessing intended to be wrought by his sickness, and was in a fit state of mind to receive a gracious healing, as an act of Divine favour. Compare the expression, perceiving that he had faith to be healed. The elders were not preachers, not missionaries, not apostles, not priests. They are represented by the elders of the Jewish synagogues, and are to be regarded simply as agents of the Christian Church; they are the Christian Church acting; and have neither power nor authority save as standing for the Church. It should be carefully observed that the sick man was not to call for some one of the elders, but for the elders as a body. If there were three, then all three; if ten, then all ten. These men were to pray over him, when they had anointed him with oil. That is, they were to pray with such a faith that he would be restored, as could show itself in dealing with him as if he actually were already restored. From what is known of anointing customs in daily life, one thing comes out quite clearly. Every one, when in health, used oil more or less in the daily toilet. But oil was never used when a person was laid aside in sickness. His return to the use of oil was a sign of his return to health. A very natural and simple explanation of this difficult and much misused passage can therefore be given. Anointing the body with oil was the sign of health. Those who were sick might not be anointed; nor those passing through a time of mourning. The ancient customs in relation to anointing may be illustrated by our customs in relation to shaving the beard. The sick man will neither trouble himself, nor be troubled, about shaving; but as soon as he begins to recover he will return to his old and cleanly habits. So the ancients would neglect daily anointing during sickness, and their return to their old ways was a sure sign that they were recovering. When St. James therefore gives these directions for the elders, what he really means may be put in this wayBy a sign which will show the sick brother your faith help his faith. Pray for him in such perfect faith that you can even anticipate the healing, and act toward him as if he were already restored. The elders were to help the sick man to rise, wash, and anoint, and act just as if he were in health again.

II. What things in the passage require special consideration?The age of miracles had not then passed, if it ever has passed.

1. Note the unconditional character of the promise, Shall save him that is sick. It is not really without conditions. See the demand for faith, and for certain defined acts expressing faith, and proving the obedience of faith. Rules should be stated without their exceptions; but all rules have such. Compare our Lords strong sentences about prayer.

2. Consider the meaning of the anointing with oil. Whether before or after prayer, the anointing is to be understood as a strictly simultaneous act. Two ideas have been suggested:
(1) The anointing may have been a medicinal healing. Oil was regarded as a curative agent.
(2) The anointing may have been sacramentala help towards realising the action of Divine grace. Sight and feeling may be helps toward the apprehension of spiritual things. Compare our Lords touching those whom He healed, or making clay to put on the eyes of the man whose sight He restored.

3. Observe the sense in which forgiveness is blended with recovery. St. James does not assume that every case of sickness is a case of sin. But he says, if you do meet with a case in which the sickness connects with personal sin, in that case the faith which heals the body brings also forgiveness of the sin.
(1) Sin regarded as scandal to the Church. In such a case the man must be penitent, or he would not send for the elders of the Church.
(2) Sin as before God. Always conceived as the source of human disease. Compare our Lord saying to the woman, Go, and sin no more.

III. Removing the local and temporary, what may we learn from the passage for our own times?

1. The duty of showing sympathy with the sick. Example of Christ. Consider sickness from the Christian point of view. Issue of self-will resisting the Divine order. Divine chastisement. Corrective discipline.
2. The duty of using means for the recovery of the sick. Oil was curative agency. The elders were to use means. Anointing here means rubbing the body, not pouring it on the head as a symbol of dedicationrubbing the affected parts, as for rheumatism. Symbol of all healing agents. Show how science now takes the place of miracle.
3. The importance of recognising the power of the prayer of faith. This was needed for miracle. How much more is it needed for science! Prayer-power, faith-power, are especially needed if the spiritual ends, for which all sicknesscertainly all Christian sicknessis sent, are to be reached.

SUGGESTIVE NOTES AND SERMON SKETCHES

Jas. 5:14. Signs of Healing.Here unction was evidently an outward sign, similar to that used by our Saviour, when He made clay, and put it to the blind mans eyes. It was connected with the miraculous power of healing. The sign by which a healing work is indicated is not the healing, or even a necessary part of the healing. Our Lord could have completed the recovery of the sight without any putting clay on the eyes, and could have healed the leper without any touch. The signs were precisely intended either to impress the person healed, and direct his close attention to his Healer, or else to arouse the interest of bystanders, and compel them to think of the power and claims of Him who could thus heal. If the distinction between the sign and the healing is fully recognised, and the sign is regarded as an addition to the healing for the sake of securing its proper moral influence, the anointing with oil in the name of the Lord can be very simply explained. It was a ceremony, not a healing agency, and in no way essential to the cure. It may be freely admitted that oil is sometimes used in the Eastand, for that matter, in the West tooas a medical agent. But it is not sufficiently recognised that the act St. James enjoins is not a rubbing over of the body, or even of affected parts of the body, but the symbolical act of anointing, with which the Jews were familiar. It is most simple to understand St. James as requiring the pouring of oil on the mans head, as a symbolic act, a sign of the Divine grace unto healing which would come down upon the sick man. Such a symbolic act would have a direct influence on those who prayed for the healing, fixing their thoughts on the power and grace of God whose ministry of healing they sought; and having an equally direct influence on the sufferer; making him look with believing expectancy for the recovering grace which the anointing oil symbolised. In this way the sign of healing, accompanying the prayer for healing, was a direct help to the nourishment of that faith on which the coming of the healing grace must ever depend.

Jas. 5:16. The Healthy Confessional.Confess therefore your sins one to another. It appears to be assumed by St. James, that sicknesses and diseases are often the natural and direct consequences, not only of sin, but of the actual sin of the person who suffers. And he seems to admit that this may even be true of members of the Church. By omissions, negligences, imprudences, and even self-indulgence and wilfulness, those within the Church may bring sickness and suffering upon themselves. There is then assumed a moral condition of sickness, as well as a physical. And the spirit of brotherly love in the Church secures as sincereand a more anxiousinterest in the state of the brothers soul as in the state of his body. What the Church could do for the body has been dealt with. No inquiries were necessary, and no confessions were required, for the condition of the patient was evident enough. But what the Church could do for the mans soul-condition was not manifest, for it must depend on what the condition of the mans soul was, and that could only be found out by inquiry. The man must confess to his brethren if he would have their help towards the restoration of inward health. We cannot pray for one anothers spiritual conditions unless we know what those conditions are, and we can only know any man as he is pleased to reveal himself to us. This is what St. James means by confessing our sins one to another. By no scheming can confessing to one another be made to mean confessing to an official who has authority to absolve from the sin, or to remit the penalty. The brethren can neither heal the body nor the soul, but they can use the power of believing prayer about both the body and the soul. They can see with their eyes what to pray for on behalf of the body; but they can only know what to pray for on behalf of the soul, when the man himself tells them his trouble, his sin, or his need. Confessions that simply throw us on the sympathy and helpful love of our brethren and sisters in Christ Jesus are, in every way, healthy confessions.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

(14) The elders of the churchi.e., literally, the presbyters. The identity of bishop (episcopus) and presbyter in the language of the apostolic age seems conclusive. Such is the opinion of Lightfoot (Epistle to the Philippians, 93-97; see also his Dissertation on the Christian Ministry, ibid., 180-267), and few may hope to gainsay it. In fact, the organisation of the early Church was much more elastic than theologians always suppose; and names and terms were applied less rigidly than the schoolmen of the Middle Ages have so stoutly declared. But, on the other hand, no man who has read the Patres Apostolici can deny the reality of Church government as enforced by them, nor base on their authority any defence of Congregationalism or the rule of a mere presbytery. The theory of development must be maintained, though not on the lines of Dr. Newman.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

(14, 15) Anointing him with oil.Or, unction. The use of some precious and mysterious ointment, on solemn occasions, obtained in most of the ancient nations, specially the Eastern. The Jews themselves were by no means originators of the habit, although they carried it to its highest ceremonial and significance. Apart, too, from the regular performances of the rite, as upon the accession of a king, or the consecration of a high priest, it often occurred in private cases, and some striking instances are recorded in the Gospels:the spikenard, costly and fragrant (Luk. 7:36-50), wherewith the Saviours feet were anointed by a woman which was a sinner; and that, again, which Mary, of her grateful love, poured upon Him six days before His death (Joh. 12:3-9). These were not unusual acts, but chiefly worthy of note because of the persons concerned. It was not remarkable for women to make such offerings to a famous rabbi, but that our Lord should be so treated, carried a deeper meaning. Nor, again, was it a new ordinance with which the Apostles were first commissioned, in pursuance whereof they anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them (Mar. 6:13). Here, observes Bishop Harold Browne, unction was evidently an outward sign, similar to that used by our Saviour, when He made clay, and put it to the blind mans eyes. It was connected with the miraculous power of healing. This connection only, this use of a known form with a diviner import, was the cause of astonishment; and clearly it was to such a practice, with simply its common intention, that St. James refers. Nor can we refrain from saying, however undesirous of controversy, that all which unction now implies to the Romanist is quite opposed to whatever force and value are given it in Holy Writ. There unction is enjoined with the special object of recovery; its purport was a present bodily one, and in no way applicable to the future of the soul. The prayer of faith shall save the sicki.e., shall heal him: the faithful prayer shall be that which God will answer, and so raise up the sufferer. But, it is urged, the next clause has a different force: If he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. Such is only apparent in our own version, and not in the original. The grammatical sense infers that the sick man is abiding under the consequence of some committed sin, which is presumed to have been the working cause of his present sickness. So Alford, and Bede similarly: Many by reason of sins done in the soul are compassed by weakness: nay, even death of the body. And the former theologian again: Among all the daring perversions of Scripture, by which the Church of Rome has defended her superstitions, there is none more patent than that of the present passage. Not without reason has the Council of Trent defended its misinterpretation with anathema; for indeed it needed that, and every other recommendation, to support it, and give it any kind of acceptance. The Apostle is treating of a matter totally distinct from the occasion and the object of extreme unction. He is enforcing the efficacy of the prayer of faith in afflictions (Jas. 5:13). Of such efficacy he adduces one special instance. In sickness let the sick man inform the elders of the church. Let them, representing the congregation of the faithful, pray over the sick man, accompanying that prayer with the symbolic and sacramental act of anointing with oil in the name of our Lord. Then the prayer of faith shall save (heal) the sick man, and the Lord shall bring him up out of his sickness; and even if it were occasioned by some sin, that sin shall be forgiven him. Such is the simple and undeniable sense of the Apostle, arguing for the efficacy of prayer; and such the perversion of that sense by the Church of Rome. Not that we should think this and other like cases are wholly intentional twistings of Gods word. The Latin Bible is in many places a faultythough not deliberately unfaithfulrendering of the Hebrew and Greek; and half our differences with Rome arise from such misinterpretations. Allowing the beginning of mischief to have been oftentimes a wrong translation, religious opinions engendered from it, we can understand, would be hardly cast aside, more especially when advantageous to their possessors. Little by little the change of doctrine drew on, and most probably thus:The aim of the apostolic anointing was bodily recovery, and (again we quote Bishop Browne) this exactly corresponds with the miraculous cures of early ages; . . . so long as such . . . powers remained in the Church, it was reasonable that anointing of the sick should be retained. But these powers ceased, in the wisdom of God, after awhile; not so, however, the ceremony to which mens minds in distress had been accustomed. It was retained in affection when its true force had departed. But since no outward result remained visible, fervent and mystical teachers could not well avoid searching for the invisible; and thus the area of operations was removed from the flesh to the spirit. The words of Holy Scripture would, with a little straining, bear such a colourable translation: and so was laid the foundation of that belief now current in a great part of Christendom. The Greek Church still practices unction, but rather in memory of a venerated custom, wherein Gods mercy was aforetime present; the Latin, unfortunately, is bound by its Council of Trent (Sessio xiv.) to believe extreme unction to be a sacrament, instituted by Christ, conferring good, remitting sins, and comforting the infirm. Its authorised manual of devotionThe Crown of Jesus (p. 710)says, Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in His tender solicitude for those whom He has redeemed by His precious blood, has been pleased to institute another sacrament, to help us at that most important hour on which eternity dependsthe hour of death. This sacrament is called Extreme Unction, or the last anointing. And further explains, The priest, in administering this sacrament, anoints the five principal senses of the bodythe eyes, the ears, the nostrils, the lips, the hands and the feetbecause these have been employed during life in offending God. At each anointing he pronounces these words: May the Lord by this holy anointing, and by His own most tender mercy, pardon thee whatever sin thou hast committed, by thy sight, hearing, &c. . . . Notwithstanding this lamentable departure from right exegesis, some divines think it wise and well to reflect how far with profit the ancient ceremony could be revived; while others would rather let it slumber with the past. When miraculous powers ceased, it was reasonable that the unction should cease also. Still more reasonable is it that even the form or memorial, however touching and beautiful, should be abandoned, rather than we should seem by it to be at one with the changedalas! the falseteaching of that Church of mans tradition, Rome.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

14. Sick And even for bodily illness apostolic Christianity had its divine resource.

The elders of the church From this it is to be inferred that organized Churches, with definite authoritative elders, existed in the time of this epistle. We find in Acts (Act 21:18) that our St. James had a body of attendant elders over whom he appears to be president.

The church The body of the people, whose place of worship is called a synagogue in Jas 2:2, as see note.

Let them pray As men whose office and power are to pray.

Anointing him with oil Wordsworth remarks that there is no indication in primitive history that oil was used sacramentally. It was used medically, as a means of restoration, with prayer for the due effect.

Wordsworth notes that the gift of healing remained some time in the Christian Church; for which he quotes the authority of Irenaeus, Tertullian, Eusebius, and others; that the Greek Church still retains the custom here prescribed for the purpose of a gracious restoration to health; whereas the Roman Church retains the ritual of oil, but not for the purpose of recovery, having perverted it to an “extreme unction,” or rite for the salvation of those beyond recovery. But the English Church, in the time of reform under Edward VI., after due consideration, disused the anointing with oil, lest it should seem to claim the gift of healing as now existing in the Church. The English Church thereby disclaimed any miraculous power over disease.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘Is any among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the prayer of faith will save him who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up, and if he has committed sins, it will be forgiven him.

The third injunction concerns those who are sick. Note that this comes third in the list. Primary in the world of the spirit are those who are undergoing trial for His sake. Second are those who declare His praise. But then we come to the sick.

And what must they do? They are to call in the elders of the church. There are a number of reasons for that. The first is in order to obtain the spiritual assistance of the church through its leadership so that the oneness of the church might reach out to the sick, and so that they might receive spiritual comfort. The second is in order to call in true and reliable praying men. The third is that as duly appointed leaders they will have been given special authority in prayer by the Lord on behalf of the church for which they are responsible. The fourth is because they will be strong in faith. And these godly men are to pray over the sick person, and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord. But what does the oil do’ It is a sign that they are acting in the Name of Christ (compare Mar 6:13. Jesus Himself never anointed men with oil). It is a sign that the person in question is being separated off to God. It is an indication that if they have slipped they are being restored to their dedication, and that if they have not slipped they are being rededicated to the Lord. It is bringing God into the action. And it a sign that the whole church are identifying themselves with them. This is the meaning of anointing in the Old Testament. It also in the New Testament connects with the Holy Spirit (1Jn 2:20; 1Jn 2:27). Note that the anointing with oil to heal links them with Mar 6:13 and therefore indicates that ‘the Lord’ here is ‘the Lord, Jesus Christ’. They are acting in His Name.

And what will happen then? ‘The prayer of faith will save the sick.’ The word ‘save’ means ‘make whole’. They will be made whole in soul and body. Their sickness will be healed, for ‘the Lord will raise them up’, but even more importantly their inward man will be forgiven, for ‘if they have committed any sins they will be forgiven them’. So the healing is for both body and soul. (Compare Jesus words to the man ‘borne of four’ in Mar 2:1-12, ‘your sins are forgiven you — rise and walk’). Note the concern for the whole man. This is no indiscriminate healing. Examination will also have been made into the spiritual condition of the sick person. (But note that he is not being prepared for death, he is being prepared for being made whole).

This was written at a time when the church still expected that God would undoubtedly heal in response to believing prayer, indicating the early date of the letter. James is in no doubt that the person will be healed. But once the first ‘signs of the Spirit’ had ceased, and the church had become firmly established, healing became more a matter of waiting on the will of God. Healings still occurred but not so regularly. Similarly we pray now that God’s will may be done. Yet there is no question but that if God’s people were to act on this more, and with greater expectancy, more would be restored (even medical authorities confirm the benefit in the process of healing of believing prayer. There is no suggestion in this, however, that we should not seek medical attention, for that is one of God’s means of healing). But we must beware of those who make claims beyond what proves to be true, and must remember that Paul at least had to endure in faith, rather than be healed (2Co 12:8-9). In the end we must accept the sovereignty of God.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

Jam 5:14. In the first age of Christianity, the miraculous gifts of the Spirit were very common: it appears too, that when the Christians behaved very unbecoming their character and profession, God sent down some diseases upon them, as a punishment for those particular sins. Such of them as laboured under sickness or other bodily disorders on that account, are here advised to send for the elders of the Christian church, who had generally the power of miraculously healing diseases; that upon the repentance of the sick person, and the inspired prayer of the elders, such diseases might be cured, as one proof that the sins which had occasioned them were remitted.

Is any sick? &c. The word ‘ does not always signify “to labour under a mortal disease,” though it appears to do so in this place; for it seems to be supposed of the sick person, concerning whom the apostle is here speaking, that he would have died of that particular disorder, unless his death had been prevented by a miraculous cure. Who the elders were, see on 1Ti 5:17. Let them pray over him, says the apostle, having anointed him with oil. In the former part of this direction there seems to be an allusion to the laying on of hands, which was used sometimes in the working of miraculous cures, according to our Lord’s order, Mar 16:18. The elders were first to anoint the sick person with oil, and afterwards to lay their hands upon him, and pray for his miraculous cure and recovery. When our Lord first sent out his apostles, we find that they anointed with oil many sick persons, and healed them, Mar 6:13. At other times, those who worked miracles, laid their hands on the persons whom they cured. Act 9:17. And together with laying on of hands they joined prayer. Act 28:8. And finally, at other times, they used no external rites, but only spake some words in prayer and otherwise. The anointing with oil,the laying on of hands,the making their shadow pass over, and the like, were none of them the causes or means of the cure, but only the external signs, to denote that the miracle was performed in testimony of their mission and doctrine. For the same reason our Lord put his finger into the ears of a deaf man, whom he miraculously cured; and touched the tongue of one that was dumb, when he gave him the power of speech; and put clay on the eyes of one that was blind, when he restored him to his sight. These were none of them causes of the cures, but signs and intimations of Jesus’s doing them; and that they were not casual things, or done in the common course of Providence; but by an extraordinary and miraculous power, and as clear attestations to the divine mission and doctrine of him who did them.

It may with propriety be observed upon the passage before us, that one of the greatest abuses of the Christian doctrine has arisen from applying what was peculiar to some persons and cases, to all Christians in general. What though many or most of the things in this epistle be applicable to us, or other Christians in later ages,will it thence follow, that every thing ought to be so applied? In the same gospel, or epistle, nay, sometimes in the same chapter, we find some rules and directions peculiar to the persons who could work miracles, and others common to all Christians: we ought therefore always to use our reason in interpreting Scripture, and from the nature of the thing determine which are peculiar directions, and which are general rules, and standing precepts. We may, indeed, from the abundance of passages in the New Testament which speak of the miraculous gifts, gather the many and clear evidences which must have attended the first planting of the Christian religion; and thence, as from a thousand other sources, we may very justly conclude, that our religion is true and divine: but we ought not to regard any thing as a rule and direction for us to observe, unless it agree to our circumstances, as well as to the circumstances of the persons to whom it was first and more immediately addressed. This general observation is applicable to many points in divinity; but is made at present with a view to the case before us, and because the church of Rome has represented this anointing of persons with oil in the name of the Lord, as a standing ordinance in the Christian church, which they have termed “The sacrament of extreme unction,” and which they would support from the words of the apostle in this text. But they have misapplied the apostle’s direction more ways than one: for, first, according to St.

James, the sick person was to be anointed in prospect of a cure; whereas they anoint persons in the agonies of death, and when there is no prospect of their recovery. Secondly, The anointing which the apostle here speaks of, was in order to a miraculous cure of some great bodily disorder; whereas they pretend that they do it to cleanse the soul of the dying person from the remainders of sin, and to remove what would obstruct its passage into heaven. Thirdly, The anointing with oil was not constantly used in working miraculous cures upon sick persons; whereas they are for applying their extreme unction to all Christians in their last moments.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Jas 5:14 . From the general a particular instance, that of sickness, is selected. ] = aegrotare, as in Mat 10:8 , Luk 4:40 , and many other passages; the opposite: .

By James hardly means any sick person, but only such a person who under the burden of bodily suffering also suffers spiritually, being thereby tempted in his faith.

The sick man is to call to himself the presbyters of the congregation. ] in the middle expresses only the reference to himself; not that the call is by others, which is here taken for granted.

] the presbyters of the congregation , namely, to which the sick man belongs. It is arbitrary to explain as unum ex presbyteris (Estius, Hammond, Laurentius, Wolf); the whole body is meant (Wiesinger), as the article shows; not some of its members, as Theile considers possible. The following words: . . ., express the object for which the presbyters are to come; they are to pray over him, anointing him in the name of the Lord. The prayer is the chief point, “as also Jas 5:15 teaches: . . . .” (Wiesinger); the anointing is the act accompanying the prayer. ] is generally inaccurately explained as equivalent to pro eo, pro salute ejus; with the accusative expresses figuratively the reference to something, similarly as the German ber with the accusative; thus , Luk 23:28 . How far the author thought on a local reference, he who prayeth bending over the sick, or stretching forth his hands over him, cannot be determined; see Act 19:13 .

With the prayer is to be conjoined the anointing of the sick, for what purpose James does not state. According to Mar 6:13 , the disciples in their miracles of healing applied it, when at the command of Jesus they traversed the Jewish land; but the reason of their doing so is not given, nor at a later period is there any mention of it in the miracles of the apostles. [240] Probably James mentions the anointing with oil only in conformity with the general custom of employing oil for the refreshing, strengthening, and healing of the body, [241] since he refers the miracle not to the anointing, but to the prayer, and, presupposing its use, directs that the presbyters should unite prayer with it, and that they should perform it ( ) , that is, in a believing and trustful mention of the name of Christ (less probably of God). That . . cannot mean jussu et auctoritate Christi is evident, because there is no express command of Christ to employ it. Gebser incorrectly unites this particular with ; Schneckenburger with both verbs; it belongs only to (de Wette, Wiesinger). The question why the presbyters should do this is not to be answered, with Schneckenburger: quia (1Co 12:9 ) cum iis communicatum erat; for, on the one hand, it is an arbitrary supposition that the presbyters possessed that , and, on the other hand, there is here no mention of it; incorrectly also Pott: quia uti omnino prudentissimi eligebantur, sic forte etiam artis medicae peritissimi erant. Bengel has given the true explanation: qui dum orant, non multo minus est, quam si tota oraret ecclesia; and Neander: “the presbyters as organs acting in the name of the church.” [242]

[240] Meyer in loco considers this anointing, as also the application of spittle on the part of Jesus Himself, as a conductor of the supernatural healing power, analogous to the laying on of hands. But in this the distinction is too little observed, that according to general custom oil, but not spittle, and the laying on of hands, was applied to the sick.

[241] See Herzog’s Real-Encycl. on Oel, Oelung, Salbe.

[242] It is well known that the Catholic Church, besides Mar 6:13 , specially appeals to this passage in support of the sacrament of extreme unction. Chemnitz, in his Examen Conc. Trid. , has already thoroughly shown with what incorrectness they have done so. Even Cajetan and Baronius doubt whether James here treats of that sacrament, as he does not speak of the sick unto death, but of the sick generally. See Herzog’s Real-Encycl. on the word Oelung.

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

14 Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:

Ver. 14. Is any man sick? ] “Behold, he whom thou lovest is sick,” said Martha to our Saviour, Joh 11:3 . Si amatur, quomodo infirmatur, saith Augustine. If Christ’s friend, how comes he to be sick? Well enough; it is no new thing for Christ’s best beloved to be much afflicted.

Let him send for the elders ] This help God hath provided for such as are by sickness disabled to pray for themselves. Sick Abimelech was sent to Abraham (a prophet) for prayers.

Anointing him with oil ] As an extraordinary sign of an extraordinary cure. From mistake of this text, the Church instead of pastors had ointers and painters in times of Popery, who did not only ungere, to annoint, but emungere, to wipe, anneal inflame men, but beguile them of their monies, and of their souls. Neither want there at this day, that hold this anointing the sick as a standing ordinance for Church members among us; and they tell of strange cures too effected thereby. I hope they aim better than Ptiugius and Sidonius, authors of that wicked piece called the Interim, did; for they defended the Popish chrism and extreme unction, ut ipsi discederent unctiores (as one saith), that they might get fat bishoprics thereby. The Popish ointment differeth much from St James’s oil, used as an outward symbol and sign till miracles ceased. See Mar 16:17 ; Act 3:16 . Proculus, a Christian, healed Severus the emperor on this wise, as Tertullian testifieth. (Advers. Scapulam.)

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

14 .] Is any sick among you (here one case of is specified, and for it specific directions are given)? let him summon to him (send for) the elders of the congregation (to which he belongs: but not, some one among those elders , as Estius, Corn. a-Lap., and other Rom.-Cath. interpreters: cf. the Council of Trent, Sess. xiv. De Extr. Unct. Song of Son 4 (“Si quis dixerit, presbyteros Ecclesi, quos beatus Jacobus adducendos esse ad infirmum inungendum hortatur, non esse sacerdotes ab Episcopo ordinatos, sed tate seniores in quavis communitate, ob idque proprium Extrem Unctionis ministrum non esse solum sacerdotem: anathema sit”), and Justiniani’s vindication of the application of this passage to their sacrament of extreme unction: on which see below. The are not simply “tate seniores in quavis communitate,” but those who were officially , or , which in the apostolic times were identical: see notes on Act 20:17 ; Act 20:28 ; so that “sacerdotes ab Episcopo ordinatos” above, would, as applied to the text, be an anachronism), and let them pray over him ( , either, 1. literally, as coming and standing over his bed: or, 2. figuratively, with reference to him, as if their intent, in praying, went out towards him. Either way, the signification of motion in with an accus. must be taken into account, and we must not render ‘ for him .’ On the Presbyters praying, Bengel says, “qui dum orant, non multo minus est quam si tota oraret Ecclesia”), anointing (or, when they have anointed ) him with oil in the name of the Lord (the . . belongs to , not, as Gebser, to ., nor as Schneckenburger, to both. And thus joined, they shew that the anointing was not a mere human medium of cure, but had a sacramental character: cf. the same words, or ., ., used of baptism , Mat 28:19 ; Act 2:38 ; Act 10:48 ; Act 19:5 ; 1Co 1:13 ; 1Co 1:15 . here is probably Christ, from analogy: His name being universally used as the vehicle of all miraculous power exercised by his followers).

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Jas 5:14 . , etc.: Cf. Sir 38:14 , , . In regard to the practice of primitive Christianity in the matter of caring for the sick Harnack says: “Even from the fragments of our extant literature, although that literature was not written with any such intention, we can still recognise the careful attention paid to works of mercy. At the outset we meet with directions everywhere to care for sick people, 1Th 5:14 . In the prayer of the Church, preserved in the first epistle of Clement, supplications are expressly offered for those who are sick in soul and body (1 Clem. 59, , ). Epistle of Polycarp, 6:1; Justin Martyr, lxvii.”; he also quotes Lactantius, Div. Inst. , vi. 12: “Aegros quoque quibus defuerit qui adsistat, curandos fovendosque suscipere summae humanitatis et magnae operationis est” ( Expansion i. 147 f. first English ed.). A like care was characteristic of the Rabbis, who declared it to be a duty incumbent upon every Jew to visit and relieve the sick whether they were Jews or Gentiles ( Git. , 61 a, Soah , 14 a ); “the aberim, or asidic associations, made the performance of this duty a special obligation” ( Jewish Encycl. , xi. 327). : both the words “presbyters” (= “priest”) and “ecclesia” were taken over from the Jews, being the Greek equivalents for and . While, however, the word was, without question, in the Christian Church taken over from the in the Jewish Church, it is well to recall the extended use which attached to it according to the evidence of the papyri. The phrase occurs on a papyrus belonging to the time of the Ptolemies, and is evidently an official title of some kind; is found together with of an idolatrous worship (100:40 B.C.); and in the second century A.D. occurs in reference to “elders” of villages in Egypt. The Septuagint translators were therefore probably using in this case a word which had a well-known technical sense. Deissmann believes it possible, therefore, that the Christian congregations of Asia Minor got the title of from the minor officials who were so called, and not necessarily from the Jewish prototype ( Op. cit. , pp. 153 f.). This might well be the case in various centres, though not all (as for example, Babylonia), of the Diaspora, but not in Palestine. It is, of course, an open question as to whether our Epistle was written from Palestine or not; see, further, Deissmann ( Neue Bibelst . pp. 60 ff.). As regards , Harnack remarks that “originally it was beyond question a collective term ( i.e. , ); it was the most solemn expression of the Jews for their worship as a collective body, and as such it was taken over by the Christians. But ere long it was applied to the individual communities, and then again to the general meeting for worship. Its acquisition rendered the capture of the term ‘synagogue’ a superfluity, and once the inner cleavage had taken place, the very neglect of the latter title served to distinguish Christians sharply from Judaism and its religious gatherings even in terminology. Most important of all, however, was the fact that was conceived of, in the first instance, not simply as an earthly but as a heavenly and transcendental entity” ( op. cit. , pp. 11 ff.); “ (usually rendered in LXX) denotes the community in relation to God, and consequently is more sacred than the profaner (regularly translated by in the LXX). Among the Jews lagged far behind in practical use, and this was all in favour of the Christians and their adoption of the term” ( ibid. ). In the verse before us it is the combination of these two terms, which points to a developed organisation among the communities of the Diaspora, and therefore to a late date for this part of the Epistle. : a common Jewish usage, see Isa 1:6 ; Mar 6:13 ; Luk 10:34 . As oil was believed to have the effect of curing bodily sickness, so it became customary to use it preparatory to Baptism, possibly with the idea of its healing, sacramentally, the disease of sin; that it was joined to Baptism as an integral part of the sacrament is certain. Prayer was, of course, an indispensable accompaniment. : Cf. Mar 16:17 ; Luk 10:17 ; Act 3:6 ; Act 3:16 ; Act 4:10 ; Act 16:18 ; and on the formula, the note above, Jas 2:17 .

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

elders. App-189.

church. App-186. Here the church must mean the assembly which worshipped in the synagogue of Jam 2:2.

over. App-104.

anointing = having anointed. Greek. aleipho. Occurs here and eight times in the Gospels. Compare Mar 6:13.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

14.] Is any sick among you (here one case of is specified, and for it specific directions are given)? let him summon to him (send for) the elders of the congregation (to which he belongs: but not, some one among those elders, as Estius, Corn. a-Lap., and other Rom.-Cath. interpreters: cf. the Council of Trent, Sess. xiv. De Extr. Unct. Song of Solomon 4 (Si quis dixerit, presbyteros Ecclesi, quos beatus Jacobus adducendos esse ad infirmum inungendum hortatur, non esse sacerdotes ab Episcopo ordinatos, sed tate seniores in quavis communitate, ob idque proprium Extrem Unctionis ministrum non esse solum sacerdotem: anathema sit), and Justinianis vindication of the application of this passage to their sacrament of extreme unction: on which see below. The are not simply tate seniores in quavis communitate, but those who were officially , or , which in the apostolic times were identical: see notes on Act 20:17; Act 20:28; so that sacerdotes ab Episcopo ordinatos above, would, as applied to the text, be an anachronism), and let them pray over him ( , either, 1. literally, as coming and standing over his bed: or, 2. figuratively, with reference to him, as if their intent, in praying, went out towards him. Either way, the signification of motion in with an accus. must be taken into account, and we must not render for him. On the Presbyters praying, Bengel says, qui dum orant, non multo minus est quam si tota oraret Ecclesia), anointing (or, when they have anointed) him with oil in the name of the Lord (the . . belongs to , not, as Gebser, to ., nor as Schneckenburger, to both. And thus joined, they shew that the anointing was not a mere human medium of cure, but had a sacramental character: cf. the same words, or ., ., used of baptism, Mat 28:19; Act 2:38; Act 10:48; Act 19:5; 1Co 1:13; 1Co 1:15. here is probably Christ, from analogy: His name being universally used as the vehicle of all miraculous power exercised by his followers).

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Jam 5:14. , the elders) For while they pray, it is much the same as though the whole Church should pray.- , anointing him with oil) That which Christ had committed to the apostles, Mar 6:13, was afterwards continued in the Church, even after the times of the apostles: and this very gift, remarkably simple, conspicuous, and serviceable, was of longer continuance than any other. See an instance in the works of Macarius, p. 272. And Ephraim Syrus has a remarkable testimony, . .: , …: If in discharge of thy office, thou anointest the sick with oil. It even seems to have been given by God with this intent, that it might always remain in the Church, as a specimen of the other gifts: just as the portion of Manna laid up in the ark was a proof of the ancient miracle. It is clear that James assigns the administration of this oil to the presbyters, who were the ordinary ministers. This was the highest Faculty of Medicine in the Church, as in 1 Corinthians 6 we have its highest Judicial order. O happy simplicity! interrupted or lost through unbelief (). For inasmuch as the Latin Church has its extreme unction,[75] and the Greek Church its , from the force of experience, they assign much less efficacy for the restoring of health to this mystery (), or sacrament, as they term it, than James does to the apostolic usage. Whitaker says with great force against Durus, Let them use oil, who are able by their prayers to obtain recovery for the sick: let those who are not able to do this, abstain from the use of the empty sign. For the only design of that anointing originally was miraculous healing: and in the failure of this result, it is nothing but an empty sign. But the laying on of hands is also a holy outward rite, although it does not by the mere act confer the Holy Spirit. For not even in the beginning was it always used with this one design.-, in) This is certainly not less connected with the verb, let them pray, than with the participle, anointing; whence there follows (Jam 5:15), the prayer of faith.- , the Lord) Jesus Christ.

[75] . This word (as its derivation shows) appears at first to have denoted the prayers which were used at the consecration of the oil with which the sick were to be anointed, but it has generally been applied to the act of extreme unction. For a full account of the word, see Suicers Thesaurus.

The Greek Church practises the rite of extreme unction, though its usage in this respect does not entirely correspond with that of the Church of Rome. See Riddles Christian Antiquities, and Willetts Synopsis Papismi.-T.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Jas 5:14-15

ELDERS AND THE SICK

Jas 5:14-15

14 Is any among you sick?— The word translated “sick,” (astheneo, literally, to be weak, without strength), is a term often used for illness, in the New Testament. (Mat 10:8; Joh 5:7; Act 9:37; Php 2:27.) The author, in vtrse 13, designates “suffering” in general; here, one particular type of sufferingphysical illness-is specifically mentioned. Sickness, of one kind or other, is a universal affliction of man; and, James, having just admonished those to whom he wrote to pray when suffering, sing when cheerful, passes to the subject of physical illness, perhaps because it is the most common kind of affliction to which human beings are subjected. We are not informed of the nature or extent of the illness here contemplated; nor is there anything, in this instance, to indicate vhether the term is used literally, or figuratively. The context would suggest that it is literal sickness inasmuch as it is mentioned in connection with literal suffering, praying, cheerfulness, and singing. In verse 15, below, it is clearly shown that the illness contemplated here is physical in character, in view of the fact that it is mentioned in connection with, and in addition to, spiritual illness. These conclusion,.: follow: (1) It is possible for children oi God to get sick. (2) Sickness is a physical ailment which eventually comes to all, whether good or bad. (3) The fact that one is sick does not mean that such a one has been or is guilty of specific sin. Often, the most devout suffer from prolonged illness; frequently those who live in open sin enjoy robust health. Paul was possessed of great physical weakness; there were infirmities of the flesh which bore heavily upon him and he ever lived with the painful reminder oi the thorn in his flesh. (2Co 12:1 ff.) (4) There were sick people in the early church even as there are many in this category among us today. Sickness is a burden all must, at one time or another, bear.

let him call for the elders of the church;—(Proskalesasthe, aorist middle imperative, “Let him call (at once) for the elders oi the church.”) The “church” referred to here is, obviously, the local congregation, inasmuch as it has “elders.” The word church is used in the New Testament to designate the Lord’s people as a whole (Mat 16:18) ; the people within a geographical area (1Co 1:2); the assembly of the saints (1Co 14:28). Elders supervise the local congregation (Act 20:28), not the church in the aggregate. The church, as a whole, is an organism with Christ as its head (Eph 1:19-23), and children of God the members of the body (1Co 12:12-28). All New Testament churches, when fully organized, had a plurality of elders, whose duty it is to feed the flock of God, and to oversee the work of the congregation. (Act 14:23; Act 15:2; Act 16:4; Act 21:18; Act 20:28; 1Pe 5:1-4.) To these the congregation is taught to submit, because they watch for the souls of those committed to their care. (Heb 13:7; Heb 13:17.) The “elders” are also designated bishops (Act 20:28), pastors ( Eph 4:11), presbyters (1Ti 4:14). Cf. the Greek of Act 11:30. Their qualifications are set out in detail in 1Ti 3:1-7; Tit 1:5-9.

and let them pray over him,—(Proseuzasthosan ep’ auton.) The verb is an aorist middle imperative. “Them” are the elders; “him” the sick man. The prayer the elders are to pray is to be “over” him, not literally, of course, but figuratively; they are to pray in his behalf. It seems absurd to assume, with some commentators, that the instructions necessitated standing with bowed heads over his prostrate body. There is an additional requirement, mentioned in the next clause.

anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:—The verb here is an aorist participle, indicating that the act of anointing was lo be performed either before the prayer, or in connection with it. (See margin.) Thus, the sick man is to be anointed; anointed with oil; anointed with oil in the name of the Lord. Olive oil was used both medicinally and symbolically in Biblical times. It was used symbolically in the appointment and coronation of prophets, priests and kings of the Old Testament period implying an anointing of the Holy Spirit. (1Sa 10:1; 1Sa 10:9.) Our Lord sometimes used outward symbols in connection with his healing. (Joh 9:6; Joh 9:11.) Olive oil also has therapeutic value, instances of which may lie seen in Luk 10:34, where oil was poured into the wounds of the man who fell among thieves. It appears quite clear here that the use of the oil was symbolic, and not medicinal; and thus served as a token of the power of God by which the healing was accomplished. Elders, not doctors, were to be sent for. Had the healing art through means been intended, the instruction would have been “Call for the doctors and let them diagnose his case and prescribe the proper treatment. . . . ” It was, as we shall see, the “prayer of faith” which accomplished the purpose, not the administration of oil. While olive oil is beneficial for some ailments, it is useless in others. Obviously, the application of olive oil to the head or body of one suffering from a heart condition is of little avail.

The act,-anointing with oil-was to be performed “in the name of the Lord”; i.e., by the Lord’s authority. The meaning is that the Lord ordained that such should be done and the blessing which accompanied it would be accomplished by him. This corroborates the view already indicated in these notes, and to be emphasized below, that the healing of this passage was miraculous. The phrase, “in the name of the Lord,” is to be construed with the anointing, and not with the verb “pray.” Thus, the anointing with oil was symbolic of the power which Christ himself would exercise in behalf of the sick man.

15 and the prayer of faith shall save him that is sick,—The prayer of faith (he euche tes pisteos), is a prayer which results from faith; a prayer prayed because of the faith of those praying. Of this prayer it is affirmed that it “shall save,” ( sosei, future active of sozo, to make one well), “him that is sick.” It should be observed that James declares that it is the prayer of faith which accomplishes this; not prayer and oil; not prayer and medicinal treatment; not prayer and the laying on of hands. The prayer of faith was that prayed by the elders in which, of course, the interested one, who called for the elders, joined. This prayer is said to save (in the original and primary import of the word, to make well) the sick. This word must therefore, in this instance, be regarded as limited in its significance to the physical, temporal healing of the affliction which possessed the man, inasmuch as the additional fact of the forgiveness of his sins, is later affirmed.

and the Lord shall raise him up;— Observe that it is the Lord who will do this; and, that from which the sick is to be raised is his bed of pain and illness. The verb here occurs in this same connection in Mar 1:31; Mat 8:15, and often elsewhere in the Greek Testament. Here is positive proof of the falsity of the Roman Catholic interpretation of this passage. That ecclesiasticism affects to see in this verse support ior their doctrine of Extreme Unction in which they anoint one about to die. Here, however, the anointing was to be done in an action the design of which was to enable the sick to live! Moreover, the “elders of the church,” were those to be called in such instances, not Roman Catholic Priests. This affirmation of James bears not the remotest resemblance to the monstrous doctrine advocated by the Church of Rome which they style Extreme Unction.

and if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him.—This, is promised in addition to the healing of his body. Inasmuch as the Lord forgiyes the sins of his people only when they repent and turn away from them, this fact must be implied in this passage. ( 1 John l :7-9; 2:1.) From the foregoing considerations, it must be quite obvious to the discerning student that this passage was applicable to the period of miraculous gifts in the church and limited to it. On the assumption that it is today applicable, if the sick called for the elders as directed here, and the ciders did their duty, no one in tlte church would ever die! Yet, the Hebrew writer solemnly affirmed, “It is appointed unto men once to die …. ” (Heb 9:27.)

Evidently, for a limited time, and for special purposes, God ordained that the foregoing instructions should be followed: and in eery case the promise was realized. That it was not widely follO\ed, or intended to be a universal practice during the apo:’tolic age follows from the fact that not infrequently saints were sick and often died. (Act 9:32-43; Php 2:19-30; 1Ti 5:23 : 2Ti 4:1-8.) While those to whom this passage particularly applied received, without exception, the blessing of healing and forgiveness, others of the apostolic age were often afflicted without relief. Paul had a thorn in the flesh; Timothy had a stomach disorder, and Trophimus was by Paul left in Miletus sick.

It seems quite clear from all the facts in the case that the elders contemplated here were miraculously endowed-through the laying on of an apostle’s hands-and were thus able to participate in miraculous acts of healing in the manner described. In the apostolic age, and in a day of special gifts, conferred through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, acts of healing were done independently of means; today God still heals, but by means, and through the various techniques of healing with which the world is today blessed. God once fed people miraculously, and independently of means; he still feeds us, but the seed, the sower, the soil, the sunshine, the harvest, the mill, the baker are all means to that end. It is as foreign to God’s plan today to expect miraculous healing independently of means as it is to expect him to feed us as Jesus did when he multiplied the loaves and fishes. It is, of course, proper and right for us to pray for the sick; to pray that they may be healed; to pray that the Lord will raise them up and restore them to their usual places in life; but, we must recognize that he works through means today, and that he has chosen to accomplish his purposes in this manner. One who rejects these means today-such as medicine, surgery, and all other approved techniques-and alleges dependence upon God alone, actually rejects God who chooses to work in this manner now. He who is raised up from death’s door by modern miracle drugs is assuredly healed by the power of God as were those in the first century who were the recipients of Christ’s healing ministry in that day. Let us be thankful for, and use without hesitation, these marvelous means from the hand of God.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

for: Act 14:23, Act 15:4, Tit 1:5

pray: 1Ki 17:21, 2Ki 4:33, 2Ki 5:11, Act 9:40, Act 28:8

anointing: Mar 6:13, Mar 16:18

Reciprocal: Gen 20:7 – pray 2Ki 20:5 – I will heal Job 42:8 – my servant Job shall Psa 30:2 – and Psa 141:5 – for yet my Isa 33:24 – the inhabitant Mat 18:19 – That if Mat 25:36 – was sick Mar 1:30 – they tell Mar 5:23 – lay thy hands Luk 4:38 – they Luk 5:20 – Man Luk 7:21 – plagues Joh 11:3 – he Act 11:30 – to the Act 20:17 – the elders 1Co 12:9 – the gifts 1Ti 5:1 – an elder 1Jo 5:16 – he shall ask

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Jas 5:14. The word sick is from AS-THENEO, which Thayer defines at this place, “To be feeble, sick.” Robinson defines it, “A sick person, the sick.” It is the word that is used in the Greek text at Luk 7:10; Joh 4:46 Joh 11:3; Act 9:37 and other similar passages. From the above information we are sure the word in our passage has the regular sense of bodily disease, and not a figurative or spiritual condition as some teach. This verse should be regarded in the same light as Mar 16:17-18 :1 Corinthians chapters 12, 13, 14; Eph 4:8-13; Heb 2:3-4 and all other passages dealing with the subject of spiritual gifts. In the early years of the church the Lord granted miraculous demonstrations to confirm the truth that had been preached while the New Testament was being completed. Among those miracles was that of healing the sick and since elders (or pastors, Eph 4:11) were among those receiving such gifts, it is reasonable that they should be called in such a case. The use of oil does not signify anything contrary to these remarks, for Jesus sometimes used material articles in connection with His miraculous healing, such as clay in the case of the blind man in Joh 9:6-7. Just why such things were done in connection with the miracles we are not told and we need not speculate as to why.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Jas 5:14. Is any sick among you? a particular instance of the general term afflicted; to be taken in its literal sense, denoting bodily sickness, and not to be spiritualized as denoting spiritual trouble.

let him call for the elders of the church: not for the aged men, but for the presbyters of the church; that is, of the congregation to which the sick man belongs. This proves that even at the early period at which St. James wrote his Epistle there was a constituted ecclesiastical government; each congregation had its presbyters.

and let them pray over him. This may denote either literally over his bed, or over him by the imposition of hands; or figuratively with reference to him, that is, for him.

anointing him with oil. This anointing with oil was and still is much employed in the East as a medicinal remedy in the case of sickness, the oil used being chiefly olive oil. Thus in our Lords parable, the good Samaritan is represented as pouring into the wounds of the traveller oil and wine (Luk 10:34). Here, however, the anointing with oil appears to have been a religious ceremony, and to have had a symbolical meaning; it was performed by the elders of the Church in the name of the Lord. We read that the disciples, whom our Lord sent endowed with the miraculous powers of healing, anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them(Mar 6:13).

in the name of the Lord; that is, of Christ, and to be connected with anointing. The natural meaning is, that the presbyters were to anoint the sick by the authority or command of Christ. There is certainly no mention of such an injunction, but our ignorance does not exclude the fact; and we have seen that the disciples sent out by our Lord anointed with oil. The name of Christ was the recognised vehicle for the communication of miraculous cures. Compare Act 3:6 : In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Rise up and walk.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Some observe, 1. That St. James doth not say, “Is any man sick? let him pray;” but let him send for others to pray with him, and for him: plainly supposing, that the sick man is very unfit to pray himself, or to pray for himself; in other afflictions let him pray, but in sickness let others pray for him, he having enough to do to grapple with his grief, and to conflict with his affliction: a diseased body unfits the mind for holy duties.

Yet observe, 2. It is one thing to want a heart in sickness to pray for ourselves, and another thing to want ability to pray for ourselves. Many desire the prayers of others in sickness, who wanted hearts to pray for themselves in health. This is a sad symptom that the soul is as sick, yea, more dangerously sick than the body. Add to this, that the prayers of others are very rarely beneficial to us, unless we pray, or have a desire to pray, for ourselves.

Observe, 3. The sick man’s duty, not only to desire prayer, but to send to the elders of the church to pray for him, and with him.

Quest. But if the sick neglect to send, may the minister neglect to go, if he knows of the sickness?

Ans. Doubtless we ought to go, if we know of it, whether they send or not, for they want our prayers and help most when they desire it least; and by refusing to go, we may lose the last, and perhaps the best opportunity of doing good unto them. If our people, through stupidity and insensibleness, omit their duty in sending for us, God forbid, that either through pride or sluggishness, we should neglect our duty in going to them; too, too often we never hear our people are sick, till the bell tells us they are dead: if therefore by any means we gain the knowlege of their condition, let us apply ourselves with all our might to their condition, lest God be more angry with us for not going to them, than with them for not sending to us, imitating our Lord, who was found of them that sought him not.

Some make this anointing with oil to be a medicinal practice among the Jews, and that they administered it physically: but why then must the elders administer it? The physician might have done it as well as they. True, but the elders are sent for, that they, applying this corporeal remedy, might join with it spiritual physic of prayer, good admonition and comfort. As if a sick person should send for the minister at his taking of physic, that he might then pray with him, counsel and comfort him. Others make this anointing with oil a religious act. Christ empowered his apostles to work miracles, and, amongst others, they had the gift of healing the sick, whom they anointed in the name of the Lord, or by the authority of the Lord; but the gospel being sufficiently confirmed, this gift of healing is ceased, and therewith the rite of anointing; therefore the church of Rome keep up an idle ceremony in anointing the sick, unless they had a miraculous power to heal the sick: to keep up the rite, unless they could produce the effect; to pretend to the anointing, without the power of healing, is a mere piece of pageantry; besides, they anoint those that are given over for dead, and the apostle’s anointing for the benefit of the living, as appears by the following verse.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Jas 5:14-15. Is any sick? let him call for the elders of the church Those ministers of Christ whose office it is to oversee and feed the flock; and let them pray over him For his recovery, persuaded that what two or three of the Lords true disciples shall agree to ask, it shall be done for them; anointing him with oil This single conspicuous gift, (healing the sick by anointing them with oil,) which Christ committed to his apostles, (Mar 6:13,) remained in the church long after the other miraculous gifts were withdrawn. Indeed it seems to have been designed to remain always, and St. James directs the elders, who were the most, if not the only gifted men, to administer it. This was the whole process of physic in the Christian Church till it was lost through unbelief. That novel invention among the Romans, extreme unction, practised not for cure, but where life is despaired of, bears no manner of resemblance to this. See Bengelius and Wesley. And the prayer offered in faith shall save, or heal, the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up From his sickness; and if he have committed sins That is, any special sins, for which this sickness has been laid upon him; they shall be forgiven him Upon his repentance the punishment shall be taken off.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Verse 14

Anointing him with oil. Whether the anointing here prescribed was intended as a rite, or as a remedy, does not appear. The oil obtained from the olive was much in use among the ancient Jews, both as an article of food, and as a medical remedy; and was also employed in many civil and religious ceremonies. The good Samaritan Is represented as employing it in the case of the wounded traveller, and the twelve, when sent out upon their original mission, anointed with oil the sick whom they were called upon to cure. (Mark 6:13.) The ceremony of extreme unction, as practised by the Catholic church, rests upon the authority of this passage. That ceremony, however, is performed as the last act of preparation for death, when all hope of recovery is gone; but, in the directions here given, the anointing, whether prescribed as a medical remedy or as a religious rite, is plainly employed as a means of restoration to health, as appears from the James 5:15.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament

Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord:

The term “sick” can also be translated weak, or weakness. The importance of this will be seen later as we discuss the overall meaning of this text. Is it speaking of being sick as in the flu, physical sickness, or is it in the context of spiritual sickness? We will see later on in our study.

The formula is, if you are sick, call the elders of the church and “let” them pray over him, with anointing with oil – in the name of the Lord. Some very specific items are called for. Elders, not deacons, the term elders is plural, not singular, prayer, anointing in the Lord’s name. Many suggest that the office of elder is for THE pastor, but here we see that there are multiple elders in the church. (Every translation I checked lists this as a plural.)

This will require some scheduling, to get more than one together for the visit. Indeed, it seems to me that it would be ALL of the elders unless it was impossible. Most today suggest anointing be the touching of the forehead with a drop or two of olive oil. There is nothing in the text to show this to be incorrect, though there is nothing in the text to show this to be correct either.

Since James did not specify the how, we might suggest that the why was well known to the readers, thus possibly something from Jewish culture, or it might indicate that the how is not all that important, that the prayer is the important part. It would be suggested that the anointing must be of some importance since it is to be done in the Lord’s name.

There are some that view the oil as representative of the Spirit, which it may be. To anoint would seem to be a small amount to me, but it might be that a covering of the forehead of the person, might be soothing and cooling if there was a fever involved.

There might also be another truth tucked away in the verse. Call the elders, is the statement, not go to the healing meeting, go to the revival, or go to the television. The elders of your local church are the ones that are to be involved and no one else. The healing of our “church society” is not Biblical, nor is it effective. The going forward and being knocked to the floor, the wailing, and the showmanship, all are totally foreign to this passage of Scripture.

Now, which would you want to do if you were sick and looking for relief from God? Especially if you had it in mind that this sickness was caused by sin. The sinner should look to their spiritual leaders for relief. It would be better if they would just deal with God, but there seems to be the failure to do so.

Constable points out that the word translated “anointing” is not the normal Greek word for anoint, but rather the word which describes to rub with oil. It is a common word for any sort of rubbing. He also mentions that there is another word used of religious anointing. However, if you look up the other references to the word used by James you will find that it is in the context of times spent with God, or indeed the anointing of Christ Himself multiple times. I am not sure the observation that it is “mundane and profane” the every day rubbing that Constable implies. Correct that it may not be a religious sacrament or ritual, but more than just everyday rubbing.

Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson

5:14 {9} Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with {g} oil in the {h} name of the Lord:

{9} He shows peculiarly, to what physicians especially we must go when we are diseased, that is, to the prayers of the elders, which then also could cure the body, (for so much as the gift of healing was then in force) and take away the main cause of sickness and diseases, by obtaining healing for the sick through their prayers and exhortations.

(g) This was a sign of the gift of healing: and now seeing we have the gift no more, the sign is no longer necessary.

(h) By calling on the name of the Lord.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

2. The prescription for help 5:14-16

It is not surprising to find that James dealt with sickness (Gr. asthenai, weakness) in this epistle. He referred to the fact that departure from the will of God sets the Christian on a course that, unless corrected, may result in his or her premature physical death (Jas 1:15; Jas 1:21; Jas 5:20). Spiritual weakness, and sometimes physical sickness, result from sinful living. James gave instructions about how to deal with these maladies in Jas 5:14-20.

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Times of spiritual weakness or physical sickness are usually occasions in which it is especially difficult to be patient (e.g., Job).

Anointing with oil was the equivalent in James’ day of applying medication (cf. 1Ti 5:23).

". . . oil among the ancients was highly valued for its therapeutic qualities (Isa 1:16; Luk 10:34)." [Note: Merrill F. Unger, "Divine Healing," Bibliotheca Sacra 128:511 (July-September 1971):236. Cf. Adamson, p. 197. See also Mayor, pp. 170-71, for extrabiblical references.]

The oil provided more refreshment and soothing comfort than it did real relief for serious ailments, but people drank it as well as rubbing it on themselves as a medication. The term translated "anointing him with oil" in Greek refers to medicinal anointing, not religious ceremonial anointing. [Note: Robertson, 6:64-65.] James used aleiphein ("rub") here rather than chriein ("anoint"). The former word is the "mundane and profane" referring to all kinds of rubbing whereas the latter is the "sacred and religious" word used to describe religious ceremonies. [Note: R. C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament, p. 129. See also Burdick, p. 204.]

James instructed that in times of weakness, spiritual or physical, Christians should ask their church elders to visit them, to pray for them, and to minister to them in Jesus’ name (i.e., as His servants). [Note: See John Wilkinson, "Healing in the Epistle of James," Scottish Journal of Theology 24 (1971):338-40.]

"Prayer is the more significant of the two ministries performed by the elders. ’Pray’ is the main verb, while ’anoint’ is a participle. Moreover, the overall emphasis of the paragraph is on prayer. So the anointing is a secondary action." [Note: Burdick, p. 204.]

The fact that the weary person was to summon the elders gives a clue that this person’s sickness connects with some spiritual condition. This proves to be the case in Jas 5:15. Today a skilled physician normally provides the medical attention. The elders need to deal with the spiritual factors affecting the sick person, if any, since they have a responsibility for the spiritual welfare of the flock (Heb 13:17). In this context James had a sickness with spiritual roots in view. Really all sickness is traceable to the Fall.

It is interesting that James did not tell his readers to call for someone with the gift of healing. Evidently such people were rare even in the very early history of the church when James wrote.

Probably this treatment reminded the sick person of the power of the Holy Spirit that anointing with oil symbolized in the Old Testament. [Note: Fanning, p. 433. Cf. Gary S. Shogren, "Will God Heal Us-A Re-examination of James 5:14-16a," Evangelical Quarterly 61 (1989):99-108.]

"Aleiphein . . . may have been chosen over chriein because of standard usage yet still with the intention of conveying the thought that the anointing of oil was symbolic." [Note: Martin, p. 209.]

This verse is the basis for the Roman Catholic doctrine of extreme unction (i.e., anointing someone with oil at death to gain merit with God for so doing). [Note: For refutation of this view, see Adamson, pp. 204-5.] This practice began in the eighth century. [Note: Blue, p. 834.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Chapter 27

THE ELDERS OF THE CHURCH-THE ANOINTING OF THE SICK AND EXTREME UNCTION.

Jam 5:14-15

Two subjects stand out prominently in this interesting passage-the elders of the Church, and the anointing of the sick. The connection of the passage with what immediately precedes is close and obvious. After charging his readers in general terms to resort to prayer when they are in trouble, St. James takes a particular and very common instance of trouble, viz., bodily sickness, and gives more detailed directions as to the way in which the man in trouble is to make use of the relief and remedy of prayer. He is not to be content with giving expression to his need in private prayer to God; he is to “call for the elders of the Church.”

1. The first thing to be noted in connection with this sending for the elders of the congregation by the sick man is, that in this Epistle, which is one of the very earliest among the Christian writings which have come down to us, we already find a distinction made between clergy and laity. This distinction runs through the whole of the New Testament. We find it in the earliest writing of all, the First Epistle to the Thessalonians, in which the Christians of Thessalonica are exhorted “to know them that labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; and to esteem them exceeding highly in love for their works sake”. {1Th 5:12-13} And here St. James assumes as a matter of course, that every congregation has elders, that is a constituted ecclesiastical government. Compare with these the precept in the Epistle to the Hebrews, “Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit to them: for they watch in behalf of your souls, as they that shall give account”; {Heb 13:17} and the frequent directions in the Pastoral Epistles. {1Ti 3:1-13; 1Ti 4:6; 1Ti 4:13-14; 1Ti 5:17; 1Ti 5:19; 1Ti 5:22; Tit 1:5-9; Tit 2:15; 2Ti 1:6; 2Ti 1:14; 2Ti 2:2; 2Ti 4:5} What the precise functions of the clergy were is not told us with much detail or precision; but it is quite clear, from the passage before us, and those which have been quoted above, that whatever the functions were, they were spiritual rather than secular, and were duties which a select minority had to exercise in reference to the rest; they were not such as any one might exercise towards any one. In the present case the sick person is not to send for any members of the congregation, but for certain who hold a definite, and apparently an official position. If any Christians could discharge the function in question, St. James would not have given the sick person the trouble of summoning the elders rather than those people who chanced to be near at hand. And it is quite clear that not all Christians are over all other Christians in the Lord; that not all are to rule, and all to obey and submit; therefore not all have the same authority to “admonish” others, or to “watch in behalf of their souls, as they that shall give account.”

The reason why the elders are to be summoned is stated in different ways by different writers, but with a large amount of substantial agreement. “As being those in whom the power and grace of the Holy Spirit more particularly appeared,” says Calvin. “Because when they pray it is not much less than if the whole Church prayed,” says Bengel. St. James, says Neander, “regards the presbyters in the light of organs of the Church, acting in its name”; and, “As the presbyters acted in the name of the whole Church, and each one as a member of the body felt that he needed its sympathy and intercession, and might count upon it; individuals should therefore, in cases of sickness, send for the presbyters of the Church. These were to offer prayer on their behalf.” The intercession which St. James recommends, says Stier, is “intercession for the sick on the part of the representatives of the Church, not merely the intercession of friends or brethren as such, but in the name of the whole community, one of whose members is suffering.” It is altogether beside the mark to suggest that the elders were summoned as people of the greatest experience, who perhaps also were specially skilled in medicine. Of that there is not only no hint, but the context excludes the idea. If that were in the writers mind, why does be not say at once, “Let him call for the physicians”? If the healing art is to be thought of at all in connection with the passage, the case is one in which medicine has already done all that it can, or in which it can do nothing at all. St. James would doubtless approve the advice given by the son of Sirach: “My son, in thy sickness be not negligent; but pray unto the Lord, and He will make thee whole” (Sir 38:9). This exactly agrees with the precept, “Is any among you suffering? let him pray.” “Then give place to the physician, for the Lord hath created him: let him not go from thee, for thou hast need of him. There is a time when in their hands there is good success” (12, 13). To this there is no equivalent in St. James; but he says nothing that is inconsistent with it. Then, after the physician has done his part, and perhaps in vain, would come the summoning of the elders to offer prayer. But it is simpler to suppose that the physicians part is left out of the account altogether.

2. The second point of interest is the anointing of the sick person by the elders. That what is said here affords no Scriptural authority for the Roman rite of Extreme Unction, is one of the commonplaces of criticism. One single fact is quite conclusive. The object of the unction prescribed by St. James is the recovery of the sick person; whereas Extreme Unction, as its name implies, is never administered until the sick persons recovery is considered to be almost or quite hopeless, and death imminent; the possibility of bodily healing is not entirely excluded, but it is not the main purpose of the rite. The only other passage in the New Testament in which the unction of the sick is mentioned is equally at variance with the Roman rite. We are told by St. Mark that the Twelve, when sent out by Christ two and two, “anointed with oil many that were silk, and healed them.” {Mar 6:13} Here also recovery, and not preparation for death, was the purpose of the anointing, which the Apostles seem to have practiced on their own responsibility, for it is not mentioned in the charge which Christ gave them when He sent them out (Mar 6:7-11).

But there is this amount of connection between these two passages of Scripture and the Roman sacrament of Extreme Unction, viz., that the latter grew out of ecclesiastical practices which were based upon these passages. As in not a few other instances, development has brought about a state of things which is inconsistent with the original starting-point., But in order to understand the development we must understand the starting-point, and that requires us to find an answer to the question, What purpose was the oil intended to serve? Was it purely symbolical? and if so, of what? Was it merely for the refreshment of the sick person, giving relief to parched skin and stiffened limbs? Was it medicinal, with a view to a permanent cure by natural means? Was it the channel or instrument of a supernatural cure? Was it an aid to the sick persons faith? One or both of the last two suggestions may be accepted as the most probable solution. And the reason why oil was selected as a channel of Divine power and an aid to faith was, that it was believed to have healing properties. It is easier to believe when visible means are used than when nothing is visible, and it is still easier to believe when the visible means appear to be likely to contribute to the desired effect. Christ twice used spittle in curing blindness, probably because spittle was believed to be beneficial to the eyesight. And that oil was supposed to be efficacious as medicine is plain from numerous passages both in and outside of Holy Scripture. “From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and festering sores: they have not been closed, nor bound up, neither mollified with oil”. {Isa 1:6} The Good Samaritan poured wine and oil into the wounds of the man who fell among robbers. {Luk 10:34} A mixture of oil and wine was used for the malady which attacked the army of Aelius Gallus, and was applied both externally and internally (Dion Cass., LIII 29; Strabo, XVI 9. 780). His physicians caused Herod the Great to be bathed in a vessel full of oil when he was supposed to be at deaths door (Josephus, “Ant.,” XVII 6. 5). Celsus recommends rubbing with oil in the case of fevers and some other ailments (“De Med.,” II 14, 17; III 6, 9, 19, 22; IV 2). But it is obvious that St. James does not recommend the oil merely as medicine, for he does not say that the oil shall cure the sick person, nor yet that the oil with prayer shall do so; but that “the prayer of faith shall save him that is sick,” without mentioning the oil at all. On the other hand, he says that the anointing is to be done by the elders “in the name of the Lord.” If the anointing were merely medicinal, it might have been performed by any one, without waiting for the elders. And it can hardly be supposed that oil was believed to be a remedy for all diseases.

On the other hand, it seems to be too much to say that the anointing had nothing to do with bodily healing at all, and was simply a means of grace for the sick. Thus Dollinger says, “This is no gift of healing, for that was not confined to the presbyters; and for that Christ prescribed not unction, but laying on of hands. Had he meant that, St. James would have bidden or advised the sick to send for one who possessed this gift, whether presbyter or layman”

“What was to be conveyed by this medium was, therefore, only sometimes recovery or relief, always consolation, revival of confidence and forgiveness of sins, on condition, of course, of faith and repentance” (“First Age of the Church,” p. 235, Oxenhams translation, 2d ed.: Allen, 1867).

But although the gift of healing was not confined to the elders, yet in certain eases they may have exercised it; and although Christ prescribed the laying on of hands, {Mar 16:18} yet the Apostles sometimes healed by anointing with oil. {Mar 6:13} And that “shall save him that is sick” ( ) means “shall cure him,” is clear from the context, and also from the use of the same word elsewhere. “Daughter, be of good cheer; thy faith hath saved thee,” to the woman with the issue of blood. {Mat 9:22} Jairus prays, “Come and lay Thy hands on her, that she may be saved”. {Mar 5:23} The disciples say of Lazarus, “Lord, if he is fallen asleep, he will be saved”. {Joh 11:12} And “the Lord shall raise him up” makes this interpretation still more certain. The same expression is used of Simons wifes mother. {Mar 1:31} “The Lord” is Christ, not the Father, both here and “in the Name of the Lord.” Thus St. Peter says to Aeneas, “Jesus Christ healeth thee.” {Act 9:34. Comp. Act 3:6; Act 3:16; Act 5:10}

That St. James makes the promise of recovery without any restriction may at first sight appear to be surprising; but in this he is only following the example of our Lord, who makes similar promises, and leaves it to the thought and experience of Christians to find out the limitations to them. St. James is only applying to a particular case what Christ promised in general terms. “All things, whatsoever ye pray and ask for, believe that ye have received them, and ye shall have them.” {Mar 11:24. Comp. Mat 17:20} “If ye shall ask [Me] anything in My Name, I will do.” {Joh 14:14} “If ye shall ask anything of the Father, He will give it you in My Name”. {Joh 16:23} The words “in My Name” point to the limitation; they do not, of course, refer to the use of the formula “through Jesus Christ our Lord,” but to the exercise of the spirit of Christ: “Not My will, but Thine be done.” The union of our will with the will of God is the very first condition of successful prayer. The Apostles themselves had no indiscriminate power of healing. St. Paul did not heal Epaphroditus, much as he yearned for his recovery. {Php 2:27} He left Trophimus at Miletus sick. {2Ti 4:20} He did not cure his own thorn in the 2Co 12:7-9. How, then, can we suppose that St. James credited the elders of every congregation with an unrestricted power of healing? He leaves it to the common sense and Christian submission of his readers to understand that the elders have no power to cancel the sentence of death pronounced on the whole human race. To pray that any one should be exempt from this sentence would be not faith, but presumption.

Of the employment of the rite here prescribed by St. James we have very little evidence in the early ages of the Church. Tertullian mentions a cure by anointing, but it is not quite a case in point. The Emperor Septimius Severus believed that he had been cured from an illness through oil administered by a Christian named Proculus Torpacion, steward of Evodias, and in gratitude for it he maintained him in the palace for the rest of his life (“Ad. Scap.,” 4.). Origen, in the second Homily on Leviticus (4), quotes the passage from St. James, and seems to understand the sickness to be that of sin. He interpolates thus: “Let him call for the elders of the Church, and let them lay their hands on him, anointing him with oil,” etc. This perhaps tells us how the rite was administered in Alexandria in his time; or it may mean that Origen understood the “pray over him” of St. James to signify imposition of hands. With him, then, the forgiveness of sins is the healing. A century and a half later Chrysostom takes a further step, and employs the passage to show that priests have the power of absolution. “For not only at the time when they regenerate us, but afterwards also, they have authority to forgive sins.” And then he Jam 5:14-15 (“De Sacerd.,” III 6). It is evident that this is quite alien to the passage. The sickness and the sins are plainly distinguished by St. James, and nothing is said about absolution by the elders, who pray for his recovery, and (no doubt) for his forgiveness.

When we reach the sixth century the evidence for the custom of anointing the sick with holy oil becomes abundant. At first any one with a reputation for sanctity might bless the oil-not only laymen, but women. But in the West the rule gradually spread from Rome that the sacred oil for the sick must be “made” by the bishop. In the East this has never been observed. Theodore of Tarsus, Archbishop of Canterbury, says that according to the Greeks it is lawful for presbyters to make the chrism for the sick. And this rule continues to this day. One priest suffices; but it is desirable to get seven, if possible.

But the chief step in the development is taken when not only the blessing of the oil, but the administering of it to the sick, is reserved to the clergy. In Bedes time this restriction was not yet made, as is clear from his comments on the passage, although even then it was customary for priests to administer the unction. But by the tenth century this restriction had probably become general. It became connected with the communion of the sick, which of course required a priest, and then with the Viaticum, or communion of the dying; but even then the unction seems to have preceded the last communion. The name “Extreme Unction” (unctio extrema), as a technical ecclesiastical term, is not older than the twelfth century. Other terms are “Last Oil” (ultimum oleum) and “Sacrament of the Departing” (sacramentum exeuntium). But when we have reached these phrases we are very far indeed from the ordinance prescribed by St. James, and from that which was practiced by the Apostles. Jeremy Taylor, in the dedication of the “Holy Dying,” says fairly enough, “The fathers of the Council of Trent first disputed, and after their manner at last agreed, that Extreme Unction was instituted by Christ; but afterwards being admonished by one of their theologues that the Apostles ministered unction to infirm people before they were priests, for fear that it should be thought that this unction might be administered by him that was no priest, they blotted out the word instituted, and put in its stead insinuated this sacrament, and that it was published by St. James. So it is in their doctrine; and yet in their anathematisms they curse all them that shall deny it to have been instituted by Christ. I shall lay no prejudice against it, but add this only, that there being but two places of Scripture pretended for this ceremony, some chief men of their own side have proclaimed these two invalid as to the institution of it”; and he mentions in particular Suarez and Cajetan. But he states more than he can know when he declares of Extreme Unction that “since it is used when the man is above half dead, when he can exercise no act of understanding, it must needs be nothing.” Those who receive the rite are not always unconscious; and is it certain that an unconscious person “can exercise no act of the understanding,” or that prayer for one who can exercise no act of the understanding “must needs be nothing”? With similar want of caution Stier speaks of the superstition which sends for the minister to pray over the sick, when these have scarce any consciousness left. Whether or no Extreme Unction is an edifying ceremony is a question worthy of argument, and nothing is here urged on either side; but we are going beyond our knowledge if we assert that it can have no effect on the dying man; and we are unduly limiting the power of prayer if we affirm that to pray for one who has lost consciousness is a useless superstition. All that is contended for here is that the Roman rite is something very different from that which is ordered by St. James.

“And if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him.” We ought perhaps rather to translate, “Even if he have committed sins, it shall be forgiven him.” (The Greek is not or , but for which) {Joh 8:14; Joh 10:38; Joh 11:25} the meaning would seem to be, “even if his sickness has been produced by his sins, his sin shall be forgiven, and his sickness cured.” It is possible, but unnatural, to join the first clause of this sentence with the preceding one: “the Lord shall raise him up, even if he have committed sins.” In that case “It shall be forgiven him” forms a very awkward independent sentence, without conjunction. The ordinary arrangement of the clauses is much better: even if the malady is the effect of the mans own wrong-doing, the prayer offered by faith-his faith, and that of the elders-shall still prevail. St. Paul tells the Corinthians that their misconduct respecting the Lords Supper had caused much sickness among them, and not a few deaths; {1Co 11:30} and such direct punishments of sin were not confined to the Corinthian Church nor to the Apostolic age. They still occur in abundance, and those who experience them have the assurance of Scripture that if they repent and pray in faith their sins will certainly be forgiven, and their punishment possibly removed.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary