CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES
James 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 Lord’s saying to the maiden Arise! as if she was actually restored to life and health.
James 5:15. Prayer of faith.—The only kind of prayer that ever is acceptable to God: chap. James 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.
James 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 ἐνεργουμένη (working), it is suggested to render, “A righteous man’s supplication is of great weight in its working.”
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.— James 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 which—though they stand in marked contrast—are 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. James’s 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 way—“By 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 Lord’s 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 sacramental—a help towards realising the action of Divine grace. Sight and feeling may be helps toward the apprehension of spiritual things. Compare our Lord’s 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 dedication—rubbing 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 sickness—certainly all Christian sickness—is sent, are to be reached.
SUGGESTIVE NOTES AND SERMON SKETCHES
James 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 man’s 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 East—and, for that matter, in the West too—as 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 man’s 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.
James 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 sincere—and a more anxious—interest in the state of the brother’s 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 man’s soul-condition was not manifest, for it must depend on what the condition of the man’s 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 another’s 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.