On the undesigned coincidences between this Epistle and the Acts of the Apostles, see Dr. Paley's Horæ Paulinæ, pp. 357-367. SECTION XV.. ON THE EPISTLE TO PHILEMON. I. Account of Philemon. — II. Date.—III. Genuineness and authenticity. IV. Occasion and scope of this Epistle.-V. Obser vations on it. I. PHILEMON was an inhabitant of Colossæ, as appears from Saint Paul's mentioning Onesimus in his Epistle to the Colossians (iv. 9.), as one of them, and also from his saluting Archippus in this Epistle (ver. 2.), who appears from Col. iv. 17. to have been a pastor of that church. Philemon seems to have been a person of great worth as a man, and of some note as a citizen in his own country: for his family was so numerous, that it made a church by itself, or at least a considerable part of the church at Colossæ. (ver. 2.) He was likewise so opulent, that he was able by the communication of his faith, that is, by his beneficence, to refresh the bowels of the Saints. (6,7.) According to Grotius, Philemon was an elder of Ephesus; Beausobre and Dr. Doddridge suppose him to have been one of the ministers of the Colossian church: and from Saint Paul's requesting him (22.) to provide a lodging for him at Colossæ, Michaelis thinks that he was a deacon of that church. These opinions appear to have been founded on the inscription of this Epistle, where Saint Paul calls him a fellow-labourer. But this appellation, Drs. Whitby, Lardner, and Macknight have remarked, is of ambiguous signification; being given not only to those who were employed in preaching the Gospel, but also to such pious individuals, of either sex, as assisted the apostles in any manner. Philemon was, most probably, a converted Gentile, and from the nineteenth verse of this Epistle, some have supposed that he was converted under the ministry of Saint Paul; but, from the apostle's saying in the fifth verse that he had heard of Philemon's faith in Christ, (which was his usual phrase when writing to Christians whom he had never seen,)2 Dr. Benson is of opinion that, during Paul's long stay at Ephesus, some of the Colossians had gone thither, and heard him preach the Christian doctrine (Acts xix. 10. xx. 31.); or that the apostle had sent some of his assistants who had planted the Gospel at Colossæ. If Saint Paul had not come into those parts of Asia Minor, it is highly probable that Philemon would never have become a Christian; the apostle might therefore well say, that Phile mon owed unto him, himself, or his own soul. II. It appears from verses 1. 10. 13. and 23. of this Epistle, that Saint Paul was under confinement when he wrote it; and as he expresses (22.) his expectation of being shortly released, it is probable that it was written during his first imprisonment at Rome, towards 1 See instances of this in Rom. xvi. 8. and 3 John 8. 2 See Eph. i. 15. iii. 2. Col. i. 4. and ii. 1. the end of A. D. 62, or early in 63; and was sent, together with the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians, by Tychicus and Onesimus. III. So early as the time of Jerome, some fastidious critics showed an inclination to expunge this Epistle from the sacred canon as being a private letter, and consequently of very little importance to the Christian church. Unquestionably the apostles might (and, for aught we know to the contrary, did) write private letters as well as other persons. But we have no reason to consider the Epistle to Philemon in this light; it was wholly written with the apostle's own hand, which was much more than what he called the token in all his Epistles. (2 Thess. iii. 17.) Although from its brevity, and the private nature of its subject, it was but rarely mentioned by the primitive ecclesiastical writers, yet we know that it was alluded to, though not cited by name, by Tertullian, and was reckoned among Saint Paul's Epistles by Caius. It was likewise most expressly quoted by Origen, and was pronounced to be authentic by all the antient writers cited by Eusebius, as also by all subsequent ecclesiastical writers; and it has always been inserted in every catalogue of the books of the New Testament. Stronger external testimony to the authenticity of any part of the Bible exists not, than that which we have for the Epistle to Philemon, the argument of which is not mean, nor is any part of it unworthy of the great apostle of the Gentiles. "Whoever," says Dr. Benson, "will carefully study it, will discern a great number of the doctrines and precepts of Christianity expressed or insinuated: for instance, 1. In a religious view, or upon a spiritual account, all Christians are upon a level. Onesimus, the slave, upon becoming a Christian, is the apostle's dear son and Philemon's brother. 2. Christianity makes no alteration in men's civil affairs. By Christian baptism a slave did not become a freedman; his temporal estate or condition was still the same; and, though Onesimus was the apostle's son and Philemon's brother upon a religious account, yet he was obliged to be Philemon's slave for ever, unless his master voluntarily gave him his freedom. 3. Servants should not be taken or detained from their own masters without their master's consent (see ver. 13, 14.) 4. We should love and do good unto all men. We should not contemn persons of low estate, nor disdain to help the meanest slave when it is in our power. The apostle has here set us an example of benevolence, condescension, and Christian charity, which it well becomes us to follow. He took pains with and converted a slave, and in a most affectionate and earnest manner interceded with his master for his pardon. 5. We should not utterly despair of those who are wicked, but should use our best endeavours to reclaim them. Though Onesimus had robbed his master and run away from him, the apostle attempted his con VOL. IV. 1 Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. ii. p. 465.; 4to. vol. i. P. 424. version among others, and succeeded therein. 6. Restitution is due where an injury has been done, unless the injured party freely forgive accordingly, the apostle Paul gives a promise, under his own hand, for Onesimus's making restitution, as a matter of justice, if Philemon insisted upon it. 7. We should be grateful to our benefactors. This Saint Paul touches upon very gently (ver. 19.), where he intimates to Philemon that he owed unto him himself also: and therefore, in point of gratitude, he was obliged to grant his request. We should forgive the penitent, and be heartily reconciled to them. 9. The apostle's example teaches us to do all we can to make up quarrels and differences, and reconcile those who are at variance. 10. A wise man chooses sometimes to address in a soft and obliging manner, even in cases where there is authority to command. 11. The bishops and pastors of the Christian church, and all teachers of religion, have here the most glorious example set before them, to induce them to have a most tender regard to the souls of men of all ranks and conditions; and to endeavour to convert a slave, as well as the rich and great and honourable of the earth. He who disdained not to teach a slave, a fugitive, and a thief, but preached the doctrine of salvation to him, and took pains with him, till he had restored him to his master, an honest worthy man ;— how disinterested must he have been? To whom would he not condescend? or whose salvation and happiness would he not endeavour to promote? Would to God there was the same spirit in all the teachers of Christianity, at all times and in all places! 12. Here is a most glorious proof of the good effects of Christianity, where it is rightly understood and sincerely embraced. It transforms a worthless slave and thief into a pious, virtuous, amiable, and useful man; makes him not only happier and better in himself, but a better servant, and better in all relations and circumstances whatever. "Shall an epistle, so full of useful and excellent instructions, be rejected for its brevity? or because the occasion required that it should be written concerning one particular person? or addressed to a private man? Men would do well to examine it carefully before they reject it, or speak of it so slightly." IV. We learn from this Epistle that Onesimus was the slave of Philemon, whom he had probably robbed, and ran away from him as far as Rome. Whether he repented of what he had done, and voluntarily went to Saint Paul, or in what other manner they came to meet there, we have no information. But the apostle, during his confinement "in his own hired house," opened a way to the heart of the rude slave, converted him to the Christian faith, and baptised him. It also appears that Paul kept Onesimus with him for some time, to wait upon himself, until Onesimus, by his conduct, confirmed the truth and sincerity of his conversion. During his abode with 1 Dr. Benson's History of the First Planting of Christianity, vol. ii. p. 311. 2d edit. 2 Macknight and Lardner are of opinion that Saint Paul's expression in the eighteenth verse does not insinuate that Onesimus had robbed his master of any thing but his service. the apostle, he served him with the greatest assiduity and affection: but, being sensible of his fault in running away from his master, he wished to repair that injury by returning to him. At the same time being afraid lest, on his return, his master should inflict upon him the punishment which by the law or custom of Phrygia was due to a fugitive slave, he entreated Saint Paul to write to Philemon in his behalf, and requested him to forgive and receive him again into his family. The apostle therefore wrote this Epistle to Philemon, "in which with the greatest softness of expression, warmth of affection, and delicacy of address, he not only interceded for Onesimus's pardon, but urged Philemon to esteem him and put confidence in him as a sincere Christian. And because restitution, by repairing the injury that has been done, restores the person who did the injury to the character which he had lost, the apostle, to enable Onesimus to appear in Philemon's family with some degree of reputation bound himself in this Epistle by his hand-writing, not only to repay all that Onesimus owed to Philemon, but to make full reparation also to Philemon for whatever injury he had done to him by running away." To account for the solicitude expressed by Saint Paul in this Epistle, in order to obtain Onesimus's pardon, and procure a thorough reconciliation, it is not necessary to suppose, with some critics, that Philemon was keen and obstinate in his resentments, or of that rough and intractable disposition for which the Phrygians were proverbial. The contrary is insinuated by the apostle, who has in other places commended his benevolence and charity. It is most probable, as Dr. Macknight has conjectured, that Philemon had a number of slaves, on whom the pardoning of Onesimus too easily might have had a bad effect; and therefore he might judge some punishment necessary as an example to the rest. At least Saint Paul could not have considered the pardoning of Onesimus as an affair that merited so much earnest entreaty, with a person of Philemon's piety, benevolence, and gratitude, unless he had suspected him to have entertained some such intention. V. Whether Philemon pardoned or punished Onesimus, is a circumstance concerning which we have no information. From the earnestness with which the apostle solicited his pardon, and from the generosity and goodness of Philemon's disposition, the eminent critic above cited conjectures that he actually pardoned Onesimus, and even gave him his freedom, in compliance with the apostle's insinuation, as it is interpreted by some, that he would do more than he had asked. For it was no uncommon thing, in antient times, to bestow freedom on those slaves whose faithful services had procured for them the esteem and good will of their masters. The primitive Christians preserving this Epistle, and placing it in the sacred canon, (Dr. Benson remarks) are strong arguments to induce us to believe 1 Grotius informs us that masters had a power to torture their slaves who behaved ill, and even to put them to death, without applying to the magistrate; and that this was agreeable not only to the Roman, but also to the Grecian law. 2 Macknight's Preface to Philemon, sect. 2. that Philemon granted the apostle's request, and received Onesimus into his house and favour again. As Onesimus was particularly recommended by Saint Paul to the notice of the Colossians (iv. 9.), it cannot be doubted that they cheerfully received him into their church. In the Apostolical Constitutions, Onesimus is said to have been bishop of Beræa; but they are a compilation of the fourth century, and consequently of no authority. When Ignatius wrote his Epistle to the Ephesians (A. D. 107), their bishop's name was Onesimus: and Grotius thought that he was the person for whom Saint Paul interceded. But this, as Dr. Lardner2 remarks, is not certain. Dr. Mill3 has mentioned copy, at the conclusion of which it is said that Onesimus suffered martyrdom at Rome by having his legs broken. The whole of this Epistle is indeed a most beautiful composition. Such deference and respect for Philemon, such affection and concern for Onesimus, such distant but just insinuation, such a genteel and fine address pervade the whole, that this alone might be sufficient to convince us that Saint Paul was neither unacquainted with the world, nor that weak and visionary enthusiast, which the enemies of revelation have sometimes represented him to be. It is impossible to peruse this admirable Epistle without being touched with the delicacy of sentiment, and the masterly address that appear in every part of it. We see here, in a most striking light, how perfectly consistent true politeness is, not only with all the warmth and sincerity of the friend, but even with the dignity of the Christian and the apostle. Every word has its force and propriety. With what dignity and authority does Saint Paul entreat, though a prisoner! With what condescension and humility does he command, though an apostle! And if this letter were to be considered in no other point of view than as a mere human composition, it must be allowed to be a master-piece in its kind. As an illustration of this remark, it may not be improper to compare it with an Epistle of the younger Pliny, that seems to have been written on a similar occasion; which, though composed by one who has always been reckoned to excel in the epistolary style, and though it undoubtedly has many beauties, yet it must be acknowledged by every impartial reader to be vastly inferior to this animated composition of the apostle. Pliny seems desirous of saying something; the apostle has urged every thing that can be said upon the occasion. Pliny is too affected to be affecting; the apostle takes possession of our heart, and excites our compassion whether we will or not.5 On the undesigned coincidences between this epistle and the Acts of the Apostles, see Dr. Paley's Horæ Paulinæ, pp. 368-377. |