Philemon 1:23Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

He had been sent by the Colossians (Col 1:7; Col 4:12), so from this it is clear that Philemon lived in Colossae.

Paul calls him “my fellow prisoner,” expressing that he too was in great affliction.

Thus, if not for the Apostle himself, then for this man the request ought to be heard.

The one who is in affliction, and who has left his own affairs to care for others, ought to be heard.

On the other hand, the Apostle here reproves Philemon in case he should not show mercy to his own slave.

For his fellow citizen became Paul’s “fellow prisoner” and suffers together with him.

And he adds further: a fellow prisoner with me for Christ Jesus, that is, for Christ.

This Epaphras had been sent to Paul by the Colossians. From this it is clear that Philemon was from the Colossians.

He calls him his “fellow prisoner,” showing that Epaphras also was in great distress. By this he makes Philemon feel that, if Epaphras suffers with Paul, should Philemon not show mercy for Paul’s sake to Onesimus?

He is a “fellow prisoner,” he says, not for anything human, but for Christ Jesus, suffering together with me for the Gospel.

Concerning who Epaphras, Paul’s fellow prisoner, may have been, we have received this tradition.

It is said that the Apostle Paul’s parents were Jews from the region of Gischala. When the whole province was devastated by the Roman troops, they were driven from Judea.

They settled in the city of Tarsus in Cilicia. There Paul was born, and he inherited his origin from his parents.

He insisted on this so much that he declared of himself: “Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? So am I” (2 Cor 11:22).

In another place he says, “a Hebrew of Hebrews” (Phil 3:5), and other things showing that he considers himself more a Jew than a Tarsian.

If this is so, we may suppose that Epaphras was imprisoned at the same time as Paul.

The Apostle mentions Epaphras here because he too was a Colossian. For Paul wrote thus to the Colossians: “Epaphras, who is one of you, a servant of Jesus Christ, greets you” (Col 4:12).

He placed Demas before Luke as being known to all and as a fellow worker. For only after this did he abandon the Apostle, having loved this present age.

“Epaphras greets thee,” and so forth. The persons from whom the Apostle here sends greetings to Philemon are the very same as those from whom he wrote greetings to the Colossians.

IV. In conclusion (Phlm 20-21), St. Paul gives instructions that Philemon prepare lodging for him, because the Apostle expresses hope for a swift release from his Roman imprisonment.

The epistle ends with farewell greetings from Epaphras, Paul’s fellow prisoner, and also from Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, Paul’s fellow workers, together with Paul’s own wish for the Lord’s grace.

The greetings to Philemon from those around Paul, and Paul’s prayerful good wish for him, fully correspond to the usual postscripts of Paul’s epistles.

They correspond in particular to the information about the persons generally surrounding the Apostle in Rome, as is clear from the Epistle to the Colossians and others.

According to St. John Chrysostom’s explanation, the Apostle greets Philemon in the name of those with him, so as more quickly to incline him to obedience.

He calls them his fellow workers, so that in this way he might more strongly persuade him to fulfill the request.

Paul calls Epaphras a fellow prisoner, expressing that he too was in great affliction.

Thus, if not for the Apostle himself, then for this man the request ought to be heard.

Greetings are sent from the same persons from whom they went to all the Colossians.

There it has already been said what could be said about them. Here only a little may be added.

There Epaphras is called a fellow worker (Col 1:7), but here a fellow prisoner.

This does not mean that he too was in chains, for there St. Paul lived by himself and had freedom to receive whomever he wished.

Epaphras could be with him without hindrance and without being subjected to violence or any governmental prohibition or severity.

He was, therefore, a prisoner of love for the Apostle. He too, of course, bore sorrows, privations, and fears.

But he endured everything with good courage, unwilling to leave him. Therefore he truly was as though in captivity, a fellow prisoner without chains.