"James 5:14-16a: What is the anointing for?"

Presbyterion 23/2 (1997): 79-91

mŒBamammamsBmaammMismmmmaBÊBmMBasmxmBÊÊÊÊBÊ^amBmaKamÊamÊam

JAMES 5:14-16a: What is the Anointing For?

C. John Collins*

14 ασθενεί τις èv ύµίν, προσκαλεσάσθω τους πρεσβυτέρους της

εκκλησίας, και προσευξάσθωσαν έπ' αυτόν άλείψαντες αυτόν

έλαίφ èv τφ ονόµατι του κυρίου.

15 καΐ ή ευχή της πίστεως σώσει τον κάµνοντα καΐ έγερεΐ

αυτόν ό κύριος� καν αµαρτίας f¡ πεποιηκώς, άφεθήσεται αύτφ.

16 έξοµολογεισθε οΐ/ν άλλήλοις τάς αµαρτίας και εΰχεσθε υπέρ

αλλήλων όπως ίαθήτε.1

14 Is2 anyone among you ill/weak? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing3 him with oil in the name of the Lord.

15 And the prayer of faith will save the sick person and the Lord will raise him up; and if he should be one who is guilty of having done sins,4 it will be forgiven him.

16 Therefore confess to one another the sins and pray for one another that you may be healed.

In this passage at the end of James virtually every word and phrase is involved in a tangle of questions.5 In order to discuss the purpose for

*Jack Collins holds a Ph.D. from the University of Liverpool and is Associate Professor of Old Testament at Covenant Theological Seminary.

aThe text of N�A^/UBS^ i s the basis for this discussion. 2This translation is intentionally literal. Its purpose is to allow examination

of the passage, and not to foreclose discussion of the many interpretive questions. 3Taking άλείψαντες as referring to action concurrent with προσευξάσθωσαν

(an adverbial participle following its finite verb): cf. Porter, 188; Goodwin�Gulick §1566h.

4This admittedly awkward English is an attempt to express the notion in McKay, "Perfect," 524: "it is the state of responsibility rather than the sinful act that is specified."

5Many of these questions, as expressed in commentaries (written in English or translated into English), are helpfully documented in Greenlee, 221�228 (it is

80 PRESBYTERION: COVENANT SEMINARY REVIEW 23/2

which James wanted the elders to anoint people, this paper w i l l consider such matters as: What kind of illness or weakness do ασθενεί

(14a) and τον κάµνοντα (15a) denote: spiritual, physical, or both; and if physical, how serious? What kind of anointing does άλείψαντες

(14b) denote: medicinal, ceremonial/sacramental, or aid�to�faith? What does it mean to do the action "in the name of the Lord" (14b): on behalf of the Lord, invoking his name, by his authority or power? What is the "prayer of faith" (15a): what kind of faith and who prays it? What is the referent of σώσει "save" and έγερει "raise up" (15a), and perhaps even ίαθήτε "that you be healed" (16a): is it physical or spiritual, or both? What is the relation of the Kâv-clause (15b, "and if...") to its context: does it express doubt whether the illness/weakness is due to the person's sins? What relation to vv. 14-15 is expressed by οΰν "therefore" (16a)? Who are the referents of the reciprocal pronouns άλλήλοις and αλλήλων "one another" in 16a? And what relationship does the ¿fira/r-clause (16a, "that...") have to its context?6

The fact that in many ways these questions are interlocking, w i t h the answer to one affecting the answers to the others, can seem to y ie ld a hopeless confusion; on the other hand, if we can arrive at clear answers to some, then by a "ripple effect" we might be confident of the

illuminating that none of his sources even remotely resemble the Roman Catholic "extreme unction" line). Shogren, 101-107, also deals with some of these matters, but does not seriously interact with some important interpretive issues, especially those relating to eschatological interpretations of "save" and "raise." Most of the English works listed in the bibliography here, though many list Meinertz and Pickar in their bibliographies, do not really interact with them. Only Brown, 195-197, considers the case against the standard "Protestant" interpretation; but his discussion is short and not conclusive. As an aside, it is interesting that, as controversial as this passage has become for us, a commentator such as Theophylact (PG, 125, §348) does little more than reproduce the text, and says nothing to the points that have become disputed (except to observe that the apostles used to anoint the sick with oil, perhaps a reference to Mark 6:13, although Theophylacf s wording, τούτο καί του κυρίου τοίς άνθρώποις

αναστρεφόµενου oí απόστολοι έποίουν άλείφοντες έλαίω τους άσθενοϋντας,

"this also, when the Lord was living with humans, the apostles used to do, anointing the sick with oil," reflects that of the James passage, not that of Mark [on which see next note]).

6We might also add, what is the relationship of this passage to what is apparently its only possible parallel in the NT, Mark 6:13, which describes part of the work of the twelve when Jesus sent them out (w. 7�13): καί δαιµόνια

πολλά έ(έβαλλον, καί ήλειφον έλαίω πολλούς άρρωστους καί έθεράπευον,

"and they were casting out many demons, and they were anointing many sick people with oil and healing [them]." Note that, apart from the use of αλείφω

έλαίω "to anoint with oil" in both Mark and James, there is little in common between the respective wordings (even if the subject matter be the same, which is open for investigation): e.g., Mark's word for "sick" is άρρωστος, while James uses άσθενέω and κάµνω; James makes no mention of demons or of "healing" as such.

JAMES 5:14�16a 81

others. This paper will begin by making some preliminary textlinguistic observations, i.e., by treating these verses as part of an act of communication that was intended to be intelligible to its first audience; and then proceed by observing how the ripple effect of these observations yields an understanding that coheres with vocabulary and content in the rest of the letter.

PRELIMINARY TEXTLINGUISTIC AND LITERARY OBSERVATIONS

We begin by assuming the author, James, wrote to communicate. There are indications of some relationship between James and his readers: e.g., "James a servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ" (1:1) assumes the readers know something about him; the frequent address αδελφοί

µου "my brothers" (sometimes αδελφοί µου αγαπητοί "my beloved brothers," 1:16, 19) indicates affection, while the consistent use of the imperative indicates an assumed role of authority on the part of the author. All this suggests that there was some level of shared knowledge and belief between the author and the recipients, such as known referents for 5:14�16a which would eliminate any ambiguity, which we can only infer. However, we can at least note this: James speaks in these verses with an air of confidence and assurance (e.g., 5:15 uses simple futures with no qualifications or hesitations about the results).7 This confidence is a big problem for the "physical healing" line of interpretation, and has led to efforts to "tone down these statements by saying that we must understand the unexpressed qualification that healing will only occur if it is the will of God" (Wilkinson, 337), or to exploring the possible reasons a healing might not be granted (such as lack of faith, lack of specificity in prayer, God's mysterious will, etc.).8 These reservations, though they express common sense, seem really out of step with James' own words, and suggest that an interpretation without such discordance is preferable i f it is linguistically and exegetically defensible.

7Cf. Davids, 194 (following the "physical healing" interpretation): "The promised result, which must have been normally the case...." Calvin, 355 (likewise a "physical" interpretation, albeit limited to the first century), noticed this confidence as well, since he said "nor is it probable that the oil was indiscriminately applied, but only when there was some hope of restoration."

8Cf. Shogren, 107�108 (among other things he notes that, since all die eventually, this cannot be absolute [if the passage is about physical healing]); Martin, 208 ("the reason why some people recover and others do not remains a mystery to faith").


The second textlinguistic observation is that w . 15�16a are to be taken as part of the same segment.9 This can be seen not only from the presence of the particle οΰν "therefore" (16a),10 and the definite article in τάς αµαρτίας (referring back to αµαρτίας in v. 15b, with the implication "such sins"),11 but also from the chiasmus that links v. 15 with 16a: εύχή...άµαρτίας...άµαρτίας...εΰχεσθε, "prayer...sins...sins ...pray."

What kind of link between w . 15 and 16a would be enough to take account of these phenomena? It seems that the loose link found in Davids, 195 ("James...generalizes, making the specific case of 5:14�15 into a general principle of preventive medicine"), is too weak:1 2 the data above suggest that v. 16a is an amplification of v. 15b. This then supports the view of Ropes, 309, that the reciprocal pronouns in v. 16a άλλήλοις and αλλήλων (usually translated "one another") are not fully symmetrical: "the confession is by the sick, the prayer by the well for the sick." My modification to this would be to see the confession as specifically to the elders, and the prayer of v. 16a as being by the elders for the sick person.13 To be sure, this view has its problems: how

9Contra Mußner, 225, who considers the connection a weak one and begins a new segment, w . 16-18, here.

I °Calvin, 357, who only rarely commented on textual matters, knew of the textual problem here, and thought that even if olrv were not expressed, it should be understood. Huther, 159, calls it "strongly attested." Modern commentators do not argue for its omission (cf. Greenlee, 226).

I I Note that this accords well with the discourse-oriented role of the article as discussed in Levinsohn, 97; Porter, 106: the new information (i.e., not recoverable from the preceding discourse) tends to be anarthrous (hence we have αµαρτίας "sins" in v. 15b), while the topic or old information, which the writer considers known to the reader, tends to be arthrous (hence τάς αµαρτίας "the [afore�mentionedj sins" in v. 16a). This is superior therefore to such interpretations as Cantinat, 252, "confess (your) sins."

1 Supported by Martin, 211; similarly Vouga, 143. Cf. also Shogren, 107, for another weak connection: "James is moving to the daily life of the congregatila..: if all Christians were to be admitting their sins to one another and praying for each other, the ultimate remedy of summoning the elders might be averted." Of course this depends on his "physical healing" interpretation for the passage as a whole; but it suffers from imported assumptions (why is calling the elders an "ultimate remedy," and why should it be "averted"?) and the fact that this is not the actual connection that James is making in his text.

13Ropes did not think that άλλήλοις was "necessarily restricted to the presbyters," but did not elaborate. According to Huther, 159, this interpretation has the support of "Chrysostom (De Sacerd., i., iii.) and several ancient and other expositors," including Pott, who paraphrased the Greek: ύµεΐς άσθενοϋντες

έξοµολογείσθε τοις πρεσβυτέροις τά παραπτώµατα ύµων καί ύµεΐς

πρεσβύτεροι εϋχεσθε υπέρ των άσθενούντων, "you who are sick, confess your transgressions to the elders, and you elders pray for the sick"; however, Huther's citation is not clear enough to track down these references.

JAMES 5:14�16a 83

can the reciprocal pronoun, whose normal usage is for symmetrical action (i.e., do thus to one another) have such a meaning?14

In answer I will propose a principle for the reference of the reciprocal pronoun in the NT: its dominant use is for situations of symmetric reciprocity (e.g., 1 John 4:7 άγαπώµεν αλλήλους "let us love one another"); but there are occasions when full symmetry is not required or even allowed by the logic of the referent. For example, consider Acts 19:38 έγκαταλείτωσαν άλλήλοις "let them accuse one another," where, as Lumby, 348, points out, "of course the accusation would be on one side, the defence the other." Consider also Matt 24:10 αλλήλους παραδώσουσιν καί µισήσουσιν αλλήλους "they will hand one another over and hate one another," which is not necessarily strictly mutual.1 5 In view of the connection between w . 14�15 and v. 16a, as established above, then, it becomes possible to claim that James 5:16a is an occasion in which the logic of the referent excludes full symmetry.

In light of this we are in a position to say something about the aspects of the various imperatives in this segment. The pattern is v. 13 ψαλλέτω "let him be singing"...14 προσκαλεσάσθω "let him call"...και

προσευξάσθωσαν "and let them pray"...16 έξοµολογείσθε "be confessing"...καί εΰχεσθε "and be praying." Cantinat, 247 (cf. McKay, New Syntax, 80), explains the change from the imperfective aspect in v. 13 to the aorist in v. 14 as indicating the transition from a general instruction to a more specific situation.16 But what shall we make of

1 4 Cf. Huther, 159, who says "άλλήλοις can only be referred to the relation of individual believers to each other"; cf. also Davids, 195, who writes of "the problem of having to find parts for the sick person and the elders in the verse." According to Greenlee's summary, 227, most commentators agree with Huther (but it does not appear that anyone besides Cantinat, 253�254, discusses the matter, and Cantinat does not treat it grammatically). English commentators go on to consider what common sense limitations should be put on "mutual confession" (again, such qualifications do not appear on the surface of James' actual speech act). Those who appeal to the Didache (4:14; 14:1) as evidence for "mutual confession" in the early church overlook the fact that in it the confession (έξοµολογέω) of transgressions (παραπτώµατα) is a liturgical act.

1 5 Another example is Eph 5:21 (which in view of 5:22�25; 6:1,5; cf. Col 3:18, 20, 22; 1 Pet 2:18; 3:1, is not symmetrical); cf. Piper and Grudem, 493�494 n.6, which is an editor's note discussing this passage along these lines. They add Rev 6:4; Gal 6:2; 1 Cor 11:33; and Luke 12:1 (correction to the text which reads 21:1) as further examples where the word is not "exhaustively reciprocal." (We might add Rom 14:13 µηκέτι obv αλλήλους κρίνωµεν, "let us no longer be judging one another," to their list, since Paul distinguishes the actions of the "weak" who "judge" [κρίνω] from those of the "strong" who "despise" [έξουθενέω], cf. w. 3, 10; and hence in v. 13 the "judging" is not fully symmetric.)

16This is preferable by far to the over�interpretation of the aspects found in Wilkinson, 328, "James changes the tense from the present imperative to the aorist imperative which implies that the action is to be done immediately and on one


the imperfective imperatives in v. 16a? Wilkinson, 329, argues t h a t since the imperatives here are again imperfective, James is "implying that both confession and prayer should be the usual activities in the circumstances of sickness." But this misrepresents the force of the aspect. As McKay has argued, the interpretation of the aspect of an imperative depends on its context;17 hence the relation of w . 15�16a described above provides a context in the light of which we should interpret these imperfective imperatives. Thus it is better to take the imperfective imperatives in v. 16a as depicting the confession and prayer as a process which is to take place some time during the visit of the elders.18

THE "RIPPLE EFFECT"

(a) "The prayer of faith"

In view of the observations above, we are in a position to address the interpretation of ή ευχή της πίστεως "the prayer of faith" (15a). It is commonly assumed, in view of v. 14b "let them [= elders] pray,"1 9 t h a t the prayer is offered by the elders, and the faith is the confidence either that God will hear the prayer or that the sick person will be healed.2 0

Several factors are against this interpretation, however. First, just what is "faith" in James? Quite simply, it is reverent trust and commitment toward God that leads to obedience.21 In context this kind

occasion only." Suffice it to say that recent work on aspect has made such an interpretation insupportable.

17See McKay, "Aspect in Imperatival Constructions," 207, 209; cf. 211: "there are many contexts in which the choice of aspect is either purely subjective or depends on contextual factors beyond our knowledge."

1 8It is also possible that the verbs έξοµολογέω and όµολογέω simply prefer to use imperfective aspect when they describe the confession of sins: cf. Matt 3:6; Mark 1:5; Acts 19:18; Dan 9:20 (participles); and 1 John 1:9 (subjunctive). A possible counter�example would be Sir 4:26 µή αίσχυνθης όµολογήσαι έφ'

άµαρτίαις σου, "do not be ashamed to confess concerning your sins"; and although this does not have exactly the same syntax ("sins" is not in the accusative), it is sufficient to qualify the generalization to a tendency only.

19Note that v. 16a εΰχεσθε "pray!" as discussed above also can support this. 20Cf. Greenlee, 224, for the views of English commentators; Johnson, 344;

Shogren, 107; Cantinat, 251; Calvin, 356; apparently also Wilkinson, 329. Pickar, who argues the Roman Catholic position, says (170), "By 'the prayer of faith' is understood the form of prayer which the priest pronounces over the sick man."

2 1 Cf. 1:3 where endurance under temptation proves its worth (cf. v. 12); 1:6 and 2:1, 5 where it is contrasted with διακρίνοµαι (1:6; 2:4, which denotes wavering loyalty to Christ and his people, cf. 3:17 αδιάκριτος); 2:14�26 where it proves itself and is completed by works of obedience (w. 17,22, 26 show that the "faith" of w. 14�15, which is mere verbal profession, is not the full�blown kind).

JAMES 5:14�16a 85

of trust is exercised by the sick person: he has obeyed the imperatives of v. 14 in calling for the elders, and confesses his sins in v. 16a, and has them forgiven. Normally a person receives a benefit based on his own exercise of faith, not others'.2 2 Further, in 2:14 James speaks of faith "saving" someone (σφζω), and this prayer of faith is said to "save" the patient. But this leads us to the next issue.

(b) "Save, raise up"

In interpreting the word σώσει "will save" in v. 15a, it is striking t h a t Protestant commentators (and some Catholic, too) consistently take i t as "heal." Wilkinson, 338, is typical of this approach when he says "this name [= extreme unction] has no warrant in this passage which speaks of anointing the sick in anticipation of healing, not of the dying in anticipation of death." 2 3 However, this statement overlooks some important data: first, the fact that James uses this verb four other times in his letter (1:21; 2:14; 4:12; 5:20), and each of those times it refers to entry into eschatological salvation by those who continue in faith and obedience (the "not yet" aspect of salvation). Should we suppose it means otherwise here? Second, as Meinertz, 31, points out, although in the narratives of the Gospels (and Acts) we find the sense "restore to health" for σφζω, we never find that sense in the epistles.24 Finally, in the near context of this verse we read of the person having sins forgiven (v. 15b), which is certainly an aspect of eschatological salvation. Hence it will not do to assume that physical healing is in view. In fact, James 2:14, which speaks of faith "saving" someone, is a close parallel to this text, if we take the prayer of faith as described in (a) above.

22At least in James: cf. 1:5�7; 4:3; 5:16b�18. 23Cf. his comment on σφζω, 334; Shogren, 104; Martin, 210; Condon, 39�41;

etc. Johnson, 332�333, who seems to follow this line, does not want to leave out the notion of "restoration to spiritual health." Many authors (e.g., Mayor, 168) surprisingly have no critical discussion of the issue. Mußner, 223 n.3, has a long list of European language commentators who have taken this line (Bisping, Schegg, Belser, Spitta, Ropes, Bardenhewer, Schlatter, Chaîne, Dibelius, Hauck, Marty, Michl, Garcia ab Orbiso, Schneider), and a very short list of those who take any other (Meinertz and Reuss who find a spiritual restoration here, and Trenkle, von Soden, and Grillmeyer who find an eschatological salvation denoted).

24Note that BAGD list Matt 9:21, 22; Mark 5:23, 28, 34; 6:56; 10:52; Luke 8:36,48, 50; 17:19; 18:42; Acts 4:9; 14:9 from the narrative books, and only James 5:15 from the letters. Meinertz also points out that often the passages which use σφζω (and cognates) in the sense "to rescue from trouble" (e.g., Jude 5; 1 Pet 3:20; Heb 11:7) use it as a type of eschatological salvation. One could of course argue that Meinertz' observation loses some force in view of the connections between James and the Gospels (cf. Jas 5:12 with Matt 5:33�37); hence it is less compelling of itself than the data from James'own usage. We should note as well, that "save from disease" is not the only sense of σφζω found in the Gospels (cf. BAGD, s.v. σφζω, 2). Hence we must rely on the referential context.


The situation is similar with εγείρει "he will raise." Davids, 194, compares the narrative passages (Mark 1:31; 2:9�12; 9:27; Matt 9:5�7; Acts 3:7; Josephus, Antiq. 19:294), where a healed person is "raised up," and concludes "εγείρω thus indicates that σώζω [sic] does mean physically heal/'25 However, this suffers from difficulties, in the arenas of both semantics and practicality. Semantically, we should note that in the narrative passages εγείρω refers to the physical action of making the healed person stand up; the healing itself is described by other words in the same context (e.g., Acts 3:7 "his feet and his ankles were strengthened"; Mark 1:31 "the fever left her"); similarly, in Matt 9:6 Jesus tells the paralytic to "rise." The physical action of standing up is perhaps simultaneous with the healing, but it is not the same thing: hence the BAGD gloss "raise up = restore to health" is not strictly correct. The practical difficulty has already appeared above: "It certainly cannot reasonably be supposed that St. James was himself convinced and taught that every anointed Christian would experience only physical relief from his affliction or a bodily cure" (Pickar, 172�173). Finally, we note with Meinertz, 32, that the epistles lack any usage of εγείρω referring to physical restoration parallel to that in the narrative accounts. If we allow σφζω and εγείρω to illuminate each other, it appears that an eschatological reference to the resurrection to everlasting bliss is not out of place here; and this will be even clearer below in the discussion of ασθενεί and κάµνοντα (w. 14a, 15a).

The reference of ίάοµαι in v. 16a is not entirely clear: in the context of the sickness, a physical understanding of "be healed" seems straightforward, but since this word can be used for "spiritual" healing, some discussion is in order. The "spiritual" healing nuance appears in citations from Isa 6:10 (Matt 13:15; John 12:40; Acts 28:27); 53:5 (1 Pet 2:25); and 61:1 (Luke 4:18).26 The statement of Martin, 211 (cf. Davids, 195), that this word refers to physical healing except when it is in a quotation from the OT is not particularly helpful: it is only another way of saying that context helps decide which nuance a word has. It is more helpful to ask what is the meaning of the ¿toys -clause in which

25Similarly Mayor, 168; Ropes, 308; Huther, 158; Mußner, 222-223; Martin, 210; Wilkinson, 334. Shogren, 104-105, takes this line, but because of Ιάοµαι in v. 16a; Johnson, 333, cites the narrative passages, but notes the use of εγείρω, which is also used of the resurrection of Jesus and of believers, and hence sees an ambivalence here: "the Lord is able to 'raise him up' from sickness,...and is able to 'raise him up by resurrection' even if he should die" (cf. Vouga, 142; Cantinat, 251�252, for similar conclusions). John, a contemporary Roman Catholic author who follows the "physical healing" interpretation, supposes the author deliberately used ambiguous language to cover those occasions when a physical healing would not be granted (59).

26Meinertz, 32, includes Heb 12:13, but there it is part of an overall figure and does not belong in this list.

JAMES 5:14�16a 87

the verb appears. It is most likely the content of the prayer, rather than the purpose or outcome of either the prayer or the confession.27

Taken this way, the prayer for physical healing (which does seem the dominant usage of the word) is not out of harmony with the overall interpretation toward which this discussion is progressing.28

(c) "Sick/weak"

Although the majority of writers take the words ασθενεί and τον

κάµνοντα (w. 14a, 15a) as referring to physical sickness, there is an important minority who think James is describing spiritual weakness or illness here.2 9 Several factors, however, show that physical sickness is in view here. First, as a matter of lexicography, the common meaning of άσθενέω is "to be (physically) weak or sick";30 and though κάµνω

means something like "to be weary," there are sufficient examples of its use to speak of physical sickness.31 Hence these two words together favor the physical sickness interpretation.

Further, when one considers the question of how serious an illness is described, this becomes inescapable. The instruction in v. 14a to call the elders "suggests that he or she is confined to the sickbed and is too ill to go to the elders" (Martin, 206; cf. Cantinat, 247; Pickar, 168). The word άσθενέω may refer to serious and life�threatening illness (e.g., Phil 2:26�27; John 4:46�47; ll:2�6),32 and it very likely does so here in view of the use of κάµνω to refer to being terminally ill, or even to die (e.g., Wisd 4:16; 15:9). Hence this sickbed is considered as potentially near to being the deathbed.

(d) The/(-¿^clause The use of καν (= καί έάν) with the subjunctive does not comment on the likelihood of the condition: instead it is "normal whenever the reference is to the future" (Zerwick, §322). The periphrastic perfect

27As in NJB "pray for one another to be cured." Cf. BAGD, δπως 2b (577a), where after verbs of asking and praying it introduces an object clause (and BAGD list James 5:16 there). For other views cf. Greenlee, 227�228.

2 8 Interestingly Aquinas, ST, Supplement, Q. 30, A. 2, says, ex hoc sacramento

non sequitur corporalis sanatio semper, sed quando exyedit ad spiritualem

sanationem, "from this sacrament a bodily healing does not always follow, but only when it provides for the spiritual healing."

29Cf. Greenlee, 221, 224�225. Another advocate of the spiritual sickness interpretation is Hayden. BAGD list our verses under physical sickness.

30Cf. LSJ, 256a; Moulton�Milligan, 84b�85a. 3 1 Cf. BAGD, κάµνω 2, 3 (402a); LSJ, 872b�873a; Moulton�Milligan, 320a. 32Cf. Pickar, 166�167, where he gives as other examples Matt 10:8; Mark

6:56; Luke 4:40; 7:10; Acts 9:37, and indicates that there are others. Of course, "life�threatening" is not part of its own semantic contribution; it is an inference from the context.


participle fj πεποιηκώς expresses, as in the translation above, " the state of responsibility rather than the sinful act" (McKay, "Perfect," 524). On this interpretation, then, it becomes unnecessary to ask whether James thought, or merely allowed the possibility, that the sickness was due to some sin. Rather, the seriousness of the illness may possibly bring to mind sins not previously dealt with.

(e) Why the anointing with oil?

The answer to this question depends on the answers to the other questions. Those who take a "healing" interpretation discuss whether the oil is used medicinally, as a psychological boost for the sick man, or as a symbol or sacrament communicating God's favor. Roman Catholics consider the oil to be the material element in the Sacrament of Extreme Unction (today called the Anointing of the Sick).33

We notice first that James does not specify the meaning of the anointing with oil, and this likely indicates that it was common ground between author and audience. This then will be a shared referent whose nature we can only infer, as mentioned above. Aquinas suggested that "spiritual healing is signified by the anointing of oil," taking the medicinal use of Isa 1:6 as his example,34 This is attractive, but αλείφω

does not appear in the Greek version of Isaiah. The evidence we have (the use of αλείφω to denote anointing with oil in LXX and NT) suggests that anointing is associated with consecration to God (Gen 31:13; Exod 40:15; Num 3:3), and with gladness in contrast to mourning (for the dead: 2 Sam 12:20; 14:2; with fasting: Dan 10:3; Matt 6:17). Either of these could be taken as an appropriate realm for the anointing; perhaps in view of the (possibly) impending death of the sick person, we may take the oil as a concrete expression of the expectation of eschatological joy in contrast to the mourning of those who die without hope (cf. 1 Thess 4:13�14).35

33Compare Council of Trent, session 14, De sacramento extremae unctionis,

with Vatican Π, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, §§73�75, which advocates the shift in terminology. According to Vorgrimler et al., 163, the changes reflect the ascendance of the "physical healing" interpretation (an interpretation which the Irish Catholic Condon argues for, and for which he cites historical support at 33 n.l,41n.l).

34

ST, Supplement Q. 29, A. 4: spiritualis sanatio per olei inunctionem

significatur. 35The question of whether this is a "sacrament" depends on one's definition

of sacrament, which of course is not a strictly exegetical matter. Since in my theology a sacrament is a covenant ceremony with an analogue in the OT, which is normally administered in public worship, this ceremony would not be a "sacrament" as such. The sacramental position of Pickar is tied to his argument that the "elders" are "persons who performed the sacred ministry or priests," and hence that several priests were necessary to administer the rite (168). This overlooks the situation of the early church in which the elders included more than

JAMES 5:14-16a 89

SUMMARY INTERPRETATION I readily acknowledge that each one of the exegetical decisions above has its difficulties. Indeed, taken singly, not all of them are secure. However, we do not take them singly: we read a passage as a coherent whole. The argument here is that the coherent reading developed above deals more satisfactorily with the textual details as a whole than the other interpretations examined.

It would hardly be surprising if a believer who fears him or herself to be near death would be concerned to make a good end; and that one on whose conscience unconfessed sins lie, would be zealous to get unburdened. This is what James has spoken to. He tells those who are dangerously ill to call the elders of their church to pray for them: for recovery if God should will it, but more importantly for their preparation for the world to come (which every one must face sooner or later). The anointing by the elders is expressive of God's promises of eschatological life, since it is in the name of the Lord, i.e., they act on his authority; and in the elders' presence the sick person should pray in faith, which includes the confession of sins and submission to the will of God. This person may then be confident of his or her joyful entry into the world to come.

James' concern throughout the book is strongly eschatological.36 In view of the overall NT teaching on the work of the leadership of the church, one might ask: what better work could there be for the elders/shepherds of the church than to see their charges safely into the next life?37

those who exercised the ministry of "word and sacrament," but were concerned more generally with the leadership and pastoral care of the congregations. Further, as argued above, it is the sick person, not the elders, who prays the "prayer of faith."

36Cf. 1:12, 21; 2:5, 12-14; 3:1, 18; 4:12; 5:1-11, 20 for James' strong eschatological interest.

37Besides the verses in James, cf. 1 Thess 2:19-20; 3:13; Col 1:28; Phil 2:16; 1 Tim 4:16; Heb 13:17; 1 Pet 5:1-4; etc.


BIBLIOGRAPHY Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Rome: Marietti, 1948. Brown, Colin. That You May Believe: Miracles and Faith Then and

Now. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985. Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles. 1885 English

Translation. Reprint, Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979 (originally 1551). Cantinat, Jean. Les Épures de Saint Jacques et de Saint Jude. Sources

Bibliques. Paris: Gabalda, 1973. Condon, Kevin. "The Sacrament of Healing (Jas. 5:14-15)." Scripture 11

(April 1959): 33-42. Davids, Peter H. James. New International Greek Testament

Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982. Dibelius, Martin. A Commentary on the Epistle of James. Revised by

H. Greeven. Translated by M. A. Williams. Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1975 (German, 1964).

Goodwin, William W. and Charles B. Gulick. Greek Grammar. Boston: Ginn and Co., 1930.

Greenlee, J. Harold. An Exegetical Summary of James. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1993.

Hayden, Daniel R. "Calling the Elders to Pray." Bibliotheca Sacra 138 (1981): 258-266.

Huther, J. E. Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the General Epistles. Meyer's Commentary. New York: Funk and Wagnalls, 1887 (German original, 1870).

John, Jeffrey. "Anointing in the New Testament." In The Oil of Gladness: Anointing in the Christian Tradition, edited by Martin Dudley and Geoffrey Rowell. London: SPCK, 1993.

Johnson, Luke Timothy. The Letter of James. Anchor Bible. New York: Doubleday, 1995.

Johnston, Wendell G. "Does James Give Believers a Pattern for Dealing with Sickness and Healing?" In Integrity of Heart, Shillfulness of Hands, edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994.

Levinsohn, Stephen H. Discourse Features of New Testament Greek. Dallas: Summer Institute of Linguistics, 1992.

Lumby, J. Rawson. The Acts of the Apostles. Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges. Cambridge: University Press, 1937.

Martin, Ralph P. James. Word Biblical Commentary. Waco: Word, 1988.

Mayor, Joseph B. The Epistle of St. James. London: Macmillan, 1897. McKay, K. L. "On the Perfect and Other Aspects in New Testament

Greek." Novum Testamentum 23 (1981): 289-329.

JAMES 5:14-16a 91

. "Aspect in Imperatival Constructions in New Testament Greek." Novum Testamentum 27 (1985): 201-226.

. A New Syntax of the Verb in New Testament Greek: An Aspectual Approach. New York: Peter Lang, 1994.

Meinertz, Max. "Die Krankensalbung Jak 5, 14f." Biblische Zeitschrift 20 (1932): 23-36.

Moo, Douglas J. James. Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985.

Moulton, J. H. and G. Milligan. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949.

Mußner, Franz. Der Jakobusbrief. Herders Theologischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament. Freiburg: Herders, 1981.

Pickar, Charles. "Is anyone sick among you?" Catholic Biblical Quarterly 7 (1945): 165-174.

Piper, John and Wayne Grudem, eds. Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1991.

Porter, Stanley E. Idioms of the Greek New Testament. Biblical Languages: Greek, no. 2. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994.

Ropes, James H. The Epistle of St. James. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: Τ & Τ Clark, 1916.

Shogren, Gary. "Will God Heal Us � A Re�examination of James 5:14�16a." Evangelical Quarterly 61 (1989): 99�108.

Vorgrimler, Herbert, et al. Commentary on the Documents of Vatican

II. Vol.1. New York: Herder and Herder, 1967. Vouga, François. L'tpitre de Saint Jacques. Commentaire du Nouveau

Testament. Geneva: Labor et Fides, 1984. Wilkinson, John. "Healing in the Epistle of James." Scottish Journal of

Theology 24 (1971): 326-345. Zerwick, Maximilian. Biblical Greek Illustrated by Examples. Rome:

Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1990.