Is anyone among you sick? Let him call for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord (Jas 5:14).
How society responds to the pandemic is going to be the dominant issue for however long, and it's an issue with many practical repercussions, including Christian fellowship, so at the risk of belaboring the issue, here's another consideration:
For many Christians, the pandemic raises two concerns: how to minimize becoming infected, and how to minimize infecting others. There's an altruistic rationale for suspending church services: we don't want to infect other parishioners, and due to the incubation period of the coronavirus, you can unwittingly infect someone as if you're an asymptomatic carrier. So Christians have a duty to practical social distancing for the sake of others, during the pandemic. So goes the argument.
I'd add that these are interrelated. Even if your primary concern is not to protect yourself from infection but to avoid infecting others, yet if you become infected, that makes you a carrier, so there's a vicious cycle.
That's well-intentioned, and up to a point it has some merit, but however laudable the motive, is it a Christian duty? Compare that to the passage from Jas 5:14.
One of the convenient things about prayer is that you can pray at a safe distance. You don't have to be present with the individual you pray for, and in some cases it isn't possible to be with them.
Yet despite that, in James 5:14 it's not sufficient that the elders pray for the sick. They are obliged to pray with the sick or pray over the sick. Go to the Christian on his sickbed. Indeed, make direct physical contact with the sick by anointing their skin with oil. The polar opposite of social distancing.
If you think about it, that's naturally hazardous at several levels:
i) The elders run the risk of contracting a contagious illness from the sick Christian.
ii) That, in turn, makes them carriers. When they return home, they may infect their family and servants.
iii) In addition, infection was far more perilous in the 1C, which didn't have our pharmaceuticals.
iv) Finally, they risk infecting the sick Christian. Due to illness, his immune system is already weakened, which makes him more vulnerable if an elder has a communicable disease. And I daresay that in the 1C, many people suffered from chronic diseases. Not all of them were communicable, but given the primitive state of medicine, they had less knowledge that we do to draw that distinction.
Of course, James 5:14-15 is a command to Christian elders, and not to Christians in general. But it does establish a principle.
//Of course, James 5:14-15 is a command to Christian elders, and not to Christians in general. But it does establish a principle. //
ReplyDeleteI (rightly or wrongly) interpret James 5:16-18 as applying to ordinary laypersons.
16 Therefore, confess your sins to one another and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working.
17 Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed fervently that it might not rain, and for three years and six months it did not rain on the earth.
18 Then he prayed again, and heaven gave rain, and the earth bore its fruit.- James 5:16-18
Though the confession of sins/trespasses/faults might suggest it's confession to ministers, the rest of the passage would suggest otherwise. Since even non-ministers could be especially righteous and have extra-ordinary answers to prayer, and the passage also highlights how Elijah, while special in one sense [e.g. in calling], was also in another sense similar to all human beings with the same human nature. Thus encouraging everyone to develop an effective prayer life.
// One of the convenient things about prayer is that you can pray at a safe distance. You don't have to be present with the individual you pray for, and in some cases it isn't possible to be with them.
Yet despite that, in James 5:14 it's not sufficient that the elders pray for the sick. They are obliged to pray with the sick or pray over the sick. Go to the Christian on his sickbed. Indeed, make direct physical contact with the sick by anointing their skin with oil. The polar opposite of social distancing.//
I think the Lord Jesus is the model. In most instances He laid hands on those whom He ministered healing to. Even the disciples used oil to minister healing to the sick during Christ's ministry (Mark 6:13). However, the Lord Jesus also prayed for people at a distance too. For example, in the case of the Centurion's servant, the Nobleman's/Official's son [John 4:46ff.]; the demoniac daughter of the Syrophoenician woman (et cetera). Even Elisha prayed for Naaman at a distance. He didn't see him until after he was healed. The Lord Jesus didn't force the 10 lepers to mingle with the rest of society until after they were healed and visited the priests who could certify their being healed and non-infectious. The priests served partially as "doctors". Since, the OT was aware of the concept of contagious diseases and had laws for quarantine. I don't think those laws were merely for ceremonial/ritual uncleanness. I think some of the Mosaic laws likely also had health and sanitation as a secondary consideration. And even those don't necessarily apply to us because some of them were written in the context of ANE conditions and without respect the advances in science that would occur after the close of the Old Covenant.
CONT.
Here's how I fallibly understand things. Passages like Eph. 4:11-14ff. teach and predict that in Redemptive History during the Messianic/Church Age the church will [with the help of non-Christians via Common Grace] grow in her understanding of the implications and outworking of the doctrine of ordinary providence resulting in the development of the physical sciences [and other sciences] including the principles of health and doctoring. Just as she grows in her understanding of other doctrines like the doctrine of extra-ordinary providence, special providence and the doctrine of healing [cf. my blog on Three Kinds of Providence]. Most Protestants would agree this has been the case in church history regarding doctrines like Christology, Pneumatology, justification, sanctification [etc].
DeleteGiven our greater understanding of ordinary providence, science and the spread of disease, we ought to take those things into consideration in our dealings with each other. At the same time that should be balanced with a real belief in God's active and present supernatural power to heal and protect. It's not one or the other. We ought not to be practical deists who deny the supernatural intervention of God so that we only behave as if infection will only spread or be contained naturalistically. NOR should we be presumptuous in thinking we need not take precautions. It seems to me that its not either/or, but both/and. There can be both corporate physical worship and prayer for healing, as well as virtual worship and prayer for healing through phones, video conferencing (et cetera). Believing God to protect doesn't entail that we don't wear our seatbelts when we drive. Doing otherwise can be [not always] a case of testing/tempting God.
This is a great opportunity for Christians to see miracles of healing for the conversion of souls [among other reasons]. The problem is that those who are most theologically knowledgeable are often the least likely to pray with confidence for the sick to be healed. The converse is often true too. Those who are most confident in praying for healing [which is is a good thing IMO], are unfortunately often the least theologically knowledgeable. Reformed continuationists like Sam Storms are praying for that convergence of the emphasis on the Word found among Reformation minded Christians, and the emphasis on the power of the Spirit among continuationists. I'm among those praying for that union.