Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - James 5:14 - 5:14
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Jam_5:14. From the general κακοπαθεῖν a particular instance, that of sickness, is selected. ἀσθενεῖν ] = aegrotare, as in Mat_10:8, Luk_4:40, and many other passages; the opposite: ὑγιαίνειν .
By ἀσθενεῖ τις 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. προσκαλεσάσθω ] in the middle expresses only the reference to himself; not that the call is by others, which is here taken for granted.
τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους τῆς ἐκκλησίας ] the presbyters of the congregation, namely, to which the sick man belongs. It is arbitrary to explain τοὺς πρεσβυτέρους 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: καὶ προσευξάσθωσαν κ . τ . λ ., 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 Jam_5:15 teaches: ἡ εὐχὴ τ . πίστεως κ . τ . λ .” (Wiesinger); the anointing is the act accompanying the prayer. ἐπʼ αὐτόν ] is generally inaccurately explained as equivalent to pro eo, pro salute ejus; ἐπί with the accusative expresses figuratively the reference to something, similarly as the German über with the accusative; thus κλαίειν ἐπί τινα , 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 ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι ( τοῦ ) κυρίου , that is, in a believing and trustful mention of the name of Christ (less probably of God). That ἘΝ Τῷ ὈΝ . ΚΥΡ . 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 ΠΡΟΣΕΥΞΆΣΘΩΣΑΝ ; Schneckenburger with both verbs; it belongs only to ἈΛΕΊΨΑΝΤΕς (de Wette, Wiesinger). The question why the presbyters should do this is not to be answered, with Schneckenburger: quia ΤῸ ΧΆΡΙΣΜΑ ἸΑΜΆΤΩΝ (1Co_12:9) cum iis communicatum erat; for, on the one hand, it is an arbitrary supposition that the presbyters possessed that ΧΆΡΙΣΜΑ , 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.