I have on more than one occasion had to eat crow. That is, I have proclaimed or predicted or prophesied something very emphatically that I later had to retract or admit I was wrong about. Now granted, this rarely has happened to me, but it has on a few occasions. The real problem comes when you have to right something that you were wrong about and eat a course of humble pie and crow. I really am not arrogant enough to have these items on my regular diet, or as part of my own personal food pyramid. But I have tasted these delicacies from time to time. And I confess, it is hard to make a wrong right especially with some people. The hardest thing is making a wrong right is that you don’t know how other people are going to react.

As most of you know, I lead a 12 step group for chemically dependant adults at the hospital, and it is probably the favorite part of my job. It is a “spirituality or spiritual growth group, but we talk about almost any and everything. We get into the discussion fairly regularly of which of the 12 steps is the hardest. Most people say step 4, “Make a searching and fearless inventory of myself” as being the most difficult. But that’s because most people I work with haven’t been successful enough at least yet to get to steps 8 and 9. These steps have to do with relationships and righting wrongs in relationships. Step eight involves making a list of all persons that I have harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all. Step nine says that I will actually make direct amends to these folks unless doing so would injure them or others. As you can see, these steps are tough. They are tough, because you don’t know how other people are going to react or can you predict how they will receive you or you can’t really know what they will do or think. And besides, when we attempt to make something right with someone we have to eat humble pie and say that “I was wrong and you were right,” and that is sometimes very tough. It is tough because pride is a tough nut to crack, no wonder its one of the 7 deadlies. I can admit that I am wrong, but sometimes I have to disarm my opponent with humor. I often use Steve Sullivan’s old phrase ,”Your right, your right, your always right.” to someone that I have known over 25 years (I won’t call any names) Sometimes this person does not think that this phrase is funny, oddly enough.

But the truth is, who wants to go and make wrong things right with other people. Easier options included denial, avoidance, and simply forgetting the wrongs and hoping that the people you must deal with will simply overlook or forget things. And besides, some things are best left alone, you might make matters worse!

Maybe that is what the apostle Paul was thinking in the very short and personal letter to Philemon. The story line to the epistle is simple. Paul evidently was imprisoned in Rome under house arrest, kinda like Jim Guy Tucker I guess, you know you can still play golf, go to football games and eat out and stuff, but was restricted in some ways. While in Rome, he crossed paths with Onesimus, a runaway slave who belonged to Philemon, evidently one of Paul’s converts in Colossae. Paul and Philemon were close buds, so when Onesimus showed up at his door in Rome, he wrote this letter. Paul evidently led Onesimus to Christ, and Onesimus ministered greatly to Paul during this hardship. Paul learned to love Onesimus like a brother, and probably wouldn’t have made it without him. So Paul sends Onesimus back to Philemon with this letter that encourages a wrong to be righted by a slave returning home to his master. Wait just a minute!!! It seems that something is wrong with this picture. Why would Paul encourage Onesimus to return as a slave, and face the consequences of running away? Wouldn’t the Christian thing to do be to free Onesimus and send Philemon a scolding letter condemning slavery? But it doesn’t happen that way. Paul seems to be righting the wrong wrong.

I don’t believe that Paul was a bigot like some claim, but you have to wonder sometimes. He was hard on women , or at least had that reputation, and now he is sending poor Onesimus back to the place he escaped from to perhaps be killed for all he knows. Surely Paul thought slavery wrong. Surely he loved Onesimus. From his words he clearly expected Philemon to free Onesimus, but did not know for sure that he would. He did not approve of Onesimus being treated as a slave, and he wanted him elevated to the status of a brother. But the fact remains that he sent him back. Paul was no abolitionist, and no social justice advocate, at least at this time. Paul never would have made it on an underground pipeline for run aways. He never said that slavery was wrong or a sin, but simply sent Onesimus back.

Now, we are not usually too hard on Paul for we say that he was the product of his world, of his culture. We make this excuse for him. Slavery was so ingrained in his society that one did not even think it was up for discussion. What Paul did react to was the abuse or inhumane treatment of Onesimus and slaves. Whether or not he be freed, he did expect that he was treated like a brother.

Unfortunately, the Bible never really overtly condemns slavery. Yet none of us, except the most radical hate groups for a second would consider slavery anything but a gros sin against humanity. There are even pro-slavery passages in the Old Testament if you look hard enough. And in the New Testament, there are passages about slaves being obedient to their masters. My problem is you can make the case for all kinds of trivialities being condemned as sin in the Bible. It has been used for pointing out the wrongs of card playing, movie going, drinking, dancing, and mowing your yard on Sunday. It has been used as a manual for church discipline for not going to church three times per week and for not bringing your Bible to church or a treatise against women working outside the home. It has even been used as a dietary handbook for not eating ham sandwiches or catfish. Many live by the Bible as though it were a rule book for 21st century living, we use its literal words to suppress women who are called by God. We say the Bible is against slavery. But virtually nobody deals with or alludes to these passages that condone slavery. We selectively filter them out, and say that they were culturally encapsulated text that are a product trapped in their period of history and do not apply toady. We all do understand that such a practice is wrong under any circumstance. You can and many have make a case that a variety of inconsequential behaviors are sins in the eyes of God. You can certainly find passages of scripture that forbid discrimination and declare us all equal in God’s sight, But it is difficult, very difficult to find anywhere the Bible condemns the ownership of another human being as property. Culturally encapsulated text indeed.

Paul had an excellent opportunity to stand up against a societal evil and to defend one that he loved, yet he sent him back. He did not challenge culture, but instead tried to work within the framework of it. He would be what theologian Rienhold Niebur described as a “Christ of culture” disciple. This is where we accommodate our theology to fit in society. So if Paul did not challenge the conventions of his day. So how on earth can we expect to challenge ours?

How do we escape our cultural encapsulation, our cultural conditioning and stand up for right? How do we right wrongs that are difficult to see as wrong? How do we go against the grain and make our mark for social justice? How do we avoid the traps of accommodation. How do we avoid the copout of equating our government and leadership as being equal to God or ordained by God? It appears that Paul could not do it, I don’t suspect many of us have the faith and strength of Paul despite his obvious flaws.

Have you ever wondered what you would do and believe if the historical context were different. What if you had been born a German in Nazi Germany at the time of Hitler. Would you have gone against the grain or would you have joined the long line of sincere God fearing Germans that bought into the hysteria. What if you had been in Arkansas in 1848, would you like everyone else in the newly established Southern Baptist Convention, own slaves and believe that it was OK? What if you had been alive in 1957 in Little Rock Arkansas, or 1965 in Selma Alabama or 1968 in Memphis Tennessee? I wonder if I would have been with the majority of God fearing Christians who suppressed and beat others in the name of God’s divine plan or would I been in the vast minority of people who stood up and marched with the blacks? I wonder what I would have done. It is easy without the benefit of a culturally encapsulating society that has learned better, for the most part, and say I would have stood up for the right. I would have freed the Onesimus’s of the world and condemned the Philemon’s or the world.

I believe down deep that Paul did that same thing. He sent a letter to Philemon believing that in his imprisoned state, he could catch more flies with honey than vinegar. You see, Paul is the one who preached that there is no slave or free, no jew no male nor female in Christ. He told us that God is no respecter of persons, who died to set the captives free and that every single one of us are made in the image of God. He told us that if we didn’t have God’s type of revolutionary life-changing love in our hearts then we were like a noisy gong or a clanging symbol. He new Philemon had truly experienced it too, and that he would in fact elevate Onesimus to a brother and he would be useful to the kingdom of God.

I think that Philemon did just that. Otherwise this letter goes into the trash instead of being circulated throughout history as how to treat another human being. Word must have spread far and wide of Philemon’s unheard of act of love, to the point that it is included in the canon of scripture, the only personal document of its kind. And when the most revolutionary tactic that has ever been presented is practiced its power is unleashed with a fury. You see the revolutionary love of God does not come through insurrection, but through resurrection. His laws are no longer written in stone, but in our hearts.

Well, I honestly can’t say what I would have done had I lived in Paul’s time or had I lived in 1848. I can only dedicate myself to what I should do now whenever I see oppression, or discrimination especially in the name of God. I have to commit myself to righting the wrongs I see in 2008 in Little Rock Arkansas where racial issues still live, where women are denied equal status in the house of God, where you may be ostracized because of your sexual orientation, or even your political affiliation, or maybe even your religious alliances. A town like other predominantly Christian towns everywhere where oppression reigns in some circles and where hate is alive and well. And no matter how else we evolve as a church here at Providence, we must always be a beacon of light for all those who are wounded and seeking safe harbor. If we fail to do so, we won’t be able to stomach all the humble pie we will have to eat. And we will never have regrets when we look back someday and see where we stood on the hard issues in the year 2008. AMEN.