Januarius J. Asongu, PhD

Abstract

This article develops a constructive theology of the Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick through the frameworks of Critical Synthetic Realism (CSR) and Synthetic Theological Realism (STR). It argues that the sacrament should not be understood as magical intervention, ritual superstition, or guaranteed physical cure, but as sacramental participation in God's healing, consoling, reconciling, and hope-giving presence amid human fragility, suffering, illness, and mortality. Drawing from Scripture, patristic theology, Thomistic sacramental realism, liberation theology, pastoral theology, the psychology of suffering, disability theology, and contemporary philosophy of medicine, the article argues that human suffering cannot be understood adequately through simplistic supernaturalism, prosperity theology, or punitive interpretations of illness. Instead, suffering emerges from the broader fragility of finite existence, structural injustice, natural vulnerability, moral evil, epistemic limitation, and humanity's incomplete participation in truthful flourishing. The article further argues that prayer is not magical manipulation of divine power but relational participation in God's sustaining presence within reality. The Sacrament of the Sick therefore becomes a sacrament of hopeful accompaniment, existential dignity, reconciliation, communal solidarity, and truthful confrontation with suffering. Within CSR, suffering requires humility, discernment, compassion, scientific responsibility, spiritual accompaniment, and moral courage rather than magical thinking. The article concludes by proposing a reconstructive theology of healing grounded in truthful hope, communal care, scientific responsibility, sacramental grace, and the affirmation of human dignity amid fragility and death.

Keywords: Anointing of the Sick, suffering, healing, evil, prayer, hope, Critical Synthetic Realism, Synthetic Theological Realism, sacramental theology, human fragility, magical religion, theodicy

1. Introduction

Human suffering remains one of the most profound challenges confronting theology, philosophy, medicine, and pastoral care. Illness, disability, psychological trauma, chronic pain, aging, death, natural disasters, structural injustice, and existential fragility continually expose the vulnerability of human existence. Despite dramatic advances in medicine, technology, psychology, and social development over the past century, suffering remains inescapably woven into the human condition (Cassell, 2004; Kleinman, 2020). The COVID-19 pandemic alone reminded the world that no amount of technological sophistication can eliminate vulnerability to disease, loss, and mortality (Butler, 2020; Horton, 2021).

Yet suffering also remains one of the most distorted areas of religious interpretation. Across many religious traditions and communities, illness and suffering are frequently interpreted through magical, punitive, fatalistic, or superstitious frameworks. Disease may be attributed simplistically to divine punishment for personal sin (Job's friends were not alone), demonic attack, witchcraft, curses, insufficient faith, ancestral displeasure, or spiritual impurity (Brown, 2015; Porterfield, 2005). Such approaches often intensify fear, shame, alienation, and epistemic distortion rather than fostering truthful understanding, compassionate accompaniment, and effective medical care (Koenig, 2012; Pargament, 2007).

Within the framework of Critical Synthetic Realism (CSR) , these distortions may be understood as manifestations of epistemic fracture: the systematic distortion of humanity's capacity to interpret reality truthfully (Asongu, 2026a). Human beings often seek simplistic explanations for suffering because fragility, uncertainty, and mortality generate profound existential anxiety. However, distorted interpretations of suffering frequently deepen human suffering itself, adding spiritual and psychological injury to physical illness (Asongu, 2026b; see also Frankl, 2006; van der Kolk, 2014).

Synthetic Theological Realism (STR) extends this analysis into theology by arguing that salvation does not eliminate human finitude but restores truthful participation in divine reality amid fragility and incompleteness (Asongu, 2026c). Human beings remain vulnerable creatures living within a finite, evolving, and morally incomplete world. The redemption of creation, as Paul writes, is a future hope rather than a present possession: "We know that the whole creation has been groaning in labor pains until now; and not only the creation, but we ourselves... groan inwardly while we wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies" (Romans 8:22-23). Consequently, suffering cannot be reduced to simplistic formulas of divine punishment or magical divine intervention.

Within this context, the Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick acquires renewed significance. The sacrament should not be understood as magical ritual guaranteeing physical cure, nor as a final rite reserved only for the dying (as it was often reduced in the medieval period). Rather, it constitutes sacramental participation in God's healing, consoling, reconciling, and sustaining presence amid suffering. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1997) states, the sacrament is not only for the dying but for "anyone of the faithful who, because of sickness or old age, begins to be in danger of death" (no. 1514), and it may be repeated as often as the sick person's condition worsens.

This article argues that the Sacrament of the Sick should be reconstructed within CSR and STR as a sacrament of hopeful accompaniment, truthful participation, communal solidarity, reconciliation, and dignified endurance amid human fragility. The article further argues that prayer is not magical manipulation of divine power. Authentic Christian prayer does not suspend the natural order arbitrarily or eliminate the responsibilities of medicine, science, ethics, and communal care. Rather, prayer constitutes relational participation in divine presence, wisdom, hope, discernment, and sustaining grace.

The article proceeds in seven sections. Section 2 provides a comprehensive literature review spanning biblical, patristic, Thomistic, liberationist, disability, and pastoral theological sources. Section 3 outlines the methodological framework of Critical Synthetic Realist Methodology (CSRM). Section 4 examines biblical and traditional foundations for understanding suffering and healing. Section 5 critiques magical and superstitious interpretations of prayer and sacrament. Section 6 develops a CSR/STR understanding of the origins and nature of suffering. Section 7 reconstructs the Sacrament of the Sick as hopeful accompaniment. Section 8 considers pastoral and civilizational implications. Section 9 concludes.

2. Literature Review: Suffering and Healing in Theological Perspective

The theology of suffering and the Sacrament of the Sick has been developed across multiple Christian traditions, yet significant divergences remain regarding its nature, purpose, and proper use. This review examines biblical, patristic, Thomistic, liberationist, disability, and pastoral perspectives.

2.1 Biblical Foundations

The Old Testament presents a complex, evolving understanding of suffering. Deuteronomy's theology of retribution (blessings for obedience, curses for disobedience) is challenged profoundly by the Book of Job, where an innocent man suffers despite his righteousness (Job 1-2). Job's friends insist that suffering must be punishment for hidden sin; the divine speeches (Job 38-41) reject this simplistic explanation without providing a complete alternative (Clines, 1989; Newsom, 2003). The Psalms frequently lament suffering while also praising God for deliverance, modeling honesty before God rather than pious denial (Psalm 22, 88, 137; Brueggemann, 1984).

The New Testament presents Christ as healer and sufferer. The Gospels describe numerous healing miracles: the blind see, the lame walk, lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, and the dead are raised (Matt. 8-9; Mark 1-5; Luke 4-8). Yet Christ also suffers profoundly, and his suffering is not presented as punishment for sin but as participation in human fragility and obedience to the Father (Phil. 2:5-11). The Letter to the Hebrews emphasizes that Christ "was tested in every respect as we are, yet without sin" and therefore can "sympathize with our weaknesses" (Heb. 4:15).

The Epistle of James provides the foundational scriptural basis for the Sacrament of the Sick: "Are any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them, anointing them with oil in the name of the Lord. The prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise them up; and anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven" (James 5:14-15). This passage links physical healing, prayer, anointing, forgiveness of sins, and the communal role of church elders—all elements of the later sacramental tradition (Johnson, 2000; Moo, 2021).

2.2 Patristic and Medieval Developments

The early Church Fathers understood anointing as a continuation of Christ's healing ministry. Origen described anointing as a sign of spiritual healing and the reception of the Holy Spirit (Origen, 1957). John Chrysostom emphasized the power of prayer and anointing for both physical and spiritual healing, though he also cautioned against magical expectations (Chrysostom, 1984).

Augustine of Hippo, drawing on his own experience as a bishop who prayed over the sick, distinguished between miraculous healing (rare, for the confirmation of faith) and ordinary healing through medicine and the processes of nature (Augustine, 2003). He warned against treating prayer as a substitute for medical care, a warning that would be repeated throughout Christian tradition.

In the medieval period, the sacrament became increasingly associated with the dying, acquiring the name "Extreme Unction" (final anointing). Thomas Aquinas (1947) treated the sacrament in the Summa Theologiae (III, q. 29-30), arguing that it is a true sacrament instituted by Christ, conferring grace for the healing of the soul (including the forgiveness of venial sins) and, conditionally, for physical healing when conducive to salvation. Aquinas emphasized that the sacrament is not magical: it works ex opere operato (by the rite itself) but not inevitably or mechanically; the recipient must be properly disposed, and physical healing depends on God's will and the recipient's good.

2.3 The Council of Trent and Vatican II

The Council of Trent (1545-1563) reaffirmed the sacramental nature of Extreme Unction against Protestant critiques, anathematizing those who denied that it is a true sacrament (Denzinger & Hünermann, 2012, nos. 1695-1697). Trent also clarified that the sacrament is properly administered to those in danger of death from illness, not to all sick persons indiscriminately.

The Second Vatican Council (1962-1965) significantly broadened and deepened the Church's understanding. Sacrosanctum Concilium (1963) restored the name "Anointing of the Sick" to emphasize its purpose as healing and comfort rather than merely preparation for death (no. 73). The Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy called for a new rite that would be more pastoral, adaptable, and focused on the needs of the sick person. The revised rite, promulgated in 1972, emphasizes prayer, anointing of the forehead and hands, the laying on of hands, and the communal context of the sacrament (International Commission on English in the Liturgy, 1974).

2.4 Liberation and Disability Theologies

Liberation theology has significantly shaped understanding of suffering by emphasizing its structural and social dimensions. Gustavo Gutiérrez (1973, 1984) argued that suffering is not only individual but collective, arising from poverty, oppression, violence, and unjust economic systems. Authentic Christian response to suffering must therefore include not only pastoral care but structural transformation. Jon Sobrino (2001) emphasized that Christ suffers with the crucified peoples of history, and the Church must similarly accompany the suffering rather than offering cheap comfort.

Disability theology has challenged traditional assumptions about healing and cure. Nancy Eiesland (1994) argued that the emphasis on miraculous physical cure can be harmful to disabled persons by implying that their bodies are inferior or in need of eradication. Instead, she proposed a theology of access and accommodation, affirming the goodness of embodied difference. John Swinton (2007, 2012) has developed a pastoral theology of dementia and disability that emphasizes presence, relationship, and the dignity of the person regardless of cognitive or physical capacity. Healing, in this perspective, is not primarily about cure but about restoration of relationship and community belonging.

2.5 Pastoral and Psychological Perspectives

Contemporary pastoral theology has integrated insights from psychology, medicine, and trauma studies. Pargament (2007) demonstrated that religious coping can be both helpful (providing meaning, comfort, and community) and harmful (producing guilt, shame, and spiritual struggle). Koenig (2012) reviewed the extensive literature on religion and health, finding modest positive associations but also cautioning against simplistic causal claims. Frankl (2006), drawing on his experience in Nazi concentration camps, argued that the search for meaning is central to human survival and flourishing, even under extreme suffering.

Carroll (2007) and Sulmasy (2006) have explored the spiritual dimensions of medical practice, arguing that physicians and chaplains must attend to the whole person—physical, psychological, social, and spiritual—rather than reducing illness to biological dysfunction alone.

2.6 Gaps and Opportunities for CSR/STR

This literature review reveals several gaps that CSR/STR can address. First, existing theologies of the Anointing of the Sick rarely integrate epistemology into sacramental ontology or address the problem of magical thinking systematically. Second, the relationship between the sacrament and the broader crisis of modern medicine (technological reductionism, burnout, healthcare inequality) remains underexplored. Third, the concept of continuous improvement and fallibilism has not been systematically applied to pastoral care of the sick. Fourth, a synthetic framework integrating medical science, psychology, liberation theology, disability theology, and sacramental theology is needed to address the complexity of suffering in the contemporary world. CSR/STR provides the resources to address these gaps.

3. Methodology: Critical Synthetic Realist Methodology (CSRM)

This article employs Critical Synthetic Realist Methodology (CSRM) , an interdisciplinary, layered, and fallibilist methodological framework developed within CSR (Asongu, 2026a). CSRM integrates: (1) metaphysical realism, affirming that reality exists independently of human perception; (2) epistemic humility, recognizing that human knowledge remains partial, historically situated, and subject to revision; (3) interdisciplinary synthesis, drawing on multiple disciplines in an integrated pursuit of truth; (4) theological realism, affirming that divine reality is truly knowable through revelation and grace; and (5) critical inquiry, exposing distortions, ideologies, and magical thinking (Asongu, 2026a, 89-112; see also Bhaskar, 2008; Searle, 1995).

CSRM rejects both magical supernaturalism (which treats divine action as arbitrary intervention suspending natural law) and reductionistic materialism (which denies any transcendent dimension to human experience). It affirms that divine action is real but operates within and through the created order, not by violating it arbitrarily. This methodological commitment is essential for a theology of the Sacrament of the Sick, because it respects both the integrity of medicine and the possibility of genuine sacramental grace.

Methodologically, this article synthesizes biblical theology, patristic theology, Thomistic sacramental realism, liberation theology, disability theology, pastoral theology, medical ethics, psychology of religion, and philosophy of medicine. The aim is constructive theological reconstruction that fosters truthful hope, compassionate accompaniment, and integration of spiritual and medical care.

4. Biblical and Traditional Foundations: Beyond Simplistic Supernaturalism

4.1 The Ministry of Christ as Healer and Sufferer

The ministry of Christ consistently includes healing. Christ heals blindness, paralysis, leprosy, social exclusion, spiritual despair, and communal alienation. Healing is central to the Gospel proclamation: "The Kingdom of God has come near" (Mark 1:15) is demonstrated concretely in the restoration of wholeness to broken bodies and communities (Wright, 1996).

Yet Christ does not eliminate all suffering universally. Even within the New Testament, faithful believers continue to experience illness, persecution, and death. Paul himself speaks of the "thorn in the flesh" that remains despite prayer (2 Cor. 12:7-10). He does not interpret this as a failure of faith but as a grace that keeps him humble and dependent on God. This passage is crucial because it rejects magical expectations regarding divine intervention: Paul prayed three times for removal of the thorn, yet it remained.

4.2 The Epistle of James and Sacramental Anointing

James 5:14-15 provides the foundational scriptural basis for the sacrament. Johnson (2000) notes that James' language combines medical imagery (anointing with oil, a common therapeutic practice in antiquity) with ecclesiastical action (calling the elders, prayer in faith, forgiveness of sins). The "prayer of faith" (euche tēs pisteōs) does not guarantee physical cure, as the subsequent history of Christian interpretation recognizes. Rather, it expresses trust in God's healing power without specifying the mode or outcome of healing.

The linking of physical illness with possible sin ("if they have committed sins, they will be forgiven") reflects a first-century understanding that was already being nuanced. Jesus himself rejected the simplistic equation of illness with sin in John 9:1-3: "Neither this man nor his parents sinned." The sacrament thus addresses both spiritual and physical dimensions without reducing one to the other.

4.3 Healing as Restoration of Truthful Participation

Within STR, healing is not primarily about the miraculous reversal of biological processes. Rather, healing concerns restoration of truthful participation in divine and communal life (Asongu, 2026b). A person who accepts their limitations, finds meaning amid suffering, experiences the support of community, and dies with dignity has been healed even without physical cure.

This understanding is consistent with the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1997, no. 1520-1521), which emphasizes that the sacrament may lead to physical healing when conducive to salvation, but its primary grace is spiritual: "the grace of strength, peace, and courage to endure the suffering" and "the forgiveness of sins and the completion of Christian penance." The sacrament is not a failed magic when physical cure does not occur; it is a successful sacrament when the sick person is strengthened to face illness and death in hope.

5. Prayer Is Not Magical Manipulation: Critique of Magical Religion

5.1 Defining Magical Religion

Within many religious contexts, prayer is treated as supernatural technique, transactional bargaining, or ritual manipulation of divine power (Tambiah, 1990; Porterfield, 2005). Magical religion assumes that correct performance of ritual (words, actions, offerings) produces predictable divine responses. Health, wealth, and protection can be secured through proper technique.

This approach is deeply problematic on multiple grounds. Theologically, it misunderstands divine freedom and sovereignty. God is not a vending machine into which prayers are inserted in exchange for outcomes. Anthropologically, it reduces religion to instrumentality rather than relationship. Pastorally, it often produces guilt, shame, and spiritual crisis when the expected outcomes do not occur. If illness persists despite "prayers of faith," the sick person may be blamed for insufficient faith—a form of spiritual abuse (Pargament, 2007; Koenig, 2012).

5.2 Magical Religion as Epistemic Fracture

Within CSR, magical religion represents a form of epistemic fracture because it systematically misunderstands divine action, human freedom, natural processes, and the complexity of suffering (Asongu, 2026a). Magical thinking seeks simple control where only complex, relational, and fallible responses are appropriate. It refuses to accept the limits of human knowledge and power, projecting omnipotence onto ritual instead of accepting finitude.

The prosperity gospel movement represents one prominent contemporary manifestation of magical religion. Preachers promise guaranteed physical healing, financial prosperity, and success in exchange for faith, positive confession, and financial contributions (Bowler, 2013; Gifford, 2015). When illness remains, the sick person is blamed for lack of faith—a cruel addition to suffering. CSR and STR reject this framework entirely.

5.3 Prayer as Relational Participation

Instead, prayer is relational participation in God's sustaining, guiding, consoling, and transformative presence (Asongu, 2026b; see also Hauerwas, 1990; Sulmasy, 2006). Authentic prayer may:

• deepen courage to face difficult treatments,
• strengthen hope that finds meaning beyond cure,
• cultivate peace amid uncertainty and fear,
• sustain endurance through prolonged suffering,
• encourage discernment about medical decisions,
• inspire compassion from caregivers and community,
• and foster communal solidarity with the suffering person.

Prayer may accompany healing, but it is not magical coercion of divine power. Consequently, faith does not eliminate the need for medicine, scientific inquiry, therapy, social responsibility, or healthcare systems. Luke himself was identified as a physician (Col. 4:14). Christian tradition historically contributed significantly to hospitals, medicine, and caregiving institutions precisely because healing involves both spiritual and material dimensions (Ferngren, 2009; Porter, 1999).

6. Evil, Suffering, and Human Fragility: A CSR/STR Theodicy

6.1 The Inadequacy of Simplistic Theodicies

CSR and STR reject simplistic theodicies that attempt to explain every instance of suffering as divine punishment, demonic attack, karma, or testing. Such explanations often intensify fear, scapegoating, and spiritual distress rather than fostering truthful understanding (Asongu, 2026a; see also Swinton, 2007).

The Book of Job critiques reductionistic theodicies. Job's friends offer increasingly elaborate explanations for his suffering—hidden sin, lack of faith, divine discipline—but God rejects their speeches (Job 42:7) without providing a complete alternative explanation. Job is restored not because he solves the theological puzzle but because he remains honest before God, protesting his innocence while refusing to deny his suffering.

6.2 A Polyvalent Understanding of Suffering

Within CSR and STR, suffering emerges from multiple, overlapping, and often interacting realities:

• Finite embodiment: Human beings are biological creatures with vulnerable bodies that age, break, and die. This is not punishment but the condition of creaturely existence (Asongu, 2026b; see also Aquinas, 1947, I, q. 47-49).
• Natural vulnerability: Earthquakes, floods, pathogens, and genetic disorders are not divine punishments but features of a complex, evolving natural world (Schneider, 1995; Southgate, 2008).
• Moral evil: Human cruelty, violence, exploitation, and oppression produce immense suffering. This is not God's will but the consequence of free will and structural sin (Augustine, 2003; Gutiérrez, 1973).
• Structural injustice: Poverty, racism, sexism, colonialism, and economic exploitation create patterns of suffering that are neither natural nor individually chosen (Cone, 1970; Ruether, 1983).
• Epistemic limitation: Human beings lack perfect knowledge of causes, consequences, and divine purposes. Some suffering remains mysterious not because God is hiding information but because finite creatures cannot comprehend the whole (Asongu, 2026a; see also Book of Job).
• Relational brokenness: Alienation from God, self, others, and creation generates spiritual and psychological suffering that compounds physical illness (Swinton, 2007).

6.3 Divine Solidarity Not Divine Causality

Within STR, God does not stand outside suffering as detached observer or cosmic puppeteer. Rather, God enters human suffering through Christ. The Cross therefore becomes central to Christian theodicy: God does not promise escape from suffering but divine solidarity within suffering (Moltmann, 1974; Sobrino, 2001). As Jürgen Moltmann (1974) famously argued, a crucified God cannot be accused of indifference to suffering. The Father who allows the Son to suffer does not thereby endorse suffering but enters into it in order to overcome it from within.

Hope emerges not from magical guarantees of earthly health but from truthful participation in divine love amid fragility. The resurrection is not the reversal of suffering but its transformation: the crucified body becomes the glorified body, wounds included. Christian hope, therefore, does not deny the reality of suffering or promise escape from mortality. It promises that suffering and death do not have the final word.

7. The Sacrament of the Sick as Hopeful Accompaniment

7.1 Sacramental Grace Amid Fragility

The Sacrament of the Sick should therefore be understood as sacramental accompaniment within human vulnerability. The sacrament affirms:

• dignity amid weakness: The sick person remains a full image of God, deserving of respect and care regardless of physical or cognitive capacity.
• hope amid suffering: Hope is not the expectation of cure but the trust that God accompanies the sufferer and that life's meaning transcends health.
• communion amid isolation: The sacrament is administered within community (the "elders" of James 5), reminding the sick that they are not abandoned.
• reconciliation amid fear: The sacrament includes the possibility of confession and absolution, addressing spiritual wounds that compound physical illness.
• divine presence amid mortality: Anointing signifies God's nearness to the dying, not divine abandonment (Catechism, 1997, no. 1520-1523).

7.2 The Integration of Medical Care and Sacramental Grace

CSR and STR emphasize that the sacrament does not replace medicine. Rather, it accompanies and sanctifies medical care. The sick person should receive both competent medical treatment and sacramental prayer. There is no opposition between faith and science; both are responses to different dimensions of human need.

This integration requires the Church to:

• encourage vaccination, hygiene, nutrition, and medical compliance,
• support healthcare workers as agents of God's healing,
• oppose magical thinking that rejects medical care as faithless,
• and advocate for healthcare access for all, especially the poor.

7.3 Resisting Magical and Prosperity Theologies

Pastoral practice must actively resist magical and prosperity theologies that:

• blame sick persons for their illness as "lack of faith,"
• promise guaranteed healing if enough prayers are said,
• discourage medical treatment in favor of "faith healing,"
• stigmatize disabled persons as spiritually deficient,
• or cause spiritual crisis when healing does not occur.

Instead, pastoral care should:

• normalize lament and honest expression of suffering,
• affirm that not being healed is not a failure of faith,
• support persons in adjusting to chronic illness and disability,
• accompany the dying without demands for "miraculous recovery,"
• and foster communities of compassion rather than magical expectations.

8. Pastoral and Civilizational Implications

8.1 The Prophetic Witness of the Sacrament

Modern societies frequently marginalize suffering persons through healthcare inequality, economic exclusion, ageism, ableism, and emotional isolation. The sacrament therefore carries prophetic significance: it testifies that human dignity does not depend on productivity, health, or independence.

The Church must resist:

• prosperity theology that equates health with divine favor,
• magical religion that substitutes formulaic prayer for genuine care,
• victim blaming that adds guilt to suffering,
• and anti-scientific spirituality that rejects medicine.

Instead, Christian communities should cultivate:

• compassionate care for the chronically ill and disabled,
• truthful understanding of the limits of medicine,
• medical responsibility that supports healthcare access,
• pastoral accompaniment that does not demand cure,
• and communal solidarity that refuses to abandon the suffering.

8.2 The Sacrament and the Future of Medicine

As medicine advances technologically, the risk of dehumanization increases. Patients become organ systems, data points, and reimbursement codes. The Sacrament of the Sick reminds healthcare systems that the patient is a whole person with spiritual, emotional, and relational needs.

Chaplains, nurses, physicians, and pastoral ministers are essential members of the healthcare team. The Church should support clinical pastoral education, hospital chaplaincy programs, and medical ethics that respect patient dignity. The sacrament is not an alternative to medical care but its spiritual completion.

9. Conclusion

This article has argued that the Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick should be reconstructed within Critical Synthetic Realism and Synthetic Theological Realism as a sacrament of hopeful accompaniment, truthful participation, reconciliation, and sustaining grace amid human fragility.

Prayer is not magical manipulation of divine power. Rather, it constitutes relational participation in God's sustaining and transformative presence within reality. The sacrament does not replace medicine but sanctifies medical care, accompanying the sick with dignity, hope, and community.

Human suffering cannot be reduced to simplistic explanations involving punishment, curses, demonic attack, or insufficient faith. Instead, suffering emerges from the complex realities of finite existence, moral evil, structural injustice, natural vulnerability, epistemic limitation, and relational brokenness. Christian hope does not promise escape from suffering but divine solidarity within suffering, culminating in the resurrection that transforms rather than erases the wounds.

The sacrament therefore mediates dignity amid weakness, hope amid suffering, communion amid isolation, and truthful participation in divine love amid mortality. In a fragmented world increasingly marked by fear, loneliness, magical thinking, and dehumanization, the Sacrament of the Sick remains a profound witness to compassionate presence, truthful hope, and the enduring dignity of the human person made in the image of God.

References

Aquinas, T. (1947). Summa theologica (Fathers of the English Dominican Province, Trans.). Benziger Bros. (Original work published 1265–1274)

Asongu, J. J. (2026a). Critical synthetic realism: A systematic philosophy of truth, personhood, and human flourishing. Generis Publishing.

Asongu, J. J. (2026b). Beyond doctrine: A critical-liberative theology of faith and emancipation. Wipf & Stock Publishers.

Asongu, J. J. (2026c). The splendor of truth: A critical philosophy of knowledge and global agency. Wipf & Stock Publishers.

Augustine. (2003). City of God. Penguin Classics. (Original work published 426)

Bhaskar, R. (2008). A realist theory of science. Verso.

Bowler, K. (2013). Blessed: A history of the American prosperity gospel. Oxford University Press.

Brown, P. (2015). The cult of the saints: Its rise and function in Latin Christianity. University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1981)

Brueggemann, W. (1984). The message of the Psalms: A theological commentary. Augsburg.

Butler, J. (2020). The force of nonviolence: The ethical in the political. Verso.

Carroll, D. (2007). The spirituality of the body: Bioethics for a fragmented culture. Liturgical Press.

Cassell, E. J. (2004). The nature of suffering and the goals of medicine (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Catechism of the Catholic Church. (1997). Libreria Editrice Vaticana.

Chrysostom, J. (1984). On the priesthood. St. Vladimir's Seminary Press.

Clines, D. J. A. (1989). *Job 1-20*. Word Books.

Cone, J. H. (1970). A black theology of liberation. Lippincott.

Denzinger, H., & Hünermann, P. (Eds.). (2012). Enchiridion symbolorum definitionum et declarationum de rebus fidei et morum (43rd ed.). Herder.

Eiesland, N. L. (1994). The disabled God: Toward a liberatory theology of disability. Abingdon Press.

Ferngren, G. B. (2009). Medicine and health care in early Christianity. Johns Hopkins University Press.

Frankl, V. E. (2006). Man's search for meaning. Beacon Press. (Original work published 1946)

Gifford, P. (2015). Christianity, development and modernity in Africa. Oxford University Press.

Gutiérrez, G. (1973). A theology of liberation. Orbis Books.

Gutiérrez, G. (1984). We drink from our own wells: The spiritual journey of a people. Orbis Books.

Hauerwas, S. (1990). God, medicine, and suffering. Eerdmans.

Horton, R. (2021). *The COVID-19 catastrophe: What's gone wrong and how to stop it happening again*. Polity Press.

International Commission on English in the Liturgy. (1974). The rite of anointing of the sick. Catholic Book Publishing.

Johnson, L. T. (2000). The Letter of James. Doubleday.

Kleinman, A. (2020). The illness narratives: Suffering, healing, and the human condition (2nd ed.). Basic Books.

Koenig, H. G. (2012). Religion, spirituality, and health: The research and clinical implications. ISRN Psychiatry, 2012, 278730.

Moltmann, J. (1974). The crucified God: The cross of Christ as the foundation and criticism of Christian theology. SCM Press.

Moo, D. J. (2021). The Letter of James (2nd ed.). Eerdmans.

Newsom, C. A. (2003). The Book of Job: A contest of moral imaginations. Oxford University Press.

Origen. (1957). Homilies on Leviticus. Catholic University of America Press.

Pargament, K. I. (2007). Spiritually integrated psychotherapy: Understanding and addressing the sacred. Guilford Press.

Porter, R. (1999). The greatest benefit to mankind: A medical history of humanity. W. W. Norton.

Porterfield, A. (2005). Healing in the history of Christianity. Oxford University Press.

Ruether, R. R. (1983). Sexism and God-talk: Toward a feminist theology. Beacon Press.

Schneider, J. R. (1995). God's being is in becoming: The trinitarian being of God in the theology of Karl Barth. Eerdmans.

Searle, J. R. (1995). The construction of social reality. Free Press.

Second Vatican Council. (1963). Sacrosanctum concilium. Vatican Publishing.

Sobrino, J. (2001). Christ the liberator. Orbis Books.

Southgate, C. (2008). The groaning of creation: God, evolution, and the problem of evil. Westminster John Knox Press.

Sulmasy, D. P. (2006). The rebirth of the clinic: An introduction to spirituality in health care. Georgetown University Press.

Swinton, J. (2007). Raging with compassion: Pastoral responses to the problem of evil. Eerdmans.

Swinton, J. (2012). Dementia: Living in the memories of God. Eerdmans.

Tambiah, S. J. (1990). Magic, science, religion, and the scope of rationality. Cambridge University Press.

van der Kolk, B. A. (2014). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of trauma. Viking.

Wright, N. T. (1996). Jesus and the victory of God. Fortress Press.