[Sidenote: Unique character of the epistle.]
The Epistle to Philemon holds a unique place among the Apostle’s
writings. It is the only strictly private letter which has been
preserved. The Pastoral Epistles indeed are addressed to individuals,
but they discuss important matters of Church discipline and government.
Evidently they were intended to be read by others besides those to whom
they are immediately addressed. On the other hand the letter before us
does not once touch upon any question of public interest. It is
addressed apparently to a layman. It is wholly occupied with an incident
of domestic life. The occasion which called it forth was altogether
common-place. It is only one sample of numberless letters which must
have been written to his many friends and disciples by one of St Paul’s
eager temperament and warm affections, in the course of a long and
chequered life. [Sidenote: Its value.]Yet to ourselves this fragment,
which has been rescued, we know not how, from the wreck of a large and
varied correspondence, is infinitely precious. Nowhere is the social
influence of the Gospel more strikingly exerted; nowhere does the
nobility of the Apostle’s character receive a more vivid illustration
than in this accidental pleading on behalf of a runaway slave.
[Sidenote: The persons addressed.]
The letter introduces us to an ordinary household in a small town of
Phrygia. Four members of it are mentioned by name, the father, the
mother, the son, and the slave.
[Sidenote: 1. Philemon.]
1. The head of the family bears a name which, for good or for evil, was
not unknown in connexion with Phrygian story. [Sidenote: Occurrence of
the name in Phrygia.]The legend of Philemon and Baucis, the aged
peasants who entertained not angels but gods unawares, and were rewarded
by their divine guests for their homely hospitality and their conjugal
love[662], is one of the most attractive in Greek mythology, and
contrasts favourably with many a revolting tale in which the powers of
Olympus are represented as visiting this lower earth. It has a special
interest too for the Apostolic history, because it suggests an
explanation of the scene at Lystra, when the barbarians would have
sacrificed to the Apostles, imagining that the same two gods, Zeus and
Hermes, had once again deigned to visit, in the likeness of men, those
regions which they had graced of old by their presence[663]. Again, in
historical times we read of one Philemon who obtained an unenviable
notoriety at Athens by assuming the rights of Athenian citizenship,
though a Phrygian and apparently a slave[664]. Otherwise the name is not
distinctively Phrygian. It does not occur with any special frequency in
the inscriptions belonging to this country; and though several persons
bearing this name rose to eminence in literary history, not one, so far
as we know, was a Phrygian.
Footnote 662:
Ovid. _Met._ vii. 626 sq. ‘Jupiter huc, _specie mortali_, cumque
parente Venit Atlantiades positis caducifer alis’ etc.
Footnote 663:
Acts xiv. 11 οἵ θεοὶ _ὁμοιωθέντες ἀνθρώποις_ κατέβησαν πρὸς ἡμᾶς
κ.τ.λ. There are two points worth observing in the Phrygian legend, as
illustrating the Apostolic history. (1) It is a miracle, which opens
the eyes of the peasant couple to the divinity of their guests thus
disguised; (2) The immediate effect of this miracle is their attempt
to sacrifice to their divine visitors, ‘dis hospitibus mactare
parabant’. The familiarity with this beautiful story may have
suggested to the barbarians of Lystra, whose ‘Lycaonian speech’ was
not improbably a dialect of Phrygian, that the same two gods, Zeus and
Hermes, had again visited this region on an errand at once of
beneficence and of vengeance, while at the same time it would prompt
them to conciliate the deities by a similar mode of propitiation,
ἤθελον θύειν.
Footnote 664:
Aristoph. _Av._ 762 εἰ δὲ τυγχάνει τις ὢν Φρὺξ ... φρυγίλος ὄρνις
ἐνθάδ’ ἔσται, τοῦ Φιλήμονος γένους.
[Sidenote: This Philemon a Colossian]
The Philemon with whom we are concerned was a native, or at least an
inhabitant, of Colossæ. This appears from the fact that his slave is
mentioned as belonging to that place. It may be added also, in
confirmation of this view, that in one of two epistles written and
despatched at the same time St Paul announces the restoration of
Onesimus to his master, while in the other he speaks of this same person
as revisiting Colossæ[665]. On the other hand it would not be safe to
lay any stress on the statement of Theodoret, that Philemon’s house was
still standing at Colossæ when he wrote[666], for traditions of this
kind have seldom any historical worth.
Footnote 665:
Compare Col. iv. 9 with Philem. 11 sq.
Footnote 666:
Theodoret in his preface to the epistle says πόλιν δε εἶχε [[ὁ
Φιλήμων] τὰς Κολάσσας· καὶ ἡ οἰκία δὲ αὐτοῦ μέχρι τοῦ παρόντος
μεμένηκε. This is generally taken to mean that Philemon’s house was
still standing, when Theodoret wrote. This may be the correct
interpretation, but the language is not quite explicit.
[Sidenote: converted by St Paul.]
Philemon had been converted by St Paul himself[667]. At what time or
under what circumstances he received his first lessons in the Gospel, we
do not know: but the Apostle’s long residence at Ephesus naturally
suggests itself as the period when he was most likely to have become
acquainted with a citizen of Colossæ[668].
Footnote 667:
ver. 19.
Footnote 668:
See above, p. 30 sq.
[Sidenote: His evangelical zeal,]
Philemon proved not unworthy of his spiritual parentage. Though to
Epaphras belongs the chief glory of preaching the Gospel at
Colossæ[669], his labours were well seconded by Philemon. The title of
‘fellow-labourer,’ conferred upon him by the Apostle[670], is a noble
testimony to his evangelical zeal. Like Nymphas in the neighbouring
Church of Laodicea[671], Philemon had placed his house at the disposal
of the Christians at Colossæ for their religious and social
gatherings[672]. Like Gaius[673], to whom the only other private letter
in the Apostolic Canon is addressed[674], he was generous in his
hospitalities. [Sidenote: and wide hospitality.]All those with whom he
came in contact spoke with gratitude of his kindly attentions[675]. Of
his subsequent career we have no certain knowledge. [Sidenote: Legendary
martyrdom.]Legendary story indeed promotes him to the bishopric of
Colossæ[676], and records how he was martyred in his native city under
Nero[677]. But this tradition or fiction is not entitled to any credit.
All that we really know of Philemon is contained within this epistle
itself.
Footnote 669:
See above, p. 31 sq.
Footnote 670:
ver. 1 συνεργῷ ἡμῶν.
Footnote 671:
Col. iv. 15.
Footnote 672:
ver. 2 τῇ κατ’ οἶκόν σου ἐκκλησίᾳ. The Greek commentators, Chrysostom
and Theodoret, suppose that St Paul designates Philemon’s own family
(including his slaves) by this honourable title of ἐκκλησία, in order
to interest them in his petition. This is plainly wrong. See the note
on Col. iv. 15.
Footnote 673: