Is the Anointing of the sick with oil (James 5:14-16) to be taken literally?

by Pastor Terry L. Reese

 

“Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer offered in faith will restore the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up, and if he has committed sins, they will be forgiven him. Therefore, confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another so that you may be healed. The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much.”

  

The Anointing of the sick with oil is a practice or form which the Lord has given us with regard to the physical healing and comfort of the seriously ill Christian Believer.

 

Ignored or spiritualized away by much of Christendom, and distorted by both Romish circles (into the sacrament of Extreme Unction; a spiritual preparation for death), as well as Charismatic “faith-healers” (who hold to the modern continuance of the Apostolic sign-gift of miraculous healing), the correct (though strangely, minority) view, taught by the historic Brethren Church, should be quite readily apparent and self-authenticating from a plain, simple, and direct reading of the text.

 

With this latter presumption in mind, in analyzing the above verses in question, allow us to make a series of observations concerning the practice:

 

1.    The passage directly speaks of physical healing, and cannot simply be relegated to the realm of the spiritual—although vv. 15-16 certainly addresses the spiritual condition of the distressed party with regard to the confession of sin (without inferring, of course, that every illness is necessarily the result of personal sin).

2.    The practice is designed exclusively for Christians (“Is anyone among you sick?”). James is clearly writing unto those whom he regards as regenerate fellow-believers (James 1:18: “In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures”), and “Brethren” (1:2, 16, 19; 2:1).

3.    Healing, if God so wills it, comes from Him in response to the prayers of the faithful—not because of any inherent graces or magic within the oil itself, or within the formula of the rite. Nor does healing arise from a modern day expression or revival of the ancient Apostolic sign-gift of healing, which was uniquely bestowed upon the early Apostolic Community in order to validate its foundational role (Eph. 2:20, II Cor. 12:12), and which ceased with the completion of the NT Canon (I Cor. 13:10).

4.    The nature of the illness that is to be reserved for the practice of the rite is to be deemed serious, as opposed to trivial. “Afflicted” in v. 13 (kakopatheō) refers to a condition of suffering, whilst “sick” in v. 14 (astheneō) carries with it the connotations of weakness and powerlessness. The “sick” of v. 15 (kamnō--the faint, the sickened, the wearied) require the need of being raised up (egeirō). Thus, the modern-style “healings” associated with modern faith healers—often imaginary ailments in nature, involving tightly screened candidates—will be eliminated from consideration. When real healing takes place, something which will be recognized as the Lord’s work will occur, involving a real illness.

5.    The sick one shall ultimately call for the elders of his/her own initiative (“…Then he must call for the elders…”). Likewise, a plurality of elders is spoken of. Both of these principles are inconsistent with the practices of modern “faith-healers,” and thus ensure that God—not man—will receive the proper credit for any healing that may take place.

6.    These elders are not traveling Elmer Gantrys or snake-oil salesmen, but rather, they are presumably respected local elders who are, in all probability, known unto the sick one and the community, and who meet the Scriptural qualifications of I Tim. 3:1-8 and Titus 1:5-9. Of course, as local elders, it naturally follows that they are men—in opposition to the practice of many modern day “healers” (e.g., Katherine Kuhlman).

7.    Following the aforesaid confession of sin, the individual is to be anointed with oil, which, Scripturally, is emblematic of the Holy Spirit (Lev. 8:10-12, Matt. 25:3, 8), the one who indwells the body (John 14:16-20, James 4:5) and who convicts the world of sin (John 16:8-11). The Holy Spirit is also the believer’s Comforter (John 14:16, 15:26, 16:7), and it is He who performs uniquely Divine labors, as Creator (Gen. 1:2), Redeemer (e.g., His regenerative work; John 3:5-8), and Sustainer (Ps. 104:30). The oil is but a symbol, pointing to the Spirit. It should by no means regarded as the causative agent of an individual’s healing. The emphasis which follows is upon the prayer, offered in faith, as opposed to the oil.

8.    The prayer of faith follows, wrought by the Spirit Himself (Phil. 2:13) and offered by the elders in faith and trust (1 John 5:14) in the goodness and wisdom of God, and in the true spirit of worship and devotion, in acceptance of the sovereign will of God.

9.    It is not always the will of the Lord to heal, as II Cor. 12:7-10 makes clear. Through sufferings, saints are both refined (I Peter 2:20-21) and chastened as sons (Heb. 12:8). Eventually, of course, as Phil. 1:23 observes, for every man it comes time to “depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better…”

10. The Lord is the ultimate and final source of all healing, and if it is indeed in accordance with His sovereign will to heal, He is free to employ whatever means He sees fit—including the ordinary medical arts. God can heal directly, instantly, and supernaturally if He so chooses, or, if it pleases Him, may heal over a certain period of time, using any providential means which are in harmony with His particular desires.