3. The use of anointing in religious ceremony was very varied. It was applied both to persons — as, e.q., to the kings and high priests — and to in- animate things. This is not the place to investi- gate the original signification of the act of anoint- ing in religious ceremonies (see liobertson Smith, Rd. Se7)i.-\ 1894, pp. 233, 383 ; EEE, HDB, SDB, EBi, art. 'Anointing'), but it seems clear that it came to signify the consecration of persons and things to the service of God, and also the com- munication to, e.g., the kings, of the Divine Spirit (see E. Kautzsch, in HDB v. 659). That is to say, anointing liad in part the nature of a sacrament. And it seems probable tliat something of this sort underlies the passages Mk 6'^, Ja 5'"*. The anoint- ing oil was not merely medicinal, but consecrated the patient to God, and, together with prayer, was the means of conveying to him the Divine healing life. We may compare a passage in the Secrets of Enoch (22'*), where Enoch, when carried into the presence of God, is anointed with holy oil, with the result (56'^) that he needs no food, and is purged from earthly passions.
4. Instances of the metaphorical use of anoint- ing to signify the communication of the Divine Spirit are to be found in 1 Jn 2-'''- -' 'ye have an anointing from the Holy One,' ' his anointing reacheth you all things.' 'Anointing' here means the material, not the act, of anointing, and so the grace of the Holy Spirit. The same metaphorical !ise is found in 2 Co l'^^ ' He that hath anointed us is God' ; and in the passages in which Ciirist is spoken of as having been anointed, Ac 4-' lu^**, lie 1" (OT quot.). A passage in the recently dis- covered Odes of Solomon (36^), ' He hath anointed aie from his own perfection,' may be referred to liere. It is uncertain whether the speaker is Christ or the Christian. Allusions to a custom of anoint-
ing dead bodies are found in Mk 14^ and the parallels, and in Mk 16'.
Lastly, reference should be made to the absten- tion from anomting by the Essenes (Jos. BJ II. viii. 3). This is explained by Schiirer (HJP li. ii. 212) as a part of an attempt to return to the simplicity of nature ; by Bousset (Bel. des Jud."^, Berlin, 1906, p. 442) as a protest against the priest- hood, whose authority rested upon anointing.
LiTERATiTRB. — See the artt. 'Anointing' in ERE, HDB, and EBi ; and, for the development of the doctrine of Extreme Unction in the Church, J. B. Mayor on Ja oi'* (Ep. of :St, Jameni, 1910); see also ExpT xvii. [190G] 418 S., and the literature there cited. WiLLOUGHBY C. ALLEN.
ANSWER. — Passing over the very large number of occurrences of this word in the common sense of * reply ' (a-n-oKplvofiai, awSKpccns), there are one or two interesting usages to note before we come to the most theologically significant use of the term. Thus in Tit 2" slaves are enjoined not to 'answer again' (AV ; RV 'gainsay,' duTtXeyu) ; in Gal 4^' ' this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and anstver- eth to (i.e. ' corresjionds with,' cri;crroixew) the Jeru- salem that now is' ; in Ro 11* St. Paul, discussing the despair of Elijah, asks ' What saitli the answer (Xpv/^O'Ti-ci^^^i ' Divine oracle') of God unto him ?'
The passages with which we are most concerned, however, are those which speak of tiie Christian answer or 'defence' (so usually in RV) against critics from within or without the Church (dTro- Xoyiofxai, diroXoyia). In the life of St. Paul we have, e.g., his 'answer' or apologia before Felix (Ac24'''^*), before Festus (25^^-), and before Agrippa (26'*^). The charges brought against him were that he had incited the people to sedition (24^ 25**), that he had profaned the Temple (24**), and that he was a ring- leader of the Sect of the Nazarenes (24^). His defence was skilfully directed in each case to the rebutting of the charges, to the conciliation of his judges, and to the demand that as a Roman citizen he should be tried before Ca?sar. Before Agrippa and Festus he defended himself so successfully that they agreed that, if he had not appealed to Ctesar, he migTit have been set at liberty, but having made the appeal he could no longer withdraw. In 2 Ti 4'^ St. Paul is represented as complaining that at iiis 'first answer' (before Caesar) no man took his part, but that ' all men forsook him ' (cf. V^). With these instances may be compared the remarkable ' answer ' of St. Stephen before the Sanhedrin (Ac 7).
Of probably even greater interest than these defences before civil tribunals are St. Paul's answers to those who denietl his Apostleship, the Judaizers who followed him from place to place and attempted to undermine his teaching and influence among his converts in his absence — a fact to which we largely owe the letters to the Galatians and the Corinthians, or at least the most characteristic and polemical portions of then). The same or otlier enemies charged him with inconsistency (1 Co lO'-''^' etc.), and brought other charges against him (IP-*-", 1 Co 9'-), such as the charge of being mean in appearance (lU^"'"), of being rude of speech (11"), of being a visionary (12^), and of other things not mentioned, which evidently inspired certain obscure references throughout these chapters. St. Paul's apologia meets these charges with a vehement assertion of his innocence, of his full Apostleship, of his com- ])etency to utter forth the gospel from fullness of knowledge (11''), and of his abundant suii'crings and self-denial for the sake of his converts. The large space given to these apologice and j)ersonal re- joinders is remote from our modern habit of mind, but it should be borne in mind that every educated man in these days was expected by the Greeks to be reatly to take free part in polemics