V* 
 
 
 ,»•' V. 
 
 W 
 
 
 
 $*' 
 
 
 ■ 5 i 
 
 ft <>■ . 
 
 
 
 &• "W 
 
 =»* 
 
 i0 v *l\r- 
 

 
 u - * ay yU • 
 
 
 k* 
 
 fi\ -%j$: y% '<Jjg: J\ , 
 
 
 
 **,*/?/%»> * O 
 
 ^0 
 4 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
THE CHURCH, THE MINISTRY, AND SLAVERY. 
 
 ISCOURSE, 
 
 DELIVERED AT RUTLAND, MASS., 
 
 July 1 -i , 18 5 0. 
 
 GEORGE E. FISHER, 
 
 Pastor of the Congregational Church. 
 
 WORCESTER : 
 
 PRINTED BY HENRY J. HOWLAND, 
 
 199 Main Street. 
 
■ ■*■/ 
 
 PREFATORY NOTE. 
 
 This Discourse goes before the public, not because it is thought to be worthy 
 of publicity, but in consequence of an unpleasant excitement of which its delivery 
 has been the occasion. The Discourse is as it was originally, with the exception 
 of a few verbal changes, and now and then an additional, illustrative remark. 
 None of its sentiments have been changed, none have been "added, and none sub- 
 tracted. In the delivery, a few remarks were made extemporaneously, which 
 have passed from the author's memory, and which therefore do not appear. But 
 the sermon is the same, and is now left to speak for itself, and to be approved or 
 condemned, according to the different standards of feeling and action which ob- 
 tain in the community, upon the questions herein discussed. G. E. F. 
 
DISCOURSE. 
 
 1 Thf.ss. 5: 21. — "Prove all things : hold fast that which is wood. 
 
 I have received frequent intimations of the existence 
 of a desire among my congregation, that I would present 
 my views upon certain questions which are now interesting 
 many minds. I refer to questions touching the relations of 
 the church to slavery, or, the duties of christians and 
 christian ministers, in regard to the sin of slavery. I have 
 therefore thought it proper to present my views at the 
 present time, since I entertain no opinions of which I am 
 ashamed, or which I am afraid or unwilling to avow- I 
 shall speak my own sentiments, though perhaps they may 
 not accord with those of any hearer. I shall speak neith- 
 er to please, nor to displease any one present, but simply 
 with the view of discharging duty to conscience and to 
 God, to whom alone I acknowledge accountability. I take 
 occasion, at the outset, to disclaim all intention of preach- 
 ing a personal discourse, or of administering a personal 
 rebuke, and if, after this open disavowal, any one shall 
 charge me with such a design, I must regard it as eminently 
 unkind, and unchristian. The Searcher of Hearts is my 
 witness, that I would not injure the feelings of one of my 
 hearers. May I not therefore ask of you all a candid 
 hearing 1 
 
I 
 
 So much I deem it important to say by way of introduc- 
 tion. 
 
 I now proceed to the subject of discourse, and call 
 your attention, 
 
 I. To a few plain propositions, in which 1 suppose we 
 shall all agree. 
 
 1. The church, in its nature and design, is hostile to 
 all sin. It is composed of those who have professedly for- 
 saken sin, and banded themselves together, to accomplish, 
 more effectually, its extermination from their own hearts, 
 and the world. It is a body of believers who walk not 
 after the flesh, but after the Spirit ; who are washed, who 
 are sanctified, who are justified in the Lord Jesus, and by 
 the Spirit of our God. Christ loved the church and gave 
 himself for it, 41 That he might sanctify and cleanse it, with 
 the washing of water by the word, that he might present 
 it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle, 
 or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without 
 blemish. And to her was grunted that she should be array- 
 ed in fine linen, clean and white, for the fine linen is the 
 righteousness of saints." Further citations and remarks 
 in support of this proposition are needless, for the friends 
 and foes of the church alike admit the, truth of it. 
 
 2. If such be the nature and design of the church, then 
 she is bound to oppose, with vigor and constancy, all forms 
 of sin. Not to do this, is to dishonor her high •commis- 
 sion, — to prove false to her sacred trust. It is to defeat the 
 very end of her establishment. To bear testimony against 
 'every form of evil, and to aim at its extirpation, is a duty 
 which she owes to God, to Christ her Redeemer and 
 Living Head, to the Spirit her Sanctifier, to the holy name 
 she bears, to the high profession she has made, and to the 
 world into which she is cast," as salt, as leaven, as a light, 
 as a reforming and saving power. She is to oppose sin 
 
within and without herself, in high places and in low, in 
 christian lands, and in* pagan. 
 
 3. All sin is not yet exterminated from the church. 
 She has now existed many thousand years. She has been 
 often subjected to the purifying process of persecution. 
 She has received many baptisms of the Holy Ghost and of 
 fire. She has enjoyed the faithful ministrations of the 
 word. But never yet has a perfect church existed upon 
 earth, — never yet a church of which it could be predicated 
 that she was " without spot or wrinkle. " There always 
 has been, there yet is much sin in the heart of every chris- 
 tian, and consequently in the heart of every church- Nor 
 do we expect to find a sinless church, until her wanderings 
 in the wilderness shall cease, — until her warrings with the 
 powers of darkness shall be ended, and she shall reach her 
 state of rest in Heaven. The church in Heaven, and that 
 only, is without sin. The church on earth ought to be so, 
 but we have no ground for rational expectation that she 
 will be so. Therefore, to denounce and forsake her, be- 
 cause she is not sinlessly perfect, is to pursue a most absurd 
 and unchristian course. 
 
 4. Slavery is a sin. That it is so in my view, you have 
 been apprized on former occasions. In those expressions 
 of opinion I was sincere, and those sentiments I continue 
 to entertain. I do not bate a jot of them. I would reiter- 
 ate it again, and yet again, that slavery is a sin, a sin against 
 God and man. It is a violation of human rights. It de- 
 bilitates the physical powers of its subjects. It degrades 
 the intellectual being. It tramples on the social affections. 
 It blunts and depraves the moral sense: It buys, and 
 beats, and sells the very image of God. It goes counter 
 to every dictate of reason, every suggestion of common sense, 
 and every principle and precept of revelation. 
 
 Such is the system, in the abstract, in its general charac- 
 
6 
 
 ter, and spirit, and influence, though I gladly allow that 
 there are cases of exception to the general rule. 
 
 5. If it be the duty of the church to oppose all sin, 
 and if slavery be a sin of such magnitude, it follows that 
 the church should lend no countenance to the system, 
 and not only so, but everywhere and always, she is bound 
 to throw the whole weight of her influence against it. If 
 the preceding propositions are established, this follows as 
 a necessary conclusion. 
 
 So far, I trust we are all agreed. Wherein then do we 
 differ X If we differ, it is in regard to what constitutes an 
 approving, or countenancing, or fellowshipping of slavery 
 by the church, or in respect to the steps which the church 
 is required to take, in order to be free from the charge of 
 so doing. 
 
 This brings forward, 
 
 II. The second division of my subject. . It is this ques- 
 tion : AVhat course must the church pursue, in order to 
 free herself from the just imputation of supporting and 
 fellowshipping the institution of slavery ? 
 
 In speaking of the church, reference is made particularly 
 to the Congregational Churches of New England, and to 
 our own church as one of them. 
 
 1. Must she refuse to recognize that as a christian church, 
 which numbers some slaveholders among its members ? In 
 my opinion she is not called upon to take this position. 
 Such a course is certainly in direct hostility to that charity 
 which *' beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all 
 things, endureth all things, " — that charity which is one of 
 the brightest and loveliest of the christian ornaments. 
 
 Again. To adopt such a course, is to unchurch nearly 
 or quite all the churches established by the Apostles them- 
 selves. There are a few facts which are facts, and which 
 
therefore cannot be denied or disproved, either by the 
 friends or foes of slavery. The facts are these : 
 
 The Apostles did not declare that a slaveholder could 
 not be a christian. They did not demand the immediate 
 emancipation of slaves as an indispensible condition of ad- 
 mission to the church. They did admit slaveholders, and 
 slaveholders in the church were not subjected to immediate 
 discipline for holding slaves. As evidence that these asser- 
 tions are assertions of truth, let me remind you how often 
 we find the Apostles addressing themselves to members of 
 the church, as still holding slaves. In Ephesians 6 : 9, we 
 read, " And ye masters, do the same things unto them, for- 
 bearing threatening." In Colossians 4: 1, it is written, 
 "Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and 
 equal." A still more decisive passage is found in 1 Timothy 
 6 : 2. "And they that have believing masters, let them not 
 despise them, because they are brethren, but rather do them 
 service, because they are faithful and beloved. " Now here 
 is proof positive that there were slaveholders in the Apos- 
 tolic churches. And here, if we assume and assert that 
 that cannot be a true christian church, which, under any 
 circumstances, includes slaveholders among its members, 
 we declare that the Apostolic churches were not true 
 churches, and this let him declare who will. For one, I 
 do not claim a piety, a conscience, and a judgment, so 
 much more enlightened than those of the Apostles. I 
 have been accustomed to suppose that Paul and his fel- 
 lows were christian ministers, and established genuine 
 christian churches, and it ill becomes me to excommuni- 
 cate them from the household of faith. 
 
 The force of the above arguments cannot be evaded by 
 the assertion that the slavery and slaveholders of those 
 times were not American. True, the Apostles were in the 
 Roman Empire, and it was Roman Slavery with which they 
 
had to do, but it was slavery, and that too, in as severe a 
 form as has ever existed. Nor are we to conclude that the 
 Apostles were in favor of the system, for they inculcated 
 principles which tended directly to its overthrow, thus 
 showing their true sentiments in regard to the evil of it. 
 
 Returning from this digression, I would say, that the 
 question before us is not whether it would be right for this 
 church, here and now, in the nineteenth century, amid all 
 the light and knowledge upon the subject by which we are 
 surrounded, to admit to our number, a man, who, though 
 always having dwelt amid this same light and knowledge, 
 yet would voluntarily buy, and hold as property, complete- 
 ly subject to his will, his fellow man, but the question is, 
 whether a church, which, anywhere, in any age, and under 
 any circumstances, admits slaveholders to its communion, 
 forfeits the name and character of a christian church, — 
 whether we should self-righteously declare, as though we 
 were able to mark out definitely just how much sin, under 
 any given circumstances, is requisite in order to destroy 
 all evidence of christian character, that a church number- 
 ing a 'single slaveholder is no true church. This is the 
 question, and the affirmative of it I cannot maintain. I 
 consider it an unrighteous, a pharasaical assumption. 
 
 2. Is it the duty of the church, of this church, to de- 
 clare absolutely and unqualifiedly, that no slaveholder shall 
 ever come to her communion-table] Must this church pass 
 a vote to this effect, before she can be exculpated from the 
 charge of being in league with oppression 1 
 
 Before this question can be answered, there is another 
 which must be settled. It is the question whether the fact 
 of a man's holding slaves, is prima facie evidence that he is 
 not a christian. For I take it that we have no right to 
 exclude from Christ's table, any whom, in the judgment of 
 charity, we may regard as Christ's followers, except for a 
 
disorderly walk. When pressed with this question, there 
 are many who reply, " I do not know that a slaveholder can- 
 not be a christian, but on the other hand, I do not know 
 that any slaveholder is, or can be a christian. It requires 
 an amazing stretch of charity for me to believe it." Now 
 to what does all this amount ? True I do not know pos- 
 itively, that any slaveholder is a christian, neither do I 
 positively know that any particular individual who is not 
 a slaveholder is a christian. I have the best evidence 
 which the nature of the case affords, that there are many 
 christians in this town, but as I cannot fathom the depths 
 of the heart, I have no infallibly sure and certain knowl- 
 edge of the fact. My want of positive knowledge is as 
 great in one case as in the other, and the objection thus 
 arising, if it can be called an objection, is equally strong 
 in each case. We are to judge according to external 
 evidence, and leave it with God to search and judge the 
 hearts of those who profess to be his. 
 
 Now does every slaveholder give certain and conclusive 
 evidence that he is not a christian \ Let us meet this ques- 
 tion fairly. I answer promptly and plainly, that in my 
 opinion, slaveholding does not necessarily and alivays indi- 
 cate the absence of the christian spirit and temper. I con- 
 tend that circumstances do affect, do modify the rightful- 
 ness and the wrongfulness of relations and acts. 
 
 A course of conduct which in the abstract, is wrong, and 
 which under most circumstances, is wrong, may under cer- 
 tain other circumstances be right, or to say the least, be 
 regarded as not inconsistent with a christian character and 
 profession. A certain course of conduct may be expedient 
 at one time, and under certain circumstances, which may 
 be inexpedient at another time, and under different circum- 
 stances. I may here be met with the reply, "away with 
 this doctrine of expediency, — it is a device of the devil. 
 2 
 
10 
 
 Right is right, and wrong is wrong, and it is always right 
 to do right, and wrong to do wrong. " Admitted, freely 
 and fully. But the right must first be ascertained, and in 
 the discovery of it, there must sometimes be a careful con- 
 sideration of circumstances, or in other words, a regard to 
 expediency. — Any thing which peculiar circumstances ren- 
 der inexpedient, is, for the time being, not right. And it 
 is a fact that all men do recognize the doctrine of expedi- 
 ency, and act upon it. Those who decry loudest against 
 it, as fully regulate their conduct by it, as do others. They 
 never do any thing which they do not consider expedi- 
 ent. 
 
 Now can we conceive of any palliating circumstances, 
 which may so far extenuate the guilt of the slaveholder, as 
 to demand of us the recognition rf him as a christian 
 brother, and the admission of him to our communion-table 
 if he be providentially present 1 In my opinion, there are 
 such circumstances. 
 
 There are many slaveholders who become such, and con- 
 tinue such, involuntarily. They do not wish to sustain 
 such a relation to their fellow men, and they are longing, 
 and waiting, and praying, that the way and the time may 
 come, when they can put an end to it. And I cannot feel 
 it to be right, to be christian, to denounce unsparingly such 
 men, and to shut them out from the pale of christian char- 
 ity and sympathy, for their hearts are right, — they are 
 doing all that they can, and who of us is doing more 1 
 
 But there are others who sustain the relation of masters 
 and owners, voluntarily indeed, but from motives of 
 the purest benevolence. An entire family, perhaps, belong 
 to one master. He gives them instruction in things tem- 
 poral and spiritual, — in short, he treats them in all respects 
 as though they were free, save that he sustains the relation 
 of master. And this he does more at their own request, 
 
11 
 
 than for any other reason, for if he should set them free, 
 or should depart and leave them, the family circle would 
 be broken, the members scattered and sold apart, and driv- 
 en off to the plantation of a cruel master, where they 
 would enjoy scarcely one of their present comforts and 
 privileges. And therefore, knowing these things, their 
 present master, from purely benevolent motives, continues 
 the relation which he holds to those slaves, they being, in 
 all other respects, freemen. There are actual cases like 
 this. And that relation abstractly considered is wrong, 
 Dut under the circumstances, I maintain that benevoleuce 
 requires the master to continue it. Though there cannot 
 really be any rightful claim of property in man, yet that 
 master may stand acquitted in the sight of God, and, in 
 the view of gospel love and charity, he ought not to be re- 
 garded as guilty of a high-handed crime against God and 
 man, and as an alien from the commonwealth of Israel. 
 
 There is still another circumstance which in some cases 
 palliates the guilt of the slaveholder. It is the circum- 
 stance of excusable ignorance upon the subject. In for- 
 mer days, days of our common ignorance, many good men 
 manufactured and sold ardent spirits, never dreaming that 
 they were violating the law of love, and they were not re- 
 garded as so doing by others. Yet no one doubts that sin- 
 cerely pious men did then and thus violate that law. And 
 so it may be with slavery. Surrounded from their birth 
 with the system, some slaveholders do not intend to violate, 
 and do not once think they are acting contrary to the law 
 of love, so long as they kindly treat those whom they call 
 their slaves. They have not our light, and cannot from 
 their very position, possess the advantages for understan- 
 ding all the bearings of the subject, which we possess, but 
 they are as conscientious, and as desirous of doing the 
 light, as we can be. 
 
12 
 
 Allow me here to say, that I have a personal acquaintance 
 with one of this class. He was a member of the same 
 theological school with myself. He was universally regar- 
 ded as a pious, devoted, conscientious christian. He wit- 
 nessed a good profession. There was no one who did not 
 love him as a truly pious, praying man. And yet he was 
 a slaveholder. In conversations held with him upon the 
 subject, I told him that I regarded slaveholding as a sin, 
 to be repented of before God — I thus bore testimony against 
 the system. He replied, with as honest and conscientious 
 a heart as was ever possessed, that he could not see that 
 he was doing wrong to hold that slave as his property. If 
 he could have seen the wrong, he would have forsaken it. 
 I wonder, and yet I do not wonder at his ignorance of the 
 wrong:, for he was conscious of no wrong intention. He 
 has always dwelt in the midst of slavery, and of course 
 been under its blinding influence. He did not view the 
 subject from the same stand point with myself. That 
 brother, though a slaveholder, I believe was a christian. 
 His daily life gave abundant evidence of it, though there 
 was in my view this one dark spot in his character. Xot- 
 withstanding this, however, I could not but regard him 
 as a true christian brother, and I regard him in that light 
 now. And I w r ould to-day cordially give him, (not his 
 sin,) the right hand of christian fellowship, and invite him 
 to sit with me at the table of our common Lord and Re- 
 deemer. Not to do this, were to do violence to every 
 christian feeling. You may call me pro-slavery, but your 
 calling will not make me so. You may charge me with 
 countenancing and fellowshipping slavery, but I can bear 
 that, knowing how baseless and false the charge would be. 
 I know there is not a throb of my heart but beats high 
 and strong for freedom. I know there is not one of you 
 all, that would utter a louder voice, or labor more untiring- 
 
13 
 
 ly to demolish the strong holds of oppression. Therefore 
 I can bear that stigma. Nay, I would glory in carrying it, 
 to my dying day, if affixed for such a cause. But I could 
 not bear the scorpion stings of conscience which would 
 surely follow, if by .any voice or vote of mine, that broth- 
 er in Christ should be driven away from the table of com- 
 munion, because I do not think him entirely free from sin. 
 Now if you should put the general question, whether I 
 would admit slaveholders to our communion, I would re- 
 ply, first, I have no power to admit or debar, except so far 
 as there is power in one vote. Do you then inquire wheth- 
 er I would do it if I possessed the power 1 My answer is, 
 that depends upon circumstances. I cannot reply positive- 
 ly, either in the affirmative or negative, irrespective of cir- 
 cumstances. I would inquire whether a slaveholder who 
 should present himself, were involuntarily so, or if volun- 
 tarily, whether he appears to be actuated by benevolent 
 motives, — whether the fact of holding slaves is the only 
 objection, he giving good evidence, in all other particulars, 
 of being a new creature in Christ Jesus, — whether he is 
 desirous of seeing the truth, and knowing and doing all his 
 duty, — whether his sin might not be attributed to a want 
 of light and knowledge, which in his circumstances, he 
 could not have acquired, and if I found all these things so, 
 then my feeling would be, let my right hand forget its 
 cunning before it is raised to exclude a follower of Christ 
 from Christ's table. But if I found him, while professing 
 to have the love of Christ in his heart, actuated by selfish 
 motives, — selfishly holding in bonds, and buying, and beat- 
 ing, and selling those for whom Christ died, then I should 
 know of no right to admit him, for he does not exhibit a 
 christian spirit. In admitting those of the former class, I 
 would say to them, " Brethren, I regard slaveholding as a 
 sin. Except in a very few cases, I consider it as wholly 
 
14 
 
 wrong, and I protest against it. 1 urge you to look at the 
 subject prayerfully, again, and see if you ought not to-day 
 to set your bondmen free ;" and by saying these things, I 
 do free myself from the just charge of fellowshipping sla- 
 very, although I do not say that I will not accept as a chris- 
 tian, one whom I cannot but suppose Christ has accepted. 
 
 Although a system of slavery is everywhere and always 
 wrong, every individual instance of it is not necessarily so. 
 Fellowshipping an individual slaveholder, is not necessari- 
 ly fellowshipping slaveholding. Jesus Christ knew posi- 
 tively, that Judas had a devil, and yet he sat down with 
 him at the supper. Judas was not indeed a slaveholder, 
 but he was worse, for he sold his blessed Lord for thirty 
 pieces of silver, and then delivered him up into the hands 
 of his murderers. Christ knew that all this was in the 
 heart of Judas, and yet he admitted him to the supper, on 
 the ground of his being professedly a friend. But, by thus 
 communing with him, did Christ give countenance to his 
 sin 1 Did he fellowship that sin % This is a question 
 which it would be well to consider, in this connection. 
 
 It is true that slavery ought not to be in the church, but 
 from this it does not follow that no individual slaveholder 
 has a right to be in it. 
 
 These considerations entirely satisfy my own mind that 
 neither this church nor any other, is called upon to make 
 a positive announcement, that no man who holds slaves, 
 shall sit down at her table of communion. Nay, a church 
 has no moral right to pass such a vote. It would be to 
 take the ground that something more than credible evidence 
 of piety, of loving the Lord Jesus, is to be required for 
 admission to the church. But this was all that Christ or 
 his apostles ever required. It would be to make our views, 
 and corresponding action upon questions of moral reform, 
 a test of piety, — to set ourselves up as a standard to which 
 
15 
 
 all must come, in relation to such questions, if they would 
 be treated as christians, no matter how penitent for sin they 
 may be, how humble, how believing, how anxious to know, 
 and willing to do their duty. Let him among us who is 
 without sin, cast the first stone at the christian slaveholder. 
 
 3. In order to escape the just accusation of fellowship- 
 ping slavery, must the Congregational Pastors of New En- 
 gland refuse all christian and ministerial intercourse with 
 Pastors and Ecclesiastical Bodies in slaveholding states % 
 Is the fact that they hold such intercourse, a sufficient 
 ground for the continual ringing of the charge that they 
 are pro-slavery, and that through them, the churches of the 
 North are countenancing the system of oppression 1 
 
 If you choose to call the holding of such intercourse a 
 connection with slavery, then I admit the existence of a 
 connection. Indeed, there is, undeniably, a kind of con- 
 nection. But is it an unjustifiable connection % Is it one 
 which involves an approving, a fellowshipping of the sys- 
 tem ? I contend that it is not. I contend that our church- 
 es are not in fellowship with slavery. What are the facts 
 in the case X Our churches are distinct, complete, inde- 
 pendent bodies in themselves, subject to no human ecclesi- 
 astical authority ; and being thus ecclesiastically distinct 
 and complete, one church is not to be held responsible for 
 evils which exist in another, especially if she lifts a voice 
 of remonstrance, and exhortation to repentance. Such is 
 the position of a congregational church in regard to this 
 matter. Is the position changed, by an association of its 
 pastors with pastors of slaveholding churches I Here, too, 
 I enquire what are the facts in the case \ Briefly these : 
 I am pastor of this church. I am connected with an asso- 
 ciation of neighboring ministers. This body sends dele- 
 gates annually, to a still larger body, viz. an association of 
 all the orthodox congregational ministers of Massachusetts. 
 
16 
 
 This General Association appoints delegates to the Gene 
 ral Assemblies of the Presbyterian Church, and their dele- 
 gates are appointed in return. These are the facts. Now 
 I ask you, the members of this church, do you feel that 
 you are accountable for the existence of slavery in a por- 
 tion of the Presbyterian church, or do you feel, that as a 
 church, or as individuals, you are fellowshipping slavery, 
 because the ministers of Massachusetts choose thus to as- 
 sociate themselves for mutual improvement, and to inter- 
 change ministerial courtesies with a body, some of whose 
 members are slaveholders % Does conscience smite you on 
 this account \ If there be, in this way, any fellowshipping 
 of slavery, it is done by the pastors, and by them alone. 
 We come then to the question whether the pastors of the 
 churches of Massachusetts, are fostering slavery by such 
 association \ and whether they are bound to refuse chris* 
 tian courtesies to the Presbyterian pastors of the South 
 and West I And my answer to these questions, is an em- 
 phatic NO. I take the ground that there are true, and 
 faithful, and successful, and acceptable ministers of Jesus, 
 as there are private christians at the south, and in connec- 
 tion with the bodies under consideration, and therefore 
 they are to be recognized as such. I take it, furthermore, 
 that if our delegates go remonstrating against the abomi- 
 nations of slavery, they thus free themselves, and all whom 
 they represent, from all unjustifiable connection with sla- 
 very. And this they have done. This very year, our del- 
 egate to the Old School Assembly went charged with the 
 presentation of the following resolution, viz : 
 
 "Resolved: That in maintaining correspondence and 
 connection with the two General Assemblies of the Pres- 
 byterian church, we look with deep and fraternal solicitude 
 upon the position of those bodies with respect to the sin 
 of slavery ; — that our strong sympathies are with such 
 
17 
 
 brethren in those Assemblies as are laboring in an earnest 
 and christian spirit, to put an end to this evil ; — that we 
 desire our delegates to those Assemblies in a decided and 
 courteous manner to express our deep conviction, that the 
 rights of the enslaved, the cause of true religion, and the 
 honor of the Great Head of the church, require those eccle- 
 siastical bodies to use all their legitimate power and influence 
 for the speedy removal of slavery from the churches under 
 their supervision.' 1 '' This resolution, embodying the senti- 
 ments of the General Association upon this subject, was 
 presented. And it is but a repetition in different phrase- 
 ology, of sentiments previously expressed.* It is therefore 
 utterly ungenerous and untrue to assert that our ministers 
 are in sympathy with slavery. It is most illiberal to make 
 the body responsible for the opinions of any two or three 
 of its members, however eminent they may be. As one 
 of the associated clergy, I deny the right of any one, or 
 any number, to call that body the bulwark and defence of 
 slavery, because we see fit to treat christians as christians, 
 while at the same time, we are careful to reprove them for 
 their evil deeds- For one, I am not in fellowship with 
 slavery. I disfellowship it, altogether. 
 
 4. In order to be free from the charge of countenancing 
 
 * " The General Association of Massachusetts, having often and earnestly ex- 
 pressed their abhorrence of slavery, grieving that the system has yet existed and 
 is sustained by some Christians and Ecclesiastical Bodies as authorized by the 
 Word of God, do solemnly reaffirm their faith ; that the Word of God is utterly 
 opposed to slavery as it exists in these United States, and that, as far as the Bible 
 obtains the ascendency in the conscience and heart of Christians, and of the 
 Church, such Christians must and will separate themselves from all responsible 
 connection with the system ; and, in the spirit of fraternal fidelity, we would ear- 
 nestly beseech all Christians and Ecclesiastical Bodies connected with that sys- 
 tem, to be living examples of the Gospel, and in the light of God's truth careful- 
 ly to review their opinions and practice, and to do their utmost to free the Church 
 of Christ from the pollution of this guilt." — 9th page of the printed Minutes of 
 the Association for 1845. 
 
18 
 
 and fellowshipping slavery, must the church refuse to lend 
 her sympathy, and prayers, and pecuniary aid in the cause 
 of foreign missions, because we have heathen at home ? It is 
 true, that there are nearly three millions of heathen in our 
 own country, but there are six hundred millions in other 
 lands. It is true that slaves have souls, precious, immortal, 
 sinful souls., — souls that must repent or perish ; but three 
 millions of slaves' souls are no more precious than the same 
 number of Chinese or Nestorian souls. It is true that we 
 ought to remember the slaves, and pray that they may en- 
 joy the preaching of the pure gospel, but these three mill- 
 ions should not enlist all our sympathy, and prayers, and 
 alms, while we forget the six hundred millions who are 
 equally guilty, and equally immortal. I would pray for 
 the slave, in common with all others who are in distress 
 and destitution of the gospel, but I know of no warrant 
 for praying for him alone. 
 
 We cannot introduce our missionaries among the slaves- 
 Anti-slavery societies, and anti-slavery missionary societies 
 have never clone it, and for the reason that it cannot be 
 done. Shall we therefore refuse to send missionaries where 
 they can be introduced ? Shall we refuse to listen to the 
 cries of the pagan world, because there are slaves at home 1 ? 
 Where in the Bible is a charity, limited like this, inculca- 
 ted ? Christ told the disciples to go into all the world, — 
 not to stay at home because there was slavery there. 
 
 But perhaps you object to the missionary board, into 
 whose treasury our churches have been accustomed to send 
 their contributions, on the ground that it has a wrongful 
 connection with slavery. To this objection I would reply, 
 if you cannot let your rills of benevolence pour into this 
 channel, then, in compassion to the dying heathen, by your 
 remembrance of the Saviour's agony and death, and of 
 your own covenant vows, seek out another society to which 
 
19 
 
 you can give aid, that so the perishing in pagan lands may 
 live. 
 
 But let us inquire as to the connection of the A. B. C. 
 F. M. with slavery. The principal objections to it, are 
 three, and these I will briefly notice. 
 
 The first is, that the Board receives "the price of blood," 
 into its treasury. It is true that the Board receives mon- 
 ies from all parts of the country, — from the South as well 
 as the North. But in so doing, the Board no more coun- 
 tenances slavery, than does that anti-slavery merchant 
 whose vessels lie at Southern wharves, and come home la- 
 den with the products of the negro's toil, or that anti-sla- 
 very shoemaker who sends to the South his cargo of shoes, 
 and receives for them the price of blood. Many of the 
 bitterest opposers of the Board are doing this, — are eating 
 and wearing the products of slave labor, — are receiving 
 money directly from the South, a fid even putting that same 
 price of blood, into what they regard as a pure missionary 
 treasury. Has that money become purified while in their 
 hands'? Is it not as much stained with blood, as before'? 
 Perhaps every dollar you may now possess, was originally 
 earned by a slave, but are you bound to refuse to receive 
 and use it, until you have first ascertained whether such be 
 the case'? Not at all, and neither are our benevolent socie- 
 ties bound to institute an inquiry, when a contribution 
 comes, whether it has not had some connection with slave- 
 ry, and if so, to reject it. Paul directs to buy what is sold 
 in the market, asking no questions for conscience' sake, 
 although much of that meat had been offered to idols. 
 Partaking of it was not countenancing idolatry, ' provided 
 the partaker knew not that it had been so offered, and he 
 was not to inquire how that might be. Nor can it be rea- 
 sonably demanded of the American Board, that it should 
 inquire into the source of all its funds. Paul says, "If any 
 
20 
 
 man say to you, this is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat 
 not." So, if one should say to the Treasurer of the Board, 
 "I have just sold a man and here is his price, which I bring 
 to you," then it could not be received without sanctioning 
 that sale. 
 
 I cannot, therefore, consider the above objection valid. 
 
 It is urged, again, that slaveholders are admitted to the 
 mission churches under the care of the Board. It is true, 
 that among the Cherokee and Choctaw Indians, some such 
 admissions have taken place. This subject has been vir- 
 tually considered in another place, and for essentially the 
 same reasons before presented, I would now say that this 
 fact does not justify a withdrawal of patronage from the 
 Board I would that there were no slaveholders in the 
 churches, but the Missionaries, w r ho were best qualified to 
 judge in the case, saw fit to receive them, on the ground 
 of penitence and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, and there- 
 fore, this fact should not forfeit to the Board, the confidence 
 and support of the christian community; for, under the cir- 
 cumstances, it seemed to be best, — best for master and 
 slave, best for the church and the cause of Christ, — that 
 the giving up of their slaves should not be made a test of 
 discipleship. 
 
 The chief remaining objection to the Board, is that slave 
 labor has been hired by some of the missionaries. Among 
 the Choctaws there have been a few such cases. There 
 was much manual labor necessary to be done, and not 
 being able to procure free, white laborers, the missionaries 
 were obliged to avail themselves of slave labor, to some 
 extent. The Board however disapproved of the practice, 
 inasmuch as it did seem to lend countenance to the system 
 of oppression, and more than two years ago, sent a long 
 communication upon the subject, to the mission. From 
 that letter, I make the following extract. "In this state 
 
21 
 
 of things, it appears to be our duty to ask you, first of all, 
 to inquire once more into the supposed necessity of this 
 practice, and to see if slave labor cannot, in some way, be 
 dispensed with. And if you can discover no method by 
 which a change can be effected, we submit for your con- 
 sideration, whether it be not desirable to request the Choc- 
 taw government to release us from our engagement in re- 
 spect to the boarding schools. It is with pain that we 
 present this alternative, but such are our views of duty in 
 the case, that we cannot suggest a different course." 
 
 Such is the extract. The result is, that only one slave 
 is now employed, and doubtless the labors of that one will 
 soon be dispensed with. Another Board has repeatedly 
 declared that it can never sustain any relation to slavery, 
 which implies approbation of the system. It appears to 
 me, therefore, that a heart filled with love and forbearance, 
 and warm with a true missionary spirit, can reasonably ask 
 of the Board nothing more. It is an anti-slavery Board, 
 and does send out an anti-slavery gospel, as purely so as 
 that proclaimed by any other organization. 
 
 There is an additional consideration, which I deem of 
 no little importance. It is the fact that God, the God of 
 Liberty, and Righteousness, and Truth, and Love, does 
 most signally bless this Board. Its successes are most 
 wonderful. They at least equal the success granted to any 
 other organization. The Holy Spirit is all over the field,, 
 gathering in a rich harvest of souls. Now, so long as 
 God thus sets to the Board the seal of his approbation, I 
 think we may venture to favor and support it, without a 
 fear that we shall thus cherish the system of slavery. 
 
 III. If the church, as a body, does not come up to 
 what an individual member regards as the standard of 
 duty, in feeling and action upon this subject, what is that 
 man's duty as an individual 1 
 
22 
 
 Is it his duty to leave the church X What good will 
 that do X Whom will it benefit \ Whom will it convince 
 of his error ? It can do no good to the slave. On the 
 other hand, it will do him much harm, for tlie hope of the 
 slave is in the church. It is the spirit of the gospel, per- 
 vading the hearts of men, that is to melt the bondman's 
 chains, and break off his fetters. But the church is the 
 repository, the defender, and the extender of the gospel. 
 This she was appointed to do ; this she has done, and this 
 she is doing ; and in God's own time Christianity will re- 
 move every form of evil, and fill the world with freedom 
 and love. 
 
 If the church, therefore, is not right, surely it is the 
 duty of those individuals who are right, to stay in it, and 
 endeavor to set it right. If they labor unsuccessfully, they 
 will be acquitted, — they have nevertheless discharged their 
 duty. Even if the church, as a body, ivere fellowshipping 
 slavery, if vve, as individuals, disfellowship it, and labor 
 untiringly for its removal, we shall stand acquitted at the 
 bar of conscience, and at the bar of God. Far better is it 
 to remain, and even suffer a little for conscience' sake, and 
 hope, and wait, and pray for the dawn of a better day, 
 than to break away from our holy and eternal covenant ; 
 from the communion of saints, and from all the sacred or- 
 dinances of religion, when such a course can do no good, 
 but must do much harm to the cause of the slave, and the 
 cause of Christ universally. 
 
 My hearers, I have done. I have freely spoken my sen- 
 timents. You may not approve of them. I do not expect 
 you all will. It would be a miracle if you should. I have 
 spoken warmly, — some of you will say fanatically, while 
 others will think me far behind the position which I ought 
 to take. I pray you now to remember, that you all differ 
 Jrom me as widely as I do from yozc, and whether you are 
 
23 
 
 willing or not, to tolerate my views, I cheerfully tolerate 
 yours. However applicable any thing which I have said, 
 may be, to any in this audience, I repeat it, that I have not 
 intended my remarks as personal for them. I think that 
 there are views somewhat prevalent in our churches, which 
 are fatal to all personal growth in grace, and enjoyment of 
 religion, as well as detrimental to the prosperity of Christ's 
 cause, and the cause of humanity. Therefore I have 
 spoken as I have. 
 
 And now, may God forgive all that has been wrong in 
 spirit and in word ; accept and bless all that has been true 
 and sincere ; guide us all in the way of duty ; free the 
 bondman ; convert the pagan, and gather us all at last in 
 one eternal home in Heaven. Amen. 
 
5* 
 

 $ 
 
 Ip f. 
 
 a 
 
 * • its y 
 
 *b>? 
 
 
 & 
 
 
 
 
 i0* •*••« 
 
 <v* * • • a 
 

 J>% 
 
 
 fa-V /^^>o .A-^V ***tid£k>» 
 
 • •« 
 
 °* *•••' a V " ,# 4** °+ 
 
 °o 
 
 
 .•*••*. "> V - ,#< 
 
 
 k * 
 
 
 S**o° V^ 5 V %*^?^V V^V 
 
 
 
 
 ^'''" m \<r 
 
 
 ».R^.». --v