The Pulpit Commentary — James — Section 77

'I'crtullian, 'Ad Scopulom,'o. iv. (see Oehler's grievous error the practice of waitin~ to notes on the )lRBsa.ge). But in the cnse be- anoint the sick" until all hope of recovery fore us if, oe m these other instances, the oil being now lost, life begins to ebb, anri Lh0 wos used as o.n octual remedy, (I) why was sick person to sink into lifeless insensibility." it lo be o.dminist.ered by the elders? 0.nd (2) In spite of this, however, the common practice why is the healing immedia.tely afterwards in the Roman Catholic Church at the present nttributed to "the pra.ycr of faith"? These day appears to be to administer the rite only questions woul,I soom to suggest that oil was to persons in eztremis. Turning now to the •·njoined by St. Jo.mes rather o.e an outward Eastern Church, we notice that a rit~ of symbol than o.s an actual remedy. A further unction has been continued there up till Ihe question remains to which a few lines must present time. The service, which is a enme- Le devoted. Is the aposUe prescribing a what lengthy one, may be seen in Daniel's rite for all times? On the one hand, we are 'Cudex Liturgicus,' bk. iv. c. v.; and cf. told tho.t the use of oil was connected with Neo.le's 'Holy Eastern Clrnrch,' Introd., the miro.culous powers of healing, and there- vol. ii. p. 1035, where it is noted that it fore ceased "when those powers ceased" differs from the Western use in tl1ree points: (cf. Bishop Browne on the Articles, p. 589). (1) the oil is not previously consecrated by On the other hand, the po.sso.ge is appealed the bishop, but at the time by seven priE,sta; to as wa.rranting the Roman Catholic sacra- (2) the unction is not conferred only in eZ• ment of extreme unction. With rega.rd to tremis, but in slighter illness, and if possibli, the pra.ctice of the early Church, there is a in the church; (3) it is not usually consi- constant stream of testimony to the use of dered valid unless at least three priests are oil for purpoBeB of healing; e.g. the case in present to officiate. It ho.s been thought Tertulli1rn already quoted, and many others well to give this slight historical sketch, as in the fourth and fifth centuries (see 'Dic- affording the best answer to the claims of tionary of Christia.n Antiquities,' pp. 1455, Roma.nists by showing how they have gradu- 2004, 2013). But (1) as originally practised ally departed from the primitive custom and it was administered by laymen and even by changed the character of the rite. But women. (2) After the blessing of the oil was the sketch will also have shown that it is restricted to bishops it was still regarded as scarcely accurate to imply that unction ceased immaterial by whom the unction was per- when the miraculous powers ceased. At formed. So Ps.-Innocent, • Ep. ad Decent.,' the Reformation, when the Englisa Church § 8, "Being made by the bishop, it is lawful wisely rejected the medi::eval service for ex- not for priests only, but for all Christians, to treme unction, she yet retained in the first use it in anointing in their own need or in English Prayer-book a simple form of tha.t of their friends." (3) Not till the middle unction, to be used "if the sick person of the ninth century do we meet with any desire it," consbtiug of(l)anointing, "npon express injunction to the priest to perform the forehead or breast only,'' with the sign the nnction himself. ( 4) "The restraint of of the cross; and (2) prayer for the inward the unction to the priest had momentous anointing of the soul with the Holy Ghost, consequences. The original intention of it and for restoration of boJily health aDLl in relation to healing of the body was prac- strength. Thus the service was entirely tically forgotten, e.nd the ri ta came to be primitive in char,1cter, and it is hard to see rcge.rded as part of a Christian's immediate what valiu objection could be raised to it. prepe.r11Lion for death. Hence in the twelfth It was, however, omitteu from the second century it acquired the nnme of • the last English Prayer-book of 1552, and has never unction,' unctio eztrema (Peter Lombard, been restored. The justification, I suppose, of • Sent.,' iv. 23), i.e. as the Catechism of Trent this disuse of unction must be sought in the asserts(' Do Extr. Unct.,' 3), thti last of those entire 11bsence of evidence that the primitive which a man received from the Church. In Church understood the passage before us as the thirteenth it we.a placed by the school- institutiug a religious rite to be permanently men e.mong the seven rites to which they continued. All the earliest notices of unction limited the application of the term sncra- refer simply to its use for healing purposes. ruent" (' Dictionary of Christian Antiquities,' Ver. 16.-Confess therefore yonl· sins, etc. p. 2004). In the sixteenth century it was The a.uthority for the insertion of oilv definitely lo.id down at the Council of Treut, (omitted in the Ileceived 'fext) is over- (1) tht\t it is a. sacrament instituted by our whelming (~, A, B, K, Vulgate, Syriac, Lord; (2) the.t by it grace is conferred, sin Copt_ic),, as is, also tha~ for the ,substitut~on 1·emitted, and the sick comforted," somcttwos of ,·a, a.µa.p,,a.< for 'Ta -rra.pa.,rTwµa.'Ta., which 11!80" the recovery of heulth is obtained; ( 3) includes tho threeolclest manuscripts,~. A,B, that it should bo given to tho,e iu d,rngc1· of tho two btter of which also read -rrpo,n~xecr8, dealh, but if tlwy recover ihuy m,iy r~ceive for ,~x•cr~,. It is clitlicult to know e~rnctly it ugo.in (i:,,~~siun xiv. o. ix.). Funher, the what to mo.ke uf this iujn,1ctiou to confess Catechism of tho Council coudcmus ns a "one to another,'' whicu i, stated in th@ 72 THE GEN:li:RAL EPISTLE OF JAM:E:S. [oY, v. 1-20.