PHILEMON, EPISTLE TO (1) Authorship. That this epistle was writ ten by the apostle Paul is the constant tradition of the ancient Church. It is expressly cited as such by Origen (Homil. XIX, in Ierem., tom. i, n. 185. ed. Huet.) ; it is referred to as such by Tertullian (Nov. Marc. v, 21); and both Eusebius (Hist.Eceles. iii, 25) and Jerome ( Proem. in EP. ad Philcm. tom. iv, p. 442) attest its universal re ception as such in the Christian world. The lat ter, indeed, informs us that some in his day deemed it unworthy of a place in the canon, in consequence of its being occupied with subjects which, in their estimation, it did not become an apostle to write about, save as a mere private in dividual; but this he, at the same time, shows to be a mistake, and repudiates the legitimacy of such a standard for estimating the genuineness or authority of any book. It was also admitted as canonical by Marcion (Hieronym. /. c.). That this epistle should not have been quoted by sev eral of the Fathers who have quoted largely from the other Pauline epistles (c. g., Irenoeus, Cle ment of Alexandria, and Cyprian), may be ac counted for partly by the brevity of the epistle, and partly by their not having occasion to refer to the subjects of which it treats. Paley has ad duced the undesigned coincidences between this epistle and that to the Colossians with great force, as evincing the authenticity of both (liora, Pau c. 14); and Eichhorn has ingeniously shown how a person attempting, with the epistle to the Colossians before him, to forge such an epistle as this in the name of Paul, would have been nat urally led to a very different arrangement of the historical circumstances and persons from what we find in the epistle which is extant (Einleit. ins Neu Testament iii, 3o2).
(2) Time of Writing. This epistle was evi dently written during the apostle's imprisonment (verses 9, to), and as we have already endeavored to show (see COLOSSIANS, EPISTLE TO THE), dur ing his two years' imprisonment at Rome.
(3) Occasion. It was occasioned by his send ing back to Philemon his runaway slave Onesi mus, who, having found his way to Rome, was there, through the instrumentality of the apostle, converted to Christianity ; and, after serving Paul for a season, was by him restored to his former master, without whose consent the apostle did not feel at liberty to retain him.
(4) Contents. The epistle commences with the apostle's usual salutation to those to whom he wrote; after which he affectionately alludes to the good reputation which Philemon, as a Christian, enjoyed, and to the joy which the knowledge of this afforded him (verses 1-7). He then gently and gracefully introduces the main subject of his epistle by a reference to the spiritual ob ligations under which Philemon lay to him, and on the ground of which he might utter as a com mand what he preferred urging as a request.
Onesimus is then introduced; the change of mind and character he had experienced is stated; his offense in deserting his master is not palliated; his increased worth and usefulness are dwelt upon, and his former master is entreated to re ceive him back, not only without severity, but with the feeling due from one Christian to an other (verses 8-16). The apostle then delicately refers to the matter of compensation for any loss which Philemon might have sustained either through the dishonesty of Onesimus or simply through the want of his service; and though he reminds his friend that he might justly hold the latter his debtor for a much larger amount (see ing he owed to the apostle his own self), he pledges himself, under his own hand, to make good that loss (verses 17-19). The epistle con cludes with some additional expressions of friendly solicitude; a request that Philemon would prepare the apostle a lodging, as he trusted soon to visit him ; and the salutations of the apos tle and some of the Christians by whom he was surrounded at the time (verses 2o-25).
(5) Felicity of Expression. This epistle has been universallyadmired as a model,graceful,deli cate,andmanly writing. 'It is a voucher,' says Eich horn, 'for the apostle's urbanity, politeness, and knowledge of the world. His advocacy of Onesi mus is of the most insinuating and persuasive character, and yet without the slightest perver sion or concealment of any fact. The errors of Onesimus are admitted, as was necessary, lest the just indignation of his master against him should be rousedanew ; but they are alluded to in the most admirable manner : the good side of Onesimus is brought to view, but in such a way as to fa cilitate the friendly reception of him by his mas ter, as a consequence of Christianity, to which he had, during his absence, been converted; and his future fidelity is vouched for by the noble principles of Christianity to which he had been converted. The apostle addresses Philemon on the softest side: who would willfully refuse to an aged, a suffering, and an unjustly imprisoned friend a request? And such was he who thus pleaded for Onesimus. The person recommended is a Christian, a dear friend of the apostle's, and one who.had personally served him; if Philemon will receive him kindly, it will afford the apostle a proof of his love, and yield him joy. What need, then, for long urgency? The apostle is cer tain that Philemon will, of his own accord, do even more than lie is asked. Nlore cogently ane more courteously no man could plead.' W. L. A.