Sunday, January 18, 2009

Final thoughts on Philemon

I began this series of posts with an attempt to look at early Christianity's attitude toward slaves and slavery, not because it's an issue that's been particularly on my mind, or even because it's a topic that catches my eye in the letter to Philemon, but ironically, because it doesn't. Having written these posts, I now realize that I have always skipped over the passages in the Bible that are directed toward slaves. "Doesn't apply to me," was what I was thinking I guess. An issue settled worldwide long ago, a rare example of moral progress in the human race. (There are still slaves in the world, but nowhere does anyone openly try to defend it.) Why would anyone spend any time thinking about the moral arguments surrounding slavery now? Even when reading the letter of Philemon I never gave the issue any thought; it's buried, really, beneath the overpowering personal story of Philemon and Onesimus.

What always noticed most about Philemon was the intense love Paul shows for his disciples, but I found it impossible to put an explanation of Philemon into words without confronting slavery. Not because of any interest in apologetics on my part certainly. Apologetics is a worthy activity, but it's not for me. Always thinking about what other people are saying about you is a distraction from progress in your own discipline, for me at least.

No, the reason I needed to confront slavery was because of a cognitive dissonance that forms when I try to put myself in the scene of the letter. Slavery is a barrier to our understanding the ancients. We feel revulsion at the thought of it; we can't understand how they could live with it in their midst. If we can't put ourselves in the author's place with conviction then there has to be something missing in our understanding of them.

In this instance I don't think I've broken that barrier. When I imagine myself in Paul's place I still see myself thinking, "All people belong to God, but that person owns that person; isn't that stealing?" "No man can serve two masters."

But as a result of these posts I have re-read some passages of the Bible that I'd never paid attention to before, and I have learned some fascinating things about the early Christians. They truly believed that a person's status as slave or free was beneath God's consideration: when people talk about Christianity containing the seed that ultimately destroyed slavery, they aren't just engaging in wishful thinking. I can now understand why Christianity was so popular among slaves. It showed them that in the only sense that really mattered, they were already free. I don't know if this idea was revolutionary at the time, but the fact that Christians really believed it must have been. If we can't put ourselves in Paul's position and understand how he could fail to denounce the institution of slavery, we can put ourselves in the midst a society that accepted slavery as the natural order of things, and understand how revolutionary this idea must have been, and how liberating it must have been for the slaves who accepted it.

Reading Paul's directive to slaves in Ephesians, that they must perform their services their masters as if they were serving Christ, also gave me a much deeper appreciation for the Christian directive to emulate Christ in his service of others. How often have we felt that God asks too much of us: "Sure, we should be humble," we think, "but do I really have to go that low? Do I have to tolerate that person? Perform that job?" Yet Paul felt that even being a slave was not humility enough, unless it were done with the same love Jesus showed for us when he made himself a slave for us. "No," is Paul answer, "You must not just tolerate that person or perform that job, you must make yourself a slave to that person and love them as Jesus loved us, and perform that job as if it were Christ himself that had asked you to do it."

No comments: