SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. BY WILLIAM HOSIER " IT IS A DEBT WE OWE TO THE PURITY OF OTTR RELIGION, TO SHOW THAT IT IS AT VARI- ANCE with that law which wabrants slavert."— Patrick, Henry. AUBURN: WILLIAM J. MOSES. 1853. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year one thousand eight hundred and fifty-three, by WILLIAM HOSMEE, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the Northern District of New- York. BTEREOTTPED BY BEEBY AND MILLEli, AUBTJEK. FEE FACE. Having been engaged, for several months past, in a news- paper controversy on the subject of slavery, and having a desire to prolong, as well as to deepen, the impression of truth, the author has deemed it incumbent upon him to present his views to the public in a more systematic and permanent form. He flatters himself that his sentiments, when understood, will be found to have no other ultraism than that of truth, and no other tendency than that of righteousness. It is made our duty to " weep with those that weep," and to " remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them." The example of the Samaritan, who relieved the man that fell among thieves, is commended to our notice by the injunction, " Go and do thou likewise." It would doubtless be easier for the present, to pass by on the other side, like the Levite, and leave the forlorn and wretched uncared for ; but in that event, what becomes of Christian principle 1 and what of fraternal feeling 1 That a large number of the inhabitants of this Republic — more than one-eighth of our entire population — have been robbed of.every personal, social, civil, political and religious right, IV PREFACE. and are at this moment exposed to sale in the market, like cat- tle — is no secret. But when this outrage is charged upon its perpetrators as a crime, the public are informed that no wrong has been done — that Christianity sanctions the act. Believing that this allegation is wholly unfounded, and that Christianity no more sanctions slavery than it does other high crimes, the writer has endeavored to express his dissent plainly, but can- didly, and with such argumentative force as patient thought and thorough conviction have enabled liim to command. CONTENTS. ♦ -♦ PART I. THE MORAL CHARACTER OF SLAVERY. CHAPTER I. SLAYEEY DEFINED, 9 PAhH. CHAPTER n. SLAYEEY A SIN", 19 CHAPTER m. SLAYEEY A GEEAT SIN, 29 CHAPTER IV. SLAYEEY A SIN" ENDEE ALL CIECUMSTANCES, ... 33 CHAPTER V. SLAYEEY NOT SANCTIONED BY THE OLD TESTAMENT, . 44 CHAPTER VI. 6LAYEEY NOT SANCTIONED BY TETE NEW TESTAMENT, . 52 VI CONTEXTS. CHAPTER YE. PAGB. SLAVERY NEVER AN ACT OF BENEVOLENCE, ... 61 CHAPTER VIII. SLAVERY NEVER THE RESULT OF NECESSITY, . 4 PART II. THE RELATION OF SLAVERY TO THE CHURCH. CHAPTER I. SLAVES CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS, 84: CHAPTER H. SLAVE-HOLDERS CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS, .... 98 CHAPTER III. SLAVERY CANNOT EXIST IN THE CHURCH, . . . .115 PART III. DUTY OF THE CHURCH IX RELATIOX TO SLAVERY. CHAPTER I. EXTIRPATION OF SLAVERY FROM THE CHURCH, . . 123 CHAPTER II. EXTIRFATION OF SLAVERY FROM THE WORLD, . . 129 CONTENTS. VTI CHAPTER IH. PAGE. THE EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY DEMANDED BY AN IMPAR- TIAL ADMINISTRATION OF CHURCH DISCIPLINE, . 134: CHAPTER IV. THE EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL TO THE PEACE AND UNITY OF THE CHURCH, 141 CHAPTER V. THE EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL TO THE EVAN- GELIZATION OF THE WORLD, 155 CHAPTER VI. THE EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY INEVITABLE, . . . . 162 CHAPTER Vn. CIVIL FREEDOM SHOULD BE MADE SUBSERVIENT TO THE CAUSE OF EMANCIPATION, 173 CHAPTER Vm. NO MIDDLE GROUND THE CHURCH MUST EITHER ABOLISH SLAVERY OR ADOPT IT, 179 CHAPTER IX. CONCLUSION, 197 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. PART I. THE MORAL CHARACTER OF SLAVERY. CHAPTER I. SLAVERY DEFINED. It is important, in the outset of this discussion, to ascertain the exact meaning of the term Slavery. Ma- ny have appeared as the defenders of slavery, who never would have done so, had they admitted the full import of the word. They have narrowed down the meaning of the term until — in their own imagination — it was reduced to a defensible point, and then, with great industry, endeavored to construct arguments for its support. All this labor might have been saved, and the cause of truth not a little advanced, if they had adhered to the established use of words. A slave, in the proper sense of the word, is one whose personal, political, civil, and religious rights have been swept away — one who may be bought and 1* 10 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. sold, like any other property, and who is obliged to obey the commands of a master, whether those com- mands are right or wrong. Dr. Webster defines the word slave as follows: 1. "A person who is wholly subject to the will of another; one who has no free- dom of action, but whose person and services are wholly under the control of another. The slaves of modern times are generally purchased like horses and oxen. 2. One who has lost the power of resistance ; or, one who surrenders himself to any power whatev- er, as a slave to passion, to lust, to ambition." This is, perhaps, the highest literary authority on the subject, and it is in entire accordance with the slave laws, both of our own and other countries, whether relating to the present age, or to any former period. A few citations from slave laws, which are always the same in substance, will settle this question : " A slave is one who is in the power of the master to whom he belongs. The master may sell him, dispose of his person, his industry, and his labor ; he can do nothing, possess nothing, nor acquire anything but what must belong to his master." (Laivs of Louisiana, Civil Code, Art. 35.) " The slave is entirely subject to the will of his master." (Id., Civil Code, Art. 273.) " Slaves shall be deemed, held, taken, reputed, and adjudged in law, to be chattels personal, in the hands of their own- ers and possessors, and their executors, administrators, and as- signs, to all intents, constructions, and purposes whatsoever." (Laws of South Carolina, Brev. Dig., 229.) " In case the personal property of a ward shall consist of spe- SL AVERY DEFINED. 11 cific articles, such as slaves, working beasts, animals of any kind, stock, furniture, plate, books, and so forth, the court, if it shall deem it advantageous to the ward, may, at any time, pass an < arder for the sale thereof." (Laws of Maryland, Act of 1798, Chap. 61.) The above quotations are a sample of tbe slave laws of every State and every nation. In some in- stances there may be more rigor, in others less, but slavery never exists in the absence of the above prin- ciples. It is of slavery that we write — not of its abuses. To treat of the abuses of slavery, would be as absurd as to treat of the abuses of any other high crime. Hence, our reference to the slave code is sparing, and embraces only a few of its most approved and unques- tioned principles. What possible enormities are, or have been, engrafted upon these principles, is compar- atively unimportant, since the system, under any con- ceivable administration, would be utterly intolerable. It is not for us to talk of incidental and contingent horrors attendant upon guilt — it does not become a grave, ethical discussion to take advantage of such things. If slavery, in its most common and blame- less character, is not wholly vile and altogether be- yond endurance — if it be not one of the highest crimes ever committed by man — then we yield the ground at once. AVe have no wish to take advantage of any accidental evils connected with slavery. A good system might be abused, but the abuses would not prove tbe Bjstem bad. In discussing the moral character of an act, we only wish to know what the 12 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. act is in its most simple form. Were we discussing the moral character of murder, we should not wish to encumber the subject with any special cruelties which might have taken place at some particular time ; we should only want to know what murder is in its na- ture — in its most common and least exaggerated character. "We have to do with the substance of sla- very, and not with its incidents. There are three elements of the slave system wholly inseparable from it — three characteristics of the slave, which distinguish his condition from that of all other persons : 1. The slave is under the entire control of his mas- ter. 2. The slave is property — a chattel, real or personal. 3. The slave is a perpetual, unconditional, heredi- tary servant. Of these in order. Absolute Subjection. The entire supremacy of the master is absolute- ly essential to slavery. The system could not exist if this main pillar were removed. Masters claim, and the law gives them, entire control. Slaves must do what they are bidden, be it right or wrong, or suffer any punishment their owners see proper to inflict. The law recognizes no right in the slave to resist the master in anything — no, not even in de- fending his own life or virtue. It is true, the slave laws of this country do not directly authorize the master to take the life of the slave at pleasure ; and SLAVETCY DEFINED. 13 in this respect they are perhaps better than the slave laws of ancient Greece and Rome ; bnt all slave own- ers indirectly have this authority. They may com- mand the slave to do what they please, and kill him if he disobeys — that is, whip him to death for stub- bornness, or shoot him for alleged resistance. As no slave is allowed to be a witness in any case against his master, or any other white person, it is impossible to bring the offender to justice, nnless he has had the indiscretion to commit the offence before a white per- son. The slave has not one religious or civil privi- lege guaranteed to him. In respect to everything of this kind, he stands before the law, not as a human being, but as a brute, to be disposed of according to the will of the owner. Blackstone truly calls this power " absolute and unlimited," and considers it es- sential to the idea of slavery : ' : Pure and proper slavery does not, nay, cannot, subsist in England: such, I mean, whereby an absolute and unlimited power is given to the master over the life and fortune of the slave. (Obmwa., Book i, Ch. 14.) It would be well if the law went no farther, but it even lays the master under disabilities : he may not emancipate the slave, nor pay him wages, nor elevate him by education; that is, the law will not permit either of these things without embarrassment, and some of them it wholly prohibits. Thus, while tho master has all authority for evil towards his slave, his authority for good is seriously abridged. It follows, therefore, that slavery is not only an absolute personal 14 SLAVERY AXD THE CHUECH. despotism on the part of the master, but a malignant despotism — it may never relax into justice or gene- rosity. The law may, or may not authorize special bar- barity; but it never gives to the master less than entire and undisputed authority over the slave. Hence, where such control is wanting, we cannot denominate the condition slavery — it is not slavery, whatever else it may be. Slaves are Property. The slave is unquestionably property, and nothing but property — a chattel — so claimed by all slave- holders, and so designated by all slave laws. By this one provision he is stricken from the human, and classed with the brute. He ceases to be a man, and takes rank with cattle. He is mere pro- perty — a thing to be bought, and sold, and possess- ed, as freely and truly as a horse or an ox, or any inanimate chattel, as, for instance, a watch or a wagon. It is not merely the slave's services that are owned, or bought, or sold in this manner ; no — it is himself — his body and soul, with all their powers and capabilities. It is the man converted into a thing, that constitutes the article of traffic. To man, as man, belong certain inalienable rights; but toman, as a slave, belongs nothing. His flesh, and bones, and spirit, and life, are the property of another. He is a chattel personal, and liable to all the chances of property, like any other chattel. He has not even the right to life. His master may be forbidden to kill him, but the slave has no right to remonstrate against SLAVERY DEFINED. 15 being killed. This feature of slavery is considered by Mr. Barnes as the chief characteristic of the institu- tion. It is, however, but one of the characteristics of slavery ; there are other things equally funda- mental, although such ownership as the master has in the slave is wholly unknown to any other relation in life. The husband possesses his wife, but she is not a chattel ; parents possess children, but they are not chattels ; masters have servants, but servants are not chattels : in none of these relations is there anything analogous to this feature of slavery. It is slavery, and slavery only, that strips a man of humanity so completely as to make him take rank with articles of merchandise. Slaves are Servants. Some have endeavored to show that slavery con- sists in mere servitude. " I define slavery," says Dr. Paley, " to be an obligation to labor for the benefit of the master, without the contract or con- sent of the servant." (Mor. and Pol. Phil., Book iii, Ch. 3.) This is only a description of involuntary servitude, and includes but a part of what is necessary to con- stitute slavery. Dr. Fuller, who tries to defend slavery on the basis of this definition, is, therefore, wholly at fault. Blackstone expressly affirms that servitude may be perpetual, where slavery is not pos- sible : "A slave or a negro, the moment he lands in England, falls under the protection of the law, and so far becomes a free- 16 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. man ; though the master's right to his services may possibly continue." (Com?n., Book i, Ch. 1.) Again : " It is now laid down that a slave, or negro, the in- stant he lands in England, becomes a freeman ; that is, the law will protect him in the enjoyment of his person and his property ; yet with regard to any right which the master may have lawfully acquired to the perpetual service of John or Thomas, this will remain exactly the same." (Id., Book i, Ch. 14.) It will not do, therefore, to make the idea of ser- vitude alone, the representative of slavery, inasmuch as it comprehends only one element of slavery^. By way of illustration, we may take the crime of mur- der, and define it thus — " killing a human being ;" or even thus, " willfully killing a human being." But would either of these definitions be correct ? Xot at all. And yet it is true, beyond all doubt, that killing a human being is essential to the crime of murder, as cognizable by our laws. The fact is, the above defini- tions include only a part of what is comprehended in the crime specified, and for this reason cannot be ad- mitted as correct. The same is true of Dr. Paley's definition of slavery. He has defined what may be a crime, but not what constitutes the crime in ques- tion. The difference is this : all slaves are servants, but all servants are not slaves. Kor does the qual- ification — '-without the contract or consent of the servant" — by any means embrace all the essential features of the slave system. A servant, though his servitude bo perpetual, may be no chattel; his re- maining personal rights may be secured by law as ef- SLAVERY DEFINED. 17 fectually as those of any other man, and his children may be free in all respects. But the servitude of the slave is perpetual, unconditional, and hereditary- it applies to him and all his descendants for all time, without any qualifications whatever. Either the above is a just exposition of slavery, or we have no word in our language expressive of the condition of the unemancipated colored man in the Southern States. A servant he is, and that, too, un- der the most abject circumstances, but he is far more than a servant: he is a thing— a chattel personal, and the service which he performs is done, not with his own hands, for he has no hands with which to la- bor—his limbs belong to his master. He is more than a servant chattel— he is a subject of the most absolute despotism. The master's will is the slave's only law. He may heed no other command, whether emana- ting from God or man. It appears, therefore, that slavery is a term used to signify a complication of wrongs. It denotes one who is stripped of all but life, and whose life is held by a very uncertain tenure — the will of his master. This is slavery as it exists among us, and as it has existed in all ages of the world. It is not an exagger- ated picture, drawn for effect, but an exact and care- ful delineation of the system, as it stands recorded up- on the statute books of slave-holding States. Kor are these laws in any respect a dead letter. They are everywhere enforced to the full extent, or at least as much so as any human laws. We never hear of the slave's becoming free through the inoperative char- 18 SLAVERY AND TIIE CHURCH. acter of the laws. His personal treatment may be better or worse, but he is still a thing, and not a man. His good treatment gains no legal immunities for him, or his wife, or his children. Chattels thej are, and chattels they must forever remain, while un- der the slave law. Our estimate of the system must be formed on the basis of its entire character, and not on any of its particular features. The parts separately may be more tolerable than when combined. We shall, there- fore, speak of slavery, not as it has been defined by its apologists, but as it is — not as an ideality which never had an existence, except in the mind of its in- ventor, but as an actual institution, known and read of all men. We readily admit, that the continued introduction of what does not belong to the definition, would vitiate it, just as certainly as do the omissions which we have noticed in the definition of murder. If we should define murder to be " killing a man with malice aforethought, by burning him over a slow fire," the definition would be faulty through excess— it includes more than is necessary, and more than commonly attaches to the crime of murder. Just so with slavery : if we define it to be " an ob- ligation to labor for the benefit of the master, with- out the contract or consent of the servant, and also to be a chattel personal in the hands of the master, sub- mitting, in all things to his sovereign, unlimited con- trol, and receiving forty lashes a day" — the definition will at once be pronounced incorrect, because the forty lashes per day are not essential to the condition SLAVEItY DEFINED. 19 of the slave, nor arc they commonly inflicted. They may be inflicted if the master pleases, and so may the murderer burn his victim over a slow fire, or cut him into inch pieces. The definition we have given is based on the laws of the slave States, and on the entire history of slavery, as it now prevails, and lias prevailed in all ages < >f the world. It is important to distinguish between slavery and serfdom, or ville- na^e, or servitude. The latter have some of the ele- ments of slavery — just as excusable homicide has some of the elements of willful murder — but, as we never confound the different kinds of killing, so neither should we the different kinds of servitude. Let slavery stand upon its own merits, as defined by law, and by the common language of men, especially where its ethical character is under consideration. We have no right to pervert the meaning of the term, and then pronounce it either good or bad, according to our definition. CHAPTER II. SLAVERY A SIN". As we have defined slavery, its moral obliquity ad- mits of no dispute, except among that class who be- lieve the slave was made to be a slave, and that he has no capacities or rights beyond what are provided 20 SLAVERY AXD THE CrTLTtCH. for in that abject condition. But even those who base their argument on the assnmed inferiority of the slave, must yield the point, or push their conclusions much farther than they have yet done. The humanity of the slave must be denied, or the sinfulness of slavery is evident. Short of this extreme, the advocates of slavery cannot stop ; because the rights of man be- long to man under every exigency of life ; they are inherent in his nature, and cannot be separated there- from by the arbitrary institutions of society. Human laws do not reach the endowments which we receive from nature. Manhood is prior to law, and therefore always paramount when the claims of law and hu- manity come into conflict. The sinfulness of Slavery is established by argu- ments drawn from the following sources : 1. The constitution of man. 2. The civil law. 3. The moral sense of mankind. 4. The Scriptures. 1. The Constitution of Man. " Sin is the transgression of the law." It is the trans- gression of any right law, whether divine or human. The law of God is embodied in the constitution of his creatures no less plainly than in the ten commandments that were written upon tables of stone. The nature and faculties of man declare for what he was made, and proclaim slavery a violence and an indignity offered to the Creator's work. The slave is a man, and hence, justly entitled to be treated as a man. He is a man, SLAVERY A SIN. 21 and is obligated to perforin the duties of a man. But slavery will admit of neither; it takes away all his rights as a member of the human family, and all his obligations as a creature of God. The following ob- servations of Dr. Whewell bear upon both of these points with much force : "As far as the limits of humanity extend, there are mutual tirs of duty which bind together all men, and as the basis of all others, a duty of mutual kindness; which, as we see, is ac- knowledged by the jurists as well as the moralists of Rome, in spite of the originally narrow basis of their jurisprudence. The progress of the conception of humanity, as a universal bond which knits together the whole human race, and makes kind- ness to every member of it a duty, was immeasurably pro- moted by the teaching and influence of Christianity. In the course of time, domestic slavery was abolished ; and marriage received the sanction of the church, and was alike honorable in all. The antipathies of nations, the jealousies of classes, the selfishness, fierceness and coldness of men's hearts, the narrow- ness and dimness of their understandings, have prevented their receiving cordially and fully the comprehensive precepts of be- nevolence which Christianity delivers ; but, as these obstacles have been more and more overcome, the doctrine has been more and more assented to, and felt to be true, by all persons of moral culture ; that there is a duty of universal benevolence which wo are to bear to men as men ; and which we are to fulfill by dealing with them as men — as beings having the like affec- tions and reason, rights and claims which we ourselves have. " This conception of humanity as a principle within us, re- quiring us to recognize in others the same rights which we claim for ourselves, may be further illustrated. Such a princi ple of humanity, requiring us to recognize men as men, requires us more especially to recognize them as such in their capacity of 22 SLAVEBT AND THE CHURCH. moral agents. They have not only like desires and affec- tions with ourselves, but also like faculties of reason and self- guidance, by which they discern the difference of right and wrong, and feel the duty of doing the right and abstaining from the wrong. This view of their condition as moral agents, is that by which we must entirely sympathize with them ; as it is the view of our own condition in which we are fully conscious of ourselves. Humanity requires that we should feel satisfaction in the desires and means of enjoyment of our fellow men ; but humanity requires, still more clearly, that we should feel a sat- isfaction in their having the desires and the means of doing their duty. Now, the fundamental rights of which we have so often spoken, the rights of the person, of property, and the like, are means and necessary conditions of duty. It is necessary to moral action, that the agent should be free, not liable to un- limited and unregulated constraint and violence ; that is, that he should have the rights of the person. It is necessary to moral action, that the agent should have some command over external tilings ; for this is implied in action ; that is, it is ne- cessary that he should have the rights of property. And, in like manner, in order that any class of persons may exist perma- nently in a community, as moral agents, it is requisite that they should possess the right of marriage ; for without that right, some of the strongest of man's desires cannot be under moral control ; nor can the sentiment of rights be transmitted from one gene- ration to another. The right of contract is a necessary accom- paniment of the right of property ; for, if the person can pos- sess, he may buy and sell. And thus these rights are necessary conditions of men's being moral agents ; and the humanity which makes us desire that all men should be able to regulate themselves by a love of duty, requires that all should be invest- ed with these rights." {Mem. Mor., Book iii, Chap. 23.) The slave, being human, must be permitted to ex- ercise the functions of humanity, or the end for which SLAVERY A GLNf. 23 he was created is contravened. If lie is to be degra- ded from manhood to a level with the brutes, his hu- man endowments are superfluous, and ought to have been withheld. If his powers of thought are not to be exercised, if his sense of obligation is to be contract- ed to the single point of obedience to his master, and if he may neither possess anything, nor acquire any- thing, why were the faculties, the capacity for doing these things, conferred upon him ? Was it intended that these powers should remain latent ? or were they as evidently designed to be cultivated in the slave as in other men 1 The slave is a man, and has the right to be a man. This is the order of God with reference to him, and as plainly expressed as if it had been the subject of a special revelation from Heaven. Do we need a revelation to inform us what our hands and feet, our eyes and ears, were made for ? Could a su- pernatural communication of that kind render their use any more apparent ? Not in the least. Finding, then, man endowed as he is, the use of those endow- ments can no longer be questioned. If the eye was made to see with in one case, it was made to see with in all cases ; that is, it was made to be used, and used according to its original design. To make a man throw aside his humanity and become a chattel, to blot him out from civil society, and remove from him eve- ry right which is peculiar to man — to do all this, is as clearly sinful as it would be to cut off the hands or the feet without cause, and even more so, because the intellectual, social and moral powers which slave- ry blights, are of greater consequence than the mem- 24 SLAVERY AXD THE CHURCH. bers of the body. In short, under the slave system, man cannot be man ; and this blight upon his powers, this necessity of sinking below the nature that God has given, is manifestly a perversion of that nature, and a sin against the primal law of his being. 2. The Civil Law. Slavery is a perversion of nature, and can only exist by positive statute. This is admitted by slave-holders themselves. No man is born a slave, except as the civil law under which he is born declares him to be such. It is not remarkable, therefore, that all law is naturally against the institution. Slave legislation is special ; it is a departure from all the ordinary prin- ciples of law-making. The citation of authorities here can scarcely be necessary, since it is known to all that the sole design of law is to promote the wel- fare of men. Its objects are rights and wrongs — the enforcement of the former and the prohibition of the latter. Blackstone says the civil law is properly de- fined to be, " A rule of civil conduct, prescribed by the supreme power in the State, commanding what is right and prohibiting what is wrong." (Comm., Int., Section 2.) He further adds : " Justinian lias reduced the whole doctrine of law to these three general precepts: 1. That we should live honestly; 2. Should hurt nobody ; 3. And should render to every one his due." (Ibid.) Burke says, " law is beneficence acting by rule;" and SLAVERY A SIX. with tliis agree all writers on law. Tlic ci\ il law is, therefore, clearly on the side of tin If the in- stitution of law bears upon him at all, it is bound by its very nature to do him good. The law should know him only for his benefit. And yet, si range to Bay, law is made the instrument of the complete and total version of all his rights. By law, he is driven from among men, and made to take rank with brutes. Thus an institution which professedly aims at the happiness of every man, becomes the direct occasion of immeas- urable injustice. Slavery is the greatest possible out rage upon law ; it destroys every thing that law was intended to preserve. I shall not here attempt to show the causes of this anomaly, hut simply mark its atrocity. That people who cherish civil law, and who thereby profess to he aiming at protection and jus for all, should so far pervert law as to render it de- structive of all protection and justice, is truly aston- ishing. The slave is a man, and claims, as rightfully as any other man, every advantage that can flow from the civil law. How men can sustain Buch law, and yet deny the colored man all participation in it- ben- efits, is a mystery not easily solved. It is violating all the principles of law. If the negro is a man, he is entitled to protection, and to withhold it from him is an arbitrary and wicked departure from the avow- ed purposes of government. AVe see not how slavery can be regarded otherwise than sin, if the maxii: law are right, for it pours contempt upon them all. Instead of guarding, it robs; instead of aining rights, it tramples them in the du 2 26 SLAVERY AND THE CHUECH. 3. The Moral Sense of Mankind. Slavery is repugnant to the moral feelings. Law may be perverted till it sanctions the greatest crimes, but the moral sense of man must always condemn it. The slave is, or is not, a man ; if the former, he has the same rights as other men ; if the latter, his rights are on- ] v those of brute nature. Whatever the law may ordain in the case, conscience is inflexible. We must either cease to make moral distinctions — must abandon all ideas of right and wrong, as applicable to men, or else allow that the slave has the same rights as our- selves. There is no rule in ethics by which we can distinguish the rights of the white man from the rights of the colored man. Justice is the same to both ; protection, liberty, happiness, and all other blessings are the same to man, whatever may be the color of his skin. If the law gives all power to one complex- ion and denies all to the other, then the law is palpa- bly subversive of right — it is wanting in that attri- bute of rectitude which is essential to law. Slavery cannot be made to agree with moral prin- ciple, except upon the gratuitous assumption that the slave is not human. In order to fasten chains upon the unoffending negro, we have to sever him from the brotherhood of man. This the moral sense will not admit, and hence slavery is of necessity branded as a crime. 4. The Scriptures. It has been assumed by the supporters of slavery, that the institution is sanctioned by the Scriptures. SLAVERY A SIN. 27 Indeed, they have claimed for it almost every kind of support, but we shall show now, and mure fully hereafter, that slavery is not only not countenanced by the Lible, but absolutely prohibited. The ques- tion is not, whether sonic particular features of slavery ever had an existence under the sanction of Scripture, but whether or not the system of slave- ry, as it exists in tin's country and has existed in eve- ry country, and in every age, is s<> sanctioned. Ser- vitude was allowed, but we have shown that servitude alone is not slavery. The purchase of a servant was allowed, but did not reduce the servant to a chattel. Beyond this, no one will presume to allege Scripture authority for the complicated abominations implied in the term slavery. On the other hand, the Scriptures pointedly assert the manhood of man, declaring- that God " hath made of one blood all nations of men," and that " he is no respecter of persons." These dec- larations overthrow the only foundation on which slavery rests. As we have said, it is not possible in physiology, or law, or morals, to find a reason for en- slaving a man ; he must be presumed to be an inferi- or nature, before so great a calamity can he inflicted upon him. But. Christianity sternly repels all ideas of inferiority as attaching to any particular race or class of mankind. Again, the Scriptures may not prohibit slavery in form, but they do so in foci, by enjoining holiness upon all men, and forbidding in de- tail the several >ins which, in their aggregate, consti- tute the crime of slavery. Injustice is prohibited, and this prohibition strikes at the robbery practiced by 28 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. the slave-holder, in denying the slave the rights which belong to him as a member of the human family. In like manner, unkindness, cruelty, neglect, and oppres- sion are forbidden towards all men, and, consequent- ly, towards the slave. But slavery could not exist, apart from these wrongs ; it is made up of them, and falls to the ground when they cease. The Scriptures enjoin all kindness towards our fellow men, but sla- very is opposed to kindness — it is ever studious of all unkindness to its victims. Once more, the Scriptures command us to love our neighbor as ourselves, but this cannot be done by him who denies his brother personal freedom and the rights of manhood. But more than all, the obligations which the Bible lays upon every man, render slavery an utter impos- sibility. God claims supreme authority over every man, and has made it the duty of every man to obey him in all things. This limits the despotism of slavery. It also prevents the traffic in men. They cannot be chattels, and still be Christians. They have the duties of husband and wife, parents and children, to perform, and these duties, every one of them, are in open and eternal conflict with slavery. We therefore conclude that the Bible ignores the re- lation of master and slave, whatever it may teach re- specting master and servant. SLAVERY A GREAT SIX. 20 CHAPTER III. SLAVERY A GREAT SIN. The conclusion that slavery is a sin — however clearly sustained — does by no means cover the whole ground. It is a sin, beyond doubt, but there arc ma- ny who esteem it only a venial sin — such an one as is greatly palliated by the circumstances, having lit- tle or nothing of the enormity which attaches to crime. But all such notions are most unfounded. Slavery is not only a sin, but a sin of the greatest atrocity. It is an enormity in the moral world. It breaks every law of God, and every law of man — except the slave law. Not, indeed, if slavery is only servitude — not if we exclude despotism and chattel- ship. Were there nothing more than simple service required of the slave, and had he secured to him the rights of a man in all other respects, his condition might be tolerable, or, if not tolerable, yet much less intolerable than now, and, therefore, less guilty. Such mitigation is unknown — where slavery is, there man always is, and always must be, a chattel, " en- tirely subject to the control of his master." The de- gradation is total, and the sin proportionate. The extreme criminality of slavery as compared with other infractions of law, lies in its cutting off the possibilities of happiness. It takes not singly — it invades not by degrees, but sweeps everything at once and forever. Other crimes usually assault us in 30 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. detail, and rob or injure by piece-meal, taking here and there a little, clandestinely or otherwise, but leav- ing on the whole far more than they take. The most rapacious robber, if he spares life, leaves character and liberty, wife and children, health and hope. But the slave-holder takes all — person and property, wife and children, together with all their capacities and powers, for all time to come. Nothing is left to the slave, unless it be animal life, and that is his — or rather in his possession, for his master's use — only on the most precarious terms. Common robbery is un- doubtedly a great crime, yet, contrasted with slavery, it sinks into utter insignificance ; it is a fault so venial that it scarcely deserves censure. Theft is a crime, but wdiat other thief ever stole as the slave-hol- der steals ? He takes the man and all his present and future acquisitions. Oppression is a sin, yet no mere political tyrant ever crushed humanity in so grievous a manner as the slave-holder. The worst of rulers never claimed to sell his subjects as he would cattle — ■ never made them articles of merchandise, and traf- ficked in them without restraint — never forbid their marriage, or owning property, or becoming citizens. But slave-holders do this, and do it according to law. Our laws declare the foreign slave trade to be ifiracy, and punish it with death, but the domestic slave trade, which is every way as bad, they uphold with all the strength of the government. Thus it is clear that slavery is equivalent to a com- bination of all the worst acts known to the penal code of civilized nations, if we except the single crime of SLAVERY A GREAT SIN. 31 munlcr. And even tills exception can hardly bo made, because the slave's life has no adequate legal protection. Henceil ation to pronounce the system the k> sum of all \ illainies." It amounts to tlii- by the most sober calculation. All rights that the law could or should have pr Btroyed, by putting the individual beyond the pale of society. All that civil \u\\ would have made his, is thus taken from him and given t<> his master. But tins grand act of spoliation only reaches to the temporal relations of the slave. As if to enhance the wrong to the uttermost, the tie which hind- man to his Maker is severed as far as it can he by hu- man authority, and the master takes the place of No slave has a right to perform any act of Worship without the consent of his owner. He may not keep the Sabbath, nor hear the gospel preached, nor pray, nor confess Christ. For him, there are no mean- <»t' grace but such as his master may choose. If the master chooses none, the slave must submit or Buffer any punishment his owner sees proper to inflict. The rights of conscience are unknown to slavery. The slave is supposed to have no conscience ; his whole duty being to obey in all things, his own- er <>r any one whom his owner may appoint. Here, then, is a human being divested of all right to obey his Creator in the performance of those high duties which are enjoined equally upon every man. It is not a simple curtailment of religious liberty, hut — if the master so orders — atotal abnegation of the right of worship. The law has provided not the smallest 32 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. fraction of relief for the slave's conscience, however sorely oppressed. What is such a system but pre- meditated spiritual murder? It is the complete abandonment of the soul as well as the body to the unrestrained authority of any person whom the slave is obliged to call master. Now, if the slightest in- terference with our obligations to God is a sin, what shall we say of a system that cuts off all obligation forever ? If to coerce the conscience even in a few particulars, is an offence too great to be tolerated, how enormous must be the crime of trampling the moral faculties in the dust, as though they formed no part of our nature ? To style such a system wicked, conveys no adequate impression of its monstrous character. Wicked it is, but more so, infinitely, than any ordinary form of vice. It is a transcending, all- pervading usurpation ; it leaves not a vestige of spir- itual or temp-oral power to those on whom God has laid all the duties of humanity. It assumes the re- sponsibility of blotting out not single rights, but all rights of every kind, leaving the whole man as much a blank as he would have been, had the creating hand denied him every human endowment. It is tame to call such a frightful outrage, wrong. There wants a name in language sufficiently strong to characterize an evil of this kind. AVe are not ac- customed to view man apart from law, and the crimes rich he commits and the injuries he suffers are mostly violations of some single law ; but in the case of the slave we hftve no such rule ; he is in a state of legal des- olation. £fo man can commit a crime against him, nor A BIN UNDER ALL CEKCOISTANCES. 33 can lie commit a crime against any man. If he is kil 1- ed, it is not murder. If he kills, it is not murder. lie is not indictable for any offence. The law kn< >ws him not, except as the property of hismaster; stripped of ill protection, save as property is protected, he stands an outcast from the human family. What additional prong has society to inflict? All that law could have made his, is taken from him by putting him beyond the operation of law — the law, in fact, is not only broken at a single point, as in ordinary crime, but broken at all points, and removed out of the way, that it may never more oppose a barrier to the mas- ter's rapacity. If even a single violation of a right- eous law is wicked, what must be the enormous wick- edness of a system that is not contented with solitary infractions, but destroys the very existence of law I These considerations place the system in the list of highest crimes. There is no law but the slave law that it does not break — none that it does not utterly destroy. It is a pure, unmixed sin, scorning isola- tion or selection, and like the Angel of Death, carry- ing indiscriminate destruction wherever it goes. CHAPTER IY. SLAVERY A SIX EXBER ALL CIRCTM3TAXCES. The advocates of slavery have strangely asserted that the guilt or innocence of slave-holding depends 2* 84 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. upon circumstances. This is to place slavery where it does not belong, among things pure in themselves, and vicious only by abuse. Dr. Fuller thus states the case : " The enormities often resulting from slavery, and which ex- cite our abhorrence, are not inseparable from it — they are not elements in the system, but abuses of it. What is slavery? 1 1 define slavery,' says Paley, < to be an obligation to labor for the benefit of the master, without the contract or consent of the slave.' This is all that enters into the definition of slavery, and now what ingredient here is sinful ? Suppose a master to ren- der unto his servant the things that are just and equal ; suppose the servant well clothed and religiously instructed, and to re- ceive a fair reward for labor in modes of compensation best suited to his condition ; might not the Bible permit the relation to continue, and might it not be best for the slave himself? Recollect that when you tell us of certain laws, and customs, and moral evils, and gross crimes, which are often incidents of slavery in this country, we agree with you, and are most anx- ious for their removal." [First Letter to Dr. Waylaxd.) I have shown in the first chapter of this work, that the definition of slavery, quoted from Paley, and re- lied on by Dr. Fuller, here, amounts to nothing. It is no more a definition of slavery than a straight line is a definition of a triangle. But even admitting that this is a correct view of slavery, the case is not ma- terially altered ; for the service claimed is at war with the original and inalienable rights of mankind— it is a service without the contract or consent of the ser- vant, and we maintain that the Bible never author- ized such a relation between man and man. The effect of this kind of reasoning is to divest A SIN UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES. 35 slavery of intrinsic evil — to show that it is not a sin j>< r 86, and may be tolerated if well used. It is made to take rank with good things, such as marriage, civil eminent, and the parental relation — all which may be sources of evil, but are essentially right, or at least not essentially wrong, in themselves. Hence, an attempt has been made to make the character of slavery turn wholly upon the motives of the slave- holder. Dr. Bond, who declares himself the staunch enemy of slavery, takes a position coincident with that as- sumed by Dr. Fuller, in the foregoing extract : " Now, when we admitted that slavery was sinful, we spoke of it as our Discipline does, as systematized in the slave laws of our Southern States. In these, slavery is no longer an ab- stract idea. It receives body and form, and is actually a wrong and an outrage on humanity. We deal in no abstractions. We look at the thing as it exists, and as it exhibits itself in its actual operation. We have not said that slavery as an ab- stract idea is a sin ; but that slavery, as established by law in this country, is sinful — a national sin, for which God will in- flict national punishment. " But we further admit, that whoever avails himself of the power which these laws give him, to hold his fellow man as property, fur gain — not from mercy or benevolence to the slave — is a sinner before God. But the quality of the act depends upon the motive. It is not the abstract idea of slavery that characterizes slave-holding, but the motives which influence the slave-holder, and of these God only can judge. Men may hypocritically allege merciful motives for holding slaves, but men may also urge them sincerely and truly. No church ju- dicatory can decide upon motives, when the circumstances of 30 SLATEEY A3D THE CHURCH. the case do not make the motives apparent ; and therefore no ral rule can be applied without wrong and injustice." . and Jour., Nov. 10, 1S52.) If the character of slavery depends upon the mo- tive, when the motive is good, of course slavery is good. This conclusion is unavoidable, from the above premises. But the doctrine of motives has a wide application — it is not merely the motive of mercy that is allowable, in reference to things in themselves harmless. Gain is a lawful, and even a commendable motive, and one of the principal motives of all in- dustry. And if slavery is neither good nor bad in itself, and its character is wholly determined by mo- tives, it follows that the motive of gain, which is good in itself, may possibly be applied to slavery as well as to other things. It is true that there are acts which demand a higher motive, and if it can be shown that converting our fellow men into chattels personal is one of those high and holy duties from which all secular motives should be excluded, we admit that slave-hold- ing for gain is sinful. The sole motive of slavery is gain. For gain, the negroes were brought to this country, and for gain, they have been kept in bondage up to this hour. Xo other motive can be alleged, or need to be alleged ; the motive is good enough, but the act is wicked, and would be if the motives were ever so exalted. It is not better motives but better acts that the slave-holder needs. The argument, then, is on the essential nature of slavery, and not on any of its alleged accidents or abuses. If slavery is not a sin, per se, it may un- A SIN UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES. 37 doubtedly be so managed as not to become sinful. Dut if sin is woven into its very nature, or, in other words, if it properly belongs to the class of crimes, then no possible circumstances can ji it. Crime never Loses its character. It may be palliated, but cannot be justified — for in that case, it would not be crime. Murder is always murder; theft is always theft, and adultery always adultery. There may bo circumstances under which killing a human beinc:, taking property not our own, and sexual intercourse, are lawful ; but no one thinks of applying to these acts, when lawful, those names which designate crime. Though killing is not always murder, yet murder it- self is always murder. That slavery is often wicked, is conceded. The question now is, whether there can be any force of circumstances or excellence of motives that shall divest slavery of its criminal character. Has slavery the stability and unchangeableness of other crimes, or is its sinfulness only incidental ? Wq affirm that its wickedness is innate and inseparable. 1. It is without a reason. In all cases where par- ticular acts, as, for instance, killing a man, are deemed innocent, they are so deemed for good and sufficient reasons. It must be shown that the killing had not in it the elements of murder — that it was done in self- defence, or in sudden passion, or by accident. So of the taking of property not our own : if it can be made to appear that there was an uncontrollable necessity for such an appropriation of another's goods, and that no felonious purpose was indulged in, the case is only one of trespass and not of theft. Kow, 38 SLAVERY AXD THE OHTECH. if the advocates of slavery could show any similar reason for the institution, we might regard it as in- nocent. Could they show that negroes cannot be governed like other men, or that they must be held as chattels, or that they are incapable of " consent and contract" in relation to service — then slavery would stand acquitted. But this they do not attempt, because thev know that nothing of the kind exists. They know that slavery is a wanton exercise of power, and that there is not the least necessity for it. 2. It is without right. The boundary which sepa- rates sin and holiness, is that which separates good and evil. The form of virtue, or good rules, may some- times be set aside without injury where constitutional principles are not infracted. Murder is always mur- der, because it is always wrong — it is always an out- rage on the constitutional right to life. The slave has a natural right to be free, and the taking away of this right must be a sin. It is an irreparable loss to the slave, and such a loss as no man has a right to inflict. There is no compensation in the case. It is not a mere quasi wrong, nor is it a substitution of one right for another — it is the deliberate crushing of a man into a brute. It is the total extinction of right without any reason, either pretended or real. The slave being by accident of law within the power of the master, is kept within that power, not from any necessity, but simply from the master's choice. 3. Dr. Fuller has given us his idea of what is ne- cessary to free slavery from its turpitude, and restore the institution to pristine purity. But he fails en- A SIN UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES. 30 tirely in showing that the institution in its most im- proved form has either justice or propriety. Ho shows that it might be less wicked than it is — a truth none will dispute — but he leaves the question of its being wicked at all, wholly out of sight. The sin of murder might be enhanced by circumstances of cru- elty, and so may that of slavery ; yet, apart from in- cidental aggravations of this kind, both acts are crim- inal. It is the criminality lying back of these alleged abuses that needs an apology, but never finds it. We do not dispute that killing twenty men is a greater sin than killing one man, but the latter act is just as truly murder as if it had been impossible to kill many instead of one. The first step in slavery is a crime, and no array of circumstances can ever make it inno- cent. "We must not overlook an intrinsic evil, be- cause there are extrinsic evils connected with it ; and no amendment of the latter can at all affect the former. " Wanton cruelty may be too often practiced by masters, as it is by parents ; but this, which is but an occasional incident of slavery, should not be exhibited as the prominent evil. This may be removed by the influence of humane feelings, and es- pecially by Christian principle, but countless evils will still re- main, inherent and inseparable from the system." {Slavery and the Domestic Slave Trade in the United States, by Prof. E. A. Andrews,- p. 35.) We are not concerned with the abuses of slavery, but with slavery itself, which is one of the greatest of abuses. It is admitted that murder, robbery and 40 SLAVERY AXD THE CHURCH. adultery may be accompanied by circumstances of additional atrocity and guilt, yet these circumstances, when wanting, never excuse the original crime. "We do not acquit the murderer, because he did not man- gle his victim, or the robber, because he did not take all the man possessed, or the adulterer, because he used neither violence nor artifice. The crime is in the act itself, and not in its adjuncts or circumstances ; and while the act remains, the sin must remain also. 4. If slavery be not a sin, per se, then it follows that the rights of man are not inherent and inaliena- ble. On this supposition, the right to " life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," is only a conventional regulation, dependent upon the accident of legislation, and removable at any time without guilt. On this hypothesis, to make a man — any man — a chattel, is no invasion of his personal or civil rights ; he may be thrown into market, or into prison, by the mere wantonness of power, and yet no injury is done — he has lost no rights, for he had none to lose. But can anybody believe that man has no natural rights ? — that lie is as destitute of such rights as a stock or a stone ? Is not the whole frame-work of civil law declarative of natural rights existing in man as man, and is it not confessedly the whole object of such law to protect these rights % To this question there can be but one answer : all know that law is a farce and a usurpation, unless it aims to promote the public welfare by care- full v guarding the rights of individuals. It follows, therefore, that slavery is wrong under all circumstan- ces, or right under all circumstances. If wrong is A SIN UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES. 41 possible, then is slavery wrong ; hut if not possible, then slavery is guiltless. If man has rights to lose, slavery takes them away; hut if he has none, of coarse, none are taken away. 5. If slavery may be justified by circumstances, then vice and virtue are not immutable in their na- tures ; they arc only accidents of things, which may or may not belong to them. This supposes that man may exist without obligations or rights : that lie may have neither duties to perform, nor privileges to enjoy. It supp< «es, in fact, that man can, at the same time, be man and not man, which is a glaring contradiction. AVe cannot limit the doctrine, that slavery is not an intrinsic moral evil, to slavery alone ; for if true of this, it is equally true of other things. It applies to all other men, and makes the invasion of their rights a matter of indifference ; they, having the same hu- man nature as the slave, can have no rights superior to his. But we must go one step further. If rights are out of the question here, then are they every- where. Natural and personal rig! its fall not alone. The whole superstructure of morals is destroyed. Our duties to God and man cease to be duties, and there is no obligation of any kind whatever, except that of mere physical force. Let it be affirmed that slavery is not a sin, perse, and it follows inevitably that there is no sin. A more glaring violation of right than slavery, there cannot be ; and we are compelled to deny the existence of moral evil, or acknowledge that slavery is one of the highest crimes. 6. There is another class of apologies, almost too 42 SLAVERY AND THE CHTJECH. futile to be noticed. These are based on the pre- existence of the evil, and on the supremacy of the State. It is enough to say of all such defences, that they will apply just as well to idolatry or murder. It is no justification of crime that it has long been tolerated ; otherwise, the attempt to reform man from inveterate crimes would be an absurdity. JSor is it of more consequence that the State countenances or requires the commission of wrongs. In other cases, we never think of pleading such authority for things acknowledged to be sinful. ~No man — no Christian man — would deem the requisition of civil govern- ment a sufficient excuse for worshiping an idol. The whole argument in this direction is too superficial to bear a moment's investigation. States or govern- ments have no right to enslave men, and what they have not a right to do themselves, they cannot author- ize individuals to do. But still we are told, " it is not a sin under the circumstances." What these circum- stances are, that transmute crime into virtue, has been abundantly shown, and we have also shown that they are no justification at all. The State throws embar- rassments in the way of emancipation, therefore slave- ry is no crime ! Suppose we change the terms of this enthymeme a little : the State throws embarrassments in the way of chastity, therefore adultery is no crime. "Will the objector admit this ? If not, let him confess at once that circumstances cannot change vice into vir- tue. He may take which position he chooses, either that slavery is a crime, or that it is not a crime ; but he. cannot be allowed both — he must not vault from A SIN" UNDER ALL CIRCUMSTANCES. 43 one to the other, as this destroys the meaning of lan- guage, and confounds all moral distinctions. Murder is murder, and theft is theft, under all circumstances ; and so of the crime of slavery — if a crime at all, it is always a crime. If the State were to hold out the strongest inducements to drunkenness and dishonesty — nay, if it were to enjoin the commission of these crimes, and back the injunction with the heaviest penalties — with disfranchisement, confiscation, and death — would it be right for us to comply ? Would it change, in any respect, the character of these sins? By no means. That the State practically forbids emancipation, and thereby enjoins a continual robbery of the colored man's rights, is beyond dispute. But it is just as much beyond dispute in this case as in the former, that the difficulties thrown in the way do not render innocent the slave-holding which they are intended to perpetuate. It is just as much a sin to hold a slave, as it would be if the State had done no- thing to promote slavery. The essential rights of the colored man are born with him ; they do not depend upon the State ; he does not acquire them by legisla- tion, nor can they be legislated away from him. For this reason, it will always be a crime to strip him of those rights, no matter what he may gain or lose by their possession ; they are his as inalienably as the blood in his veins, or the breath in his lungs. ^ SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. CHAPTER V. SLAVERY NOT SANCTIONED BY THE OLD TESTAMENT. Much stress has been laid on the authority of the Scriptures, especially the Old Testament, by the sup- porters of slavery. They appear to think that the system finds an impregnable defense in the Word of God. Their appeal to the Bible, however, is most unfortunate for their cause, as no other book in the world is so decidedly hostile to oppression, and wrong- doing of every kind. But still, as they have chosen this arbitrament, they should have whatever advan- tage it may afford. If it can possibly be shown that a book, which teaches all right to be done to all men, does, nevertheless, sanction slavery, slave-holders are justly entitled to the benefit of such showing, and very much need it. It should be understood in the outset, that the Old Testament is not, in all respects, a standard of morals for the present day. The New Testament has revised the ethical code of the Old, and several things, once allowed, are now prohibited. As instances of the kmd, we mention, 1. Wars, both offensive and de- fensive; 2. Polygamy; 3. Concubinage; 4. Putting children to death ; 5. Bills of divorce ; 6. Slaying of murderers by their relatives. These practices, how- ever tolerated in Patriarchal and Jewish times, are inanifestly contrary to both the spirit and the letter NOT SANCTIONED BY TTTE OLD TESTAMENT. 45 of the Gospel. Hence, it does not by any means fol- low, as a necessary consequence, that the recognition of slavery, by Moses, gives it a place among the in- stitutions of Christianity. Servitude was tolerated and regulated by law un- der the Mosaic institute ; but servitude is not slavery. There is a wide difference between any form of mere servitude, and slavery. The servant may have the rights of a man in several respects; he may own property, have wife and children, and be regarded as a man. But the slave can own nothing, acquire nothing, and be nothing, before the law, but a chat- tel. It is further to be conceded, that servants were bought and sold by the Jews ; yet it does not appear that such servants were regarded as chattels personal, or that the traffic in this species of property was ever extensive. Further than this, no concession can be made. The first, and most important element of slavery — that of entire subjection to the master — did not exist among them. JSTo Hebrew was permit- ted to usurp the place of God. Servants there were, but no slaves. I shall here set down some of the cir- cumstances which distinguished servitude as it pre- vailed among the Israelites, and which made slavery, in the proper sense of the word, an utter impossi- bility. 1. Their government was a Theocracy. God was supreme governor. Hence, no man could at any time claim to rule according to his own will. Under such a system of laws, the rights of conscience are always 46 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCfL protected. But it is far otherwise where the Higher Law is scouted, and the will of man is made the only rule of duty. Slavery was excluded from the Jewish polity by this feature of its constitution, as effectually as it could have been by a specific enactment. 2. The whole scope of the Mosaic institute was in opposition to the inequality and degradation peculiar to slavery. The law of brotherhood prevailed every- where, uprooting and destroying that aristocratic pride, which is the foundation of slavery. The peo- ple were taught to respect man, and to recognize in every man a brother. Depressed he might be, but he was not to be cast from the pale of humanity. Not so with slavery. The slave is reduced to the condition of a brute, and the law makes no provision for his elevation to the rank from which he has been degraded. The Jew saw in his servant a brother, for whom he was in duty bound to provide, and who was to be, with him, a sharer of immortality. His ser- vant was, equally with himself, a creature of God, and entitled to every kindness. 3. The Jewish polity was a system of mercy. Its humanizing influence was felt in a thousand ways, on both masters and servants. It taught men to live for eternity, and not for time. It inspired hopes of a better inheritance, where the vices and ills of this world should be unknown. Every Jew, properly in- structed, was spiritual, and held all his worldly pos- sessions as a tenant at will of the Most High. It was his duty to perfect holiness in the fear of God. His religion, if fully carried out, cut off all sinful indul- NOT SANCTIONED BY THE OLD TESTAMENT. 4:7 gences, and prevented all oppression. It was based on the law of love, as well as on the law of purity. " Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.' 7 {Lev. xix: IS.) 4. All servants were to be taught the principles of religion, and admitted to all the rights and privileges of divine worship. The master was specially charged to bring his servants with him when he appeared be- fore the Lord. {See Gen. xvii : 12, and Dent, xvi : 9-14.) 5. In the year of jubilee all servants were to go free. This applied, not only to servants of the He- brew stock, but to all others. " Ye shall hallow the year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land, to all the inhabitants thereof." {Lev. xxv : 10.) 6. Servants were permitted to live together in families, and their domestic relations were held sa- cred. {See Lev. xix : 20.) 7. The servant who was abused by his master, was to be set free. {See Mood, xxi : 26, 27.) 8. The master who violated the chastity of his female servant, was obliged to marry her, or let her go free. {See ffl&od. xxi: 8-11, Dent, xxi : 10-14.) 9. The servant who escaped from his master, was not to be delivered up. This regulation alone Avas sufficient to protect the servant from everything anal- ogous to slavery. This is understood by some as applying only to those servants who escaped from the surrounding idolatrous nations, and sought a refuge among the Jews. But there is nothing in the passage itself, nor in the context, that favors such a construe- 48 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. tion. It is a meaning brought to the text, and not one deduced from it. The words are plain : " Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee : he shall dwell with thee, even among you, in that place which he shall choose in one of thy gates, where it liketh him best : thou shalt not oppress him." (Deut. xxiii: 15, 16.) It is said that this must be restricted to servants from foreign nations, because it would be unjust if applied to Hebrew servants. Such an objection to a liberal construction of the text, is disrespectful — it gives the Israelite permission to wrong the foreigner, by keeping his servant, and obliges him to deal fairly only with his own countrymen. If there was injus- tice in not restoring the servant of the Hebrew, there was equal injustice in not restoring the' servant of one belonging to a neighboring tribe. But the truth is, the servant, belong to whom he might, was not to be given up. "When so oppressed that conscience and safety demanded flight, he was permitted to flee, and thus escape a tyranny that would have crushed his manhood. This compelled masters to treat servants well, and secure the continuance of their services by kindness, rather than by force. It placed masters and servants on much the same terms that prevail in free countries, where labor is hired. The employer must pay well, and demean himself correctly, or his help will leave him. He is not, in any case, the owner of the men, but the buyer of their services, and the re- lation may be dissolved when it is deemed necessary by either party. So, we think, the Israelitish servant, NOT SANCTIONED BY THE OLD TESTAMENT. 4:9 ■whom the master was bound to love as himself, had the privilege of going free, when conscience and honor demanded it. That the servant from another nation was to be accorded this right, none can dispute ; and that the right might be equally important to the servant of a Hebrew, is as little questionable. Under this regulation, oppression could reach only a certain extent. Masters were dependent upon their good behavior for the retention of their servants, as all masters ought to be. Men might sell their services, and the services of their children, as thousands prefer to do in all countries ; but the law would not allow the contract to run always — it must expire at the year of jubilee. And, even while the obligation of ■service remained, it was to be forfeited by specific acts of abuse, and might be terminated at the discre- tion of the servant. In short, provision was made for humanity. The master could not oblige his servant to violate God's law, nor to become a brute. The servant was to be a willing servant. Nothing like constraint is authorized, and all oppression is strictly forbidden. Those who chose servitude could only re- main servants upon the ignominious condition of having their ears bored through with an awl. Let those who object to the view we have taken of the foregoing passage, consider — 1. That the spirit and letter of the Old Testament were vastly elevated above the institutions of pagan- ism, and that it is therefore safer to follow the upward tendency of the former, than it is the downward analogies of the latter. Heathenism would not have s 50 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. allowed the servant to escape ; neither would it have afforded a jubilee, in which he might go out without an escape. A system which provided for the release of all, at a stated time, may be supposed to have ad- mitted of the release of the oppressed at any time. 2. That servitude, like divorce or polygamy, was not a part of the Mosaic religion, but an evil, tolera- ted under an imperfect dispensation, and because the hearts of the people were hard. Hence, all regulations on the subject are to be construed against servitude, and not in favor of it. The bill of divorce was al- lowed, but it was not intended to promote the separa- tion of man and wife ; so the holding of servants was permitted, but it was not designed to make bondage an unconditional and interminable state. 3. That to afford protection to fugitives from other masters, and not to those from Jewish masters, was most unequal ; giving to the foreigner a privilege denied to the Jew : whereas, there is abundant evi- dence that the Israelitish servant was to be treated with special tenderness. 4. That the Jews were all fugitives when these precepts were delivered — having tied from Egyptian servitude ; and that rules made for such a people, on the treatment of fugitives, would naturally be of the most comprehensive character. There was, as yet, no servants among them — their laws were only pros- pective — and it may well be supposed, that He who led a nation of bondmen to liberty, would teach them to be the protectors of all other bondmen, and espe- cially those of their own country. NOT SANCTIONED BY THE OLD TESTAMENT. 51 5. That the exodus of the Israelites was in fact nothing but an assumption of this very right to go forth and be free, at their own option, when compel- led by the obligations of duty. This great national act of self-emancipation was to constitute an example for all the oppressed. In no other way could man be man, when the voice of duty called. 6. That the Jew was always required to remember that he had been a bondman, and this for the avowed purpose of softening his treatment toward those in his service. We may safely conclude, also, that this remembrance was intended to prepare him to accord to his servants the same right to escape, which him- self had enjoyed in so marvelous a manner. Now, we contend that the advocates of slavery, if they mean to avail themselves of the Old Testament, must use its authority in support of such a system as we have here described. But this system has scarcely any resemblance to American Slavery. The argu- ment, therefore, is entirely worthless. Even if the servitude provided for by the laws of Moses had not been canceled by a new and better dispensation, it could have afforded no countenance to the diabolical system of slavery established in this country. But should we concede all, the argument could do them no good. It would be just as conclusive to adduce the Mosaic law in favor of polygamy, in order to justi- fy a plurality of wives, as it is to adduce it in support of any type of slavery. If the authority is good in one case, it is in another. Kor do we by this weaken 52 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. the authority of such parts of the Mosaic code as have not been repealed. What has been confirmed by Christ, and adopted into the New Testament, is obli- gatory ; but all the rest is annulled. The law of cir- cumcision, though vital to the Jew, is not binding upon us. And so of the whole Jewish ritual, and all the other laws not strictly of a moral character. CHAPTER VI. SLAVERY NOT SANCTIONED BY THE NEW TESTAMENT. We must abide the teaching of the New Testament. If its authority is clearly on the side of slavery, then slavery — whatever we may think of it — ought to be tolerated in the Church. If He whose kingdom was not of this world — who came not to destroy men's lives, but to save them — and who commanded his disciples to love one another as he had loved them, did, nevertheless, sanction chattel slavery with all its horrors, then we must bow to the mandate, and place it among the most inscrutable mysteries of Divine Providence. We know not as any serious attempt has been made to press the words of Christ into the support of slavery. It would be difficult to find a single text in the Evangelists that could with decency be used for such a purpose. Slavery does not appear to have flourished in Judea at the time of the Advent, NOT SANCTIONED BY THE NEW TESTAMENT. 53 and consequently the personal ministry of Christ af- forded few or no opportunities for discussing the sub- ject. It was not his practice to introduce foreign vices for animadversion and reproof. lie laid down rules for all virtue, and interdicted all sin, but con- fined the illustration and application of his precepts chiefly to things under his immediate, personal ob- servation. We shall, therefore, find the argument resting mainly on some expressions in the apostolic Epistles. The apostles went abroad, and saw slavery in all its forms ; they wrote to Churches living where slavery abounded, and if the system was worthy of adoption, or countenance, or condemnation, we may reasonably expect to find it so treated in their letters. In this expectation we are not disappointed. The references to servitude are few, but exceedingly clear. The following passage may be taken as an instance : " Art thou called being a servant ? care not for it ; but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather. For he that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord's free man : likewise, also, he that is called, being free, is Christ's servant. Ye are bought with a price; be not ye the servants of men." (1. Cor. vii, 21-23.) This shows that Christianity utterly annihilates the slave system — the servant is so far made free by his conversion, that he may look upon all that remains of bondage as of no importance, and " care not for it." He is Christ's free max, and is forbidden to be the servant of men. That is, he is free to obey Christ in all things, and not permitted to serve men in any thing contrary to the law of Christ. The course of 54 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. the apostle's argument here shows that we have not misapprehended nor overstated the matter. He was teaching the Corinthians to abide as they were called : the circumcised in their circumcision, and the uncir- cumcised in their uncircumcision ; the married as married, and the unmarried as unmarried. He would have them understand that the gospel did not depend for its efficiency on any of these external things, and that by their translation into the kingdom of God, they had gained a position which enabled them to look down upon all worldly circumstances with compara- tive indifference. The servant of man had become not only a servant, but "an heir of God, and joint heir with Christ. " One elevated to such immortal honors and immunities, if claimed as the slave of man, might well " care not for it. " It could do him no harm, because he was so fully brought under a higher law, and into the protection of a greater Sovereign, that all human authority was paralyzed, except in things lawful to be done. There is another passage which, if possible, shows still more plainly this independence of the converted servant. " Servants, be obedient to them that are your masters ac- cording to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ. Not with eye service, as men- pleasers ; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart ; with good will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men : knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free." {-Eph., vi, 5-8.) STOT SANCTIONED BY THE NEW TESTAMENT. 55 Here the human master's authority is completely absorbed, so to speak, in the will of God. The ser- vant is not allowed to consider himself the servant of man, but the servant of God. "As the servants of Christ, doing- the will of God from the heart " this is obviously not a rule for a chattel personal — a thing ; but for a man in the highest state of religious and moral freedom. No service incompatible with the holiness of God, was to be tolerated. The man was to reckon himself as doing service only to Christ— thus implying that lie sustained an infinitely higher relation than to man, and was under supreme obliga- tion, not to his master, but to his master's Master. Both servant and master were made to feel that they equally had a Master, who was God, and to whom they must give account for all their deeds. There could be no substitution in the case ; one could not answer for another — each must do right or perish. God was before them, and his law was the only law of both master and servant. Such precepts leave no room for slavery, unless slavery is holy ; it must be as pure as God, or it cannot have the slightest authority. The servant has to do every moment with the law of one who forbids sin, and if all the men in the universe were to command him to sin, he ought to spurn their authority and obey his God. But waiving further comment on particular pa we shall pr< a few general observations, which will furnish the reader with a wider view of the subject. If slavery was incorporated with Christianity by Christ, or his apostles, the question is settled — we have no right to 56 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. innovate. But if they rejected it, we ought to do the same — if they brought it into the Church, we have no right to expel it. That the apostles did not admit slavery or slave- holders into the Church, is evident to us, from the fol- lowing considerations : 1. They did not, because they could not. The na- ture and constitution of the Church would not admit of it. In the first place, slavery is a civil institution, but the Church is a spiritual institution, and could not incorporate this element of the civil law. If there was slavery in the Church, it must have been spiritual slavery, for the Church had no civil code by which to uphold slavery. In the next place, the Church is holy, but slavery is unholy, therefore, it could not come into the Church by apostolic sanction. 2. All the apostolic letters were addressed to spir- itual communities — " holy brethren," whose rule of living was universal righteousness, and whose mem- bers were all equally free in Christ, and on a level with each other — each and all" standing by faith, and by faith only. To reach this point, where " all are one," and to be a member of the "communion of saints," for whom the apostles wrote, it was necessary to renounce every worldly and social distinction, for in Christ there could be " neither Jew nor Greek, nei- ther bond nor free, neither male nor female." Those who think the apostles introduced chattel slavery into this sublime brotherhood, must have a taste for the marvelous. We could as soon believe that Mahomet made a journey to heaven on the beast Alborak, NOT SANCTIONED BY TTIE NEW TESTAMENT. 57 3. A slave, be it remembered, " is a person who is wholly subject to the will of another" human being. But no Christian can be thus bound. Hence, the slave-law must of necessity be a dead letter wherever Christianity prevails. For all Christians acknowledge God as their Master. If the slave-holder could get into the Church, his entrance there would strip him of every particle of that unrighteous authority with which the civil law had invested him. In the world, men can hold slaves, but not in Christ — not in the Church. The apostles did not write for the world, but for the Church, and hence they gave no directions for slave-holding. 4. The duties enjoined on believers are wholly in- compatible with slavery. "Let each esteem other better than themselves" — that is, the master esteem the slave better than himself. " In honor preferring one another" — that is, the master counting his slave more honorable than himself, and conceding to him, on all occasions, the place of honor. " Therefore, all things whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto them" — that is, if you, being a slave, would prefer liberty, grant it to your slaves. Now who does not see that these precepts effectually annihilate the system of slavery ? And yet no man can be a Christian without obeying all these com- mands, and many others equally at variance with the slave-law — a law which is nothing better with us than it was with the old Romans, who held their slaves "pro nuttis, pro mortwis, pro qicadrvpi ne, would entail on all successive generations, the guilt and contingency peculiar to slave families. Slavery renders men incompetent to marriage and there is no way to throw oft" the incompetency, but to throw off that which occasions it. [f separation were confined to emancipation, t. i would 72 SLAVERY AND THE CHTRCH. be varied, but it is not ; and it is onr opinion that the domestic slave-trade, the insolvencies, the capri- ces, the speculations, and the necessities of slave-hold- ers, will produce a thousand times more rending of " marriage obligations and parental ties," than would be produced by sending the slaves to a free State. It is objected that many of the slaves are not in a condition to be emancipated — infancy, old age, im- becility, and insanity, are the barriers. Would this be a good reason for , keeping white men slaves ? If not, it is of no force here. Such persons are objects of special kindness, not of brutal degradation and chat- telhood. Worse off they could not be — better they might be possibly. These extreme cases, however, are comparatively few in number, and do not affect the general question of emancipation. The slaves, much too commonly for the wishes of their masters, are ready to incur all the expense, danger and sepa- ration incident to an escape into a land of freedom. Let it be known that dogs, horses, guns and manacles will not be in requisition to frustrate their attempts, and these men — yes, even the aged and infirm — will quickly bid adieu to the tender mercies of the slave- holder — mercies which, though specious, are, never- theless, cruel. These difficult cases should never stand alone. They require to be offset by the im-r mense evils which attach to them as they are. If the wretched would suffer as freemen, it must be remem- bered that they will suffer as slaves. We are told that suffering and injustice must follow emancipation, just as though but for emancipation nothing of the NEVER AN ACT OF BENEVOLENCE. 73 kind would ever happen. Is not slavery all suffering, all injustice '? "Why, then, insist on the perpetuation of slavery as a preventive of these evils? If slave- holders would do wrong in emancipating their slaves, they must do far greater wrong not to emancipate them. If wrong must be done, let them "by all means take that course which will do the least. But the wrongs of emancipation are more fancied than real ; they are, for the most part, an idle bugbear, conjured up to relieve the consciences of slave-holders, when pressed by the claims of their unoffending victims. Interest, not humanity, is the real basis of all such arguments. If wrong occurs to the slave in conse- quence of emancipation, the slave-holder is not re- sponsible for it, any more than he is responsible for the wrongs which arise to other people who have their rights. The plea of retaining the slave for his bene- fit, if good in this case, would justify us in seizing upon the liberties of any other class of men, when, in our judgment, their interests demand such seizure — thus subjecting every inalienable right to the caprice, the rapacity, the ignorance, and the wickedness of lawless intermeddling. 74 SLAVEEY AND THE CHURCH. CHAPTER VIII. SLAVERY NEVER TH» RESULT OF NECESSITY. As " drowning men catch at straws," we find slave- holders and their apologists much inclined to extenu- ate their conduct by the plea of necessity. When driven from the fallacy that slave-holding is an act of mercy, they try to sustain themselves by a sort of fatalism. It is not wonderful that slave-holders should resort to this method of justification, but it is strange that Christian Churches should be misled by the spe- cious pretence. Men, strongly imbued with the spirit of reform, and deadly hostile to slavery, have often^ contented themselves with resolving that all voluntary slave-holders should be excluded from the Church. This is as much as to say that there may be a class of slave-holders who are involuntary, and, therefore, innocent. All such distinctions are exceedingly fu- tile ; they have neither theoretical nor practical con- sistency. We -might as well talk of involuntary can- nibalism. But we will examine some of the alleged causes of the necessity in question. 1. It is said "the present generation of slave-hold- ers were born under the system of slavery, and have no control over it — their condition was pre-deter- mined, and they are not responsible for its evils." Now this is in part true, but does not at all exculpate the slave-holder. It is no more true of slavery than NEVER TIIE RESULT OF NECESSITY. 75 of other sins, that men are born under their influence, and crippled by their antiquity and their preva- lence. And if the plea of necessity is good in this case, it is good against all reform. Suppose Sabbath- breaking or lying had been sanctioned everywhere for centuries, would the present generation be at liberty to consider themselves hopelessly entangled ? Could they not break away from these sins, notwithstanding the evil example of their ancestors, and all the effects of vicious habits and vicious associations % None will deny that they could and should, without the least hesitation. Why, then, shall we tolerate the sin of slavery as we tolerate no other sin % Or, is slavery not a sin ? AYe do not dispute that the hereditary character of v slavery has made the work of emancipation more difficult. In many resj^ects, the present race of slave- holders are eminently unfitted for the work of emanci- pation. They lack habits of industry, the love of liberty, the spirit of philanthropy, a knowledge of men and things, social advantages, and, above all, a government free from the disorders induced by op- pression. But still, none of these things, nor all of them together, render the work impossible. Slave- holders are not worse off, in this respect, than other sinners. The drunkard is poorly prepared for reform — ■ degraded, diseased, impoverished, and impelled by an insatiable appetite, he is anything but fitted for the arduous work of temperance. And yet we do not ex- cuse him from the attempt, nor deem his efforts un- likely to succeed. That the slave-holder is predesti- 76 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. nated to continue in sin, cannot be true, for God has commanded all men to repent, and we must either deny that slave-holding is sin, or conclude that the slave-holder should abandon the practice at once. 2. "The slaves, being property, could not be given up without impoverishing their owners, and ruining the country." This, we apprehend, is the most for- midable objection. Emancipation is a question of dollars and cents. All the necessity in the case is of a pecuniary character. But just this difficulty occurs in some form in reference to every sin. When Paul preached at Ephesus against idolatry, none opposed him more vehemently than Demetrius, who " made silver shrines for Diana." His emphatic, " Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth," revealed the true secret of his zeal. Superstition was profita- ble to him. If vice itself is not always profitable, there is always a class of people who make a liveli- hood by pandering to vice, and these cannot reform, because it cuts off their ill-gotten gains. The same is true of slave-holders. Some would, no doubt, lose all their property, and the whole country would, for a time, nominally have less wealth, by ceasing to inven- tory human beings as property, but is this any suffi- cient reason for slave-holding? Does increase of wealth justify the crime of robbery ? If so, the dis- tiller should continue his business, even though myri- ads die, and myriads more are stripped of their all, to fill his coffers. The robber should continue to rob, and the thief should retain his stolen property, if slavery is no crime ; for these have to encounter ex- NEVER THE RESULT OF NECESSITY. 77 actly the same kind of necessity that presses upon the slave-holder. It has often been said that we must devise some expedient to relieve the immense losses which the ab- olition of slavery would occasion, before we press the qu< stion upon the South. If such an obligation exists, it will not apply to one class of culprits only ; we are equally hound to provide for any pecuniary losses which other wicked men may sustain by "ceasing to do evil." The argument has not a particle of force, and ought never to he named where there is the least reverence for Christianity. It supposes that money is more necessary than virtue, and that men are un- der no obligation to reform, if they are likely to lose property by so doing. A more blasphemous senti- ment never had existence. 3. " The slaves could not take care of themselves." All know that this part of the alleged necessity for continued slave-holding is so far from being true, that the slaves not only take care of themselves, but of their masters too. In all slave-holding countries, slaves are compelled to till the soil, and do almost everything in the shape of manual labor. But the declaration, idle as it is, has long been contradicted by facts. Hundreds and thousands of free negroes, scattered through the different States of the Union, do provide for themselves, and quite as comfortably as their brethren are provided' for, who still remain in bondage. This objection is too manifestly puerile to claim further notice. 4. "The laws will not admit of emancipation." 78 SLAVERY AND THE CHTTECH. Here, again, the necessity involves a direct conflict with religion. In a matter of justice to man, are hu- man laws to have precedence of the law of God ? If the slave ought to be free, it is in vain to tell us that the law will not let him be free. What right have we to hold him, contrary to justice and brotherly kind- ness — *- laws of God, and paramount to all other laws ? The wicked, who neither fear God nor regard man, may put forth such objections, but no Christian can do it with decency. We are aware that the slave- holding States have sought to perpetuate slavery, by throwing embarrassments in the way of emancipation. But, as yet, these obstacles are easily overcome, where there is the slightest disposition to do right. The slaves are endowed with the power of locomotion ; they are not like trees, which cannot move, and must, therefore, remain always in the same place. Hence, if their owners wish to set them free, they have only to send them, or go with them, to a land of liberty — happily, in many instances, not remote. This we mention the more readily, as the slaves themselves are much inclined to show that emancipation is practica- ble, in spite of the laws and the owner also. Masters, though under some restrictions, still have the right to go where they will with their property ; and, as slaves are being constantly driven in gangs, all through the various slave States, for the purpose of trade, they certainly might be driven to the free States, if their owners had any disposition to enfranchise them. The plea of legal embarrassments is wholly groundless in itself, as against emancipation ; for, though it may NEVER THE RESULT OF NECESSITY. 79 retard, it cannot, possibly, prevent the master's power to manumit. 5. " The slaves refuse to leave their masters." It is barely possible that, in some instances, slaves are so ignorant and worthless, as not to know the value of liberty, or care to preserve it. Such cases occur in free countries, and it is not surprising if they are still more numerous among a people who, for many generations, have been denied all cultivation. How should they know what freedom is, and what its value to man ? Have they ever been taught to value lib- erty, except by feeling the pains of oppression ? ISTo : but they have always been told that slavery was the best for them — that God made them to be slaves, and would send them to hell if they sought to be free. Is it strange, then, that with such teaching, and such advantages, some slaves should say they preferred not to -be free ? Would it not be contrary to all experience, if such an education produced — unless by reaction — a love of liberty ? Be it then, that many of these poor, degraded creatures are ready, like Esau, to sell their birthright for a mess of pottage. This very foolishness of choice — this worse than bestial low- ness of desire — is the master's crime ! lie lias crushed the soul till its manhood has gone, and only the brute remains. "We do not doubt that slavery is omnipo- tent for evil — it can kill out all the nobler instincts of the man, and probably has done so in many instan- ces. We have no hesitation in conceding the triumphs of the institution in this line; but it is altogether im- possible for us to conceive how any humane mind 80 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. could urge such a reason for the continuance of slavery. It would be absurd, however, to suppose that this state of things is general among the slave population. In particular instances, the love of liberty may have expired, but the large and continually increasing number of fugitives from slavery, shows that the in- stinctive desire of freedom is still rampant in the hearts of the enslaved. The record of these escapes, if it could be written out, would prove that bondmen have, not unfrequently, a just appreciation of human rights, an intolerable loathing of bondage, a chival- rous courage, and indomitable perseverance. So strong is the tendency to liberty, that it requires the utmost vigilance of their oppressors to keep them from self-emancipation. If the slaves do not wish to be free, what mean the laws against education ? And why are slave-holders so much in fear of insurrection % "We need nothing more than the laws of the slave States, to establish the fact that the slaves are not contented, and do not remain willingly in slavery. This iniquitous legislation testifies for the slave, and contradicts the assertion of all who maintain that he has no wish to be free. Kept, he may be, but it can only be done by degrading him to a brute, and deny- ing him, as far as possible, all opportunities to escape. The argument may be applied to slaves with little variation. They are slaves, but not from necessity. It may be hazardous for them to seek freedom — they may fail, or, perhaps, die in the attempt. But has not freedom always been purchased at this price? NEVER THE RESULT OF NECESSITY. 81 Ask our Revolutionary patriots if peril did not sur- round them at every step. It was on sanguinary battle-fields, that they gained what the slave pants to enjoy. They endured all manner of sufferings — confiscation, poverty, reproach, war, and death, to secure a more perfect liberty. Yes, even the Father of his Country stood exposed to the traitor's doom, and had to console himself with the belief that " his neck was not made for a halter." There were men who would not have scorned to hang the immortal "Washington, because he sought to augment his own and his country's freedom ; and there are men who would kill the slave for emulating his noble example. The danger is undeniable, and so is the duty to meet it fearlessly. If slaves cower beneath the lash, and refuse to die for their rights, they seal their own doom. Such men refuse liberty on the only terms ever grant- ed to man. They are not worthy of freedom, or they would be willing to pay its price. No necessity lies upon them, but such as has always been the attendant of noble aspirations. Should any question the right of the slave to assert his freedom, and break away from his chains, we must remind them that the difficulty, whether theological or political, is not confined to the slave. The time* was, when our ancestors were enthralled, and we have no doubt they did well in striking for liberty ; and, even now, millions of the old world have our sympa- thies in their efforts to throw off hoary despot ism. "Why do we approve of our own freedom, and of the prospective emancipation of European sufferers, if 82 SLAVEEY AND THE CHTIECH. these achievements have waged war upon the rights of others ? We must, to be consistent, go back to servitude ; for some master's property was injured when our fathers escaped from serfdom. But we scarcely need reply to an argument which denies the right of progress, and assumes that it is wrong to claim our own God-given rights. Slaves are as much entitled to rise in the scale of political, moral, and social improvement, as other human beings. It would require a special revelation to exempt them from the common immunities of our nature. They are weighed down by no fatality — cut off by no decree of God ; they may be, and ought to be, what others are — free and independent. Long years have not sanctified the barbarous cruelty and base injustice which first en- slaved them ; they are as free, to-day, to assume the rights of men, as if there never had been a slave in the world. "No necessity binds either master or slave to this guilty course. On the contrary, if both do not instantly reform, they contemn religion, and outrage all the maxims of political rectitude. They virtually say, that the gospel shall not raise the fallen, nor sanctify the depraved — that the reign of error and sin shall be perpetual, and the kingdom of God shall never come — that wrong is right, or that right is but the accident of power triumphing over innocence, manhood, liberty, and religion. Necessity, then, in this regard, is no other than perverseness of will. PART II. THE RELATION OF SLAVERY TO THE CHURCH. The relation of slavery to the Church is, "undoubt- edly, the same as that of all other great crimes — a relation of utter antagonism. At first view, it hardly seems necessary to dwell upon so palpable a truth ; having shown the moral character of slavery, it looks like a work of supererogation, to formally discuss its ecclesiastical relations. But, bad as slavery is ac- knowledged to be, there are many who insist upon its continuance in the Church. They object to any rule expelling slave-holders, or preventing their admission to Church-fellowship. Under these circumstances, it becomes necessary to take up the subject in its reli- gions bearings. Slavery, though conceded to be a sin, is not conceded to be such a sin as stamps the character inevitably with infamy. It is considered a venial fault, or, rather, no fault at all, in the Church- member, and the cry of fanaticism and persecution is raised whenever an attempt is made to drive it out of the Church, as we drive out other crimes. It is a 84- SLAVERY AND THE CHUECH. sin in the State, but not in the Church ; it is a sin of the State, and not of the Church ; it is wrong in pol- itics, and right in religion. Yes, right — for to such lengths is the matter carried. The advocates of slave- ry do not hesitate to declare that slave-holding is a virtue — a religious duty. This throws upon us the necessity of showing that slavery is fatal to Christian character, and to the existence of the Church. CHAPTER I. SLAVES CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. We do not mean to say that slaves cannot be con- verted, and become Christians. They are, probably, as open to conversion as other people, and, when fa- vored with the means of grace, no doubt many of them become true converts. But we mean to say, that Christianity strikes the slave law dead — that the slave is virtually emancipated by his conversion. Slaves may be converted, but they are not converted slaves ; they may " abide as they are called," so far as the form or letter of the slave law is concerned, but they come under the power of a higher law, which exacts of them service incompatible with slave- ry. Neither do we assert that a slave cannot be saved as a heathen. If he acts u~p to the light of na- ture, and is denied all opportunity of becoming ac- SLAVES CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. 85 quainted with the gospel, he stands on the same ground as the better class of heathen, concerning whom we have hope. But the salvation of infants, idiots, and heathen, is not the result of any Christianizing influ- ence exerted upon them in this life. Our reasons for believing that the slave cannot be a Christum, are the following : 1. Slavery unmakes the man. The slave is a thing, and not a man ; he is not known as a man — lie is not permitted to act as a man. Having been declared by the law to be a chattel, he is not allowed to be anything more, nor is it possible for him to be any- thing more, while the law remains in force against him, except by incurring martyrdom. This sad ne- cessity of sinking below the organic elements of his nature, utterly excludes Christianity. A thing — a chattel — an article of traffic, has no responsibility. Moral character is never affirmed of mere things ; manhood is an essential concomitant and condition of religion. Conversion brings the slave up from his degradation, and re-instates him among the human species, in spite of the law. The Christian, therefore, is not a slave, in the eye of the law, because he is not a thing; his caste — his humanity — which the slave code had taken from him, is restored by the law of God. Kow, if Christianity does thus bring back the slave's manhood, it is in direct conflict with the law which took it away ; the lesser law yields to the great- er, and the slave, by becoming a Christian, becomes also a man. Did the slave law make provision for humanity, then human beings might be slaves, and 86 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. still be Christians ; but no provision being made for the slave to be more than a thing, Christianity inter- feres to relieve him from the grasp of unrighteous authority, and place him in a position of moral re- sponsibility. 2. A slave can have no higher master. The law gives the owner supreme control. The slave has not a single reserved right. He is as destitute of all rights whatsoever as a brute, or even any inanimate object. Now, the point in dispute is, whether one human being can be thus subject to another human being, and still be a Christian. "We maintain that it is im- possible. 1. Because " no man can serve two mas- ters" — that is, two supreme masters. If the slave must obey man, whatever he may command, he can- not obey God, unless upon the supposition that human and divine commands are always in accordance with each other, which is too improbable to be entertained for a moment. 2. But apart from this, it is impossi- ble that any Christain should be under supreme obli- gation to man. The idea of such obligation, is essen- tially anti-Christian. It cancels the claims of the Creator, in a way at once atheistic and unceremoni- ous. It destroys the possibility of religion, for the very object of the gospel is to bring men — slaves and slave-holders not excepted — to obey God as their supreme Lord and Law-Giver. 3. Every Christian, by the act of conversion, is made a subject of Christ's kingdom. " One is your master, even Christ." This subjection to Christ, brings the individual into new SLATES CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. 87 relation?, and necessarily destroys all obligation to obey man in anything which is contrary to the law of God. The slave is no longer " wholly subject to the will of another" human being. He is even free from the evil propensities of his own corrupt nature, which had previously enslaved him, no less than the civil law. Hence, it is truly said of the Christian that he is " free indeed!" AVhen men are converted, slavery is broken down — the master can no longer control them, except in things lawful to be done. This, we need not say, is a serious abridgment of slavocratic despotism. Bondmen, as well as freemen, must obey God in all things, and if the former, with this necessity resting upon them, can still be chattels, and obedient to man in everything, we have no objection. But it is alto- gether an abuse of language to call such a state slave- ry ; it is slavery only in name. We might as well call him a Christian who merely bears the Christian name, but performs none of the duties which it implies. 3. The slave cannot cultivate his powers of body or mind as the law of God requires. Education is de- nied him, and if rest, or food, or clothing, sufficient to preserve health, is allowed, it is only because the want of these might depreciate his value as a work- ing animal. The less mind the slave has the better, provided only he knows enough to work. But this, however well it may subserve the peace and stabil- ity of slave-holding communities, does not meet the w T ants of human nature. Development and culture 88 SLAVERY AND THE CHT7RCH. are requisite to that enlarged usefulness for which the Christian is taught to aspire. He must not rest contented with doing some good, but is obliged to use all his talents or be condemned as an unfaithful stew- ard. A blight is upon him that will sink him to the pit, unless we suppose the wicked law under which he is held can be plead as a justification of ignorance. But the hope of such justification is utterly futile ; for, if applicable in this case, it is in every other ; if ignorance may be excused because the master pro- hibits knowledge, so may Sabbath-breaking, false- hood, and dishonesty. 4. The slave cannot have a conscience. His own convictions of duty are wholly discarded. He may think it right to worship God, to pray, and to be per- sonally pure ; but the master has absolute power over him in all these particulars. Every abomination which the master sees proper to tell his slave to commit, the slave is bound to practice. The female must give herself up to pollution, the mother, must forsake her children, and the wife her husband. And all, of every age and sex, are bound to forsake their God, and do any manner of wickedness that their masters may re- quire. Here the conflict begins, and Christianity strips the slave instantly of all the irresponsibility and degradation which the slave law entails upon him — it abrogates the slave law, and makes the slave a man, and clothes him with all the responsibilities and im- munities of a man. Accordingly, when St. Paul sent Onesimus back to Philemon, he bid the latter receive the former " not now as a servant, but above a ser- SLAVES CANNOT BE CTIEISTLANS. 89 vant, a brother beloved." Such is the effect of reli- gion in every case ; the convert is snatched from the clutches of human authority, though not always eman- cipated from human power. In like manner, death reigns for a time over the body after the soul is par- doned. The body of the once slave may still be within reach of the slave-holder, but the spirit is free, and the free spirit will keep the enslaved body from all sin, in spite of the world, the flesh and the devil. 5. Slaves cannot perform either conjugal, or parent- al, or filial duties. They cannot, because all power to discharge these duties is lodged with the master, and made dependent upon his will. He may, at any moment, imprison, sell, or separate those on whom such obligations rest, and thus cause them to violate the law of God. But slavery knows nothing of mar- riage or of the relations to which it gives rise — it does not admit the slave to these hallowed duties — it resolutely ignores his right to participate in them. Husband and wife, son and daughter, are terms ap- plicable to human beings, but the slave is not a hu- man being, and, therefore, has no interests of this kind. "We ask, is it possible that a Christian should thus, at the bidding of man, waive these sacred claims ? Can he be a Christian, and stand in this doubt- ful attitude to duties which God has laid upon him? we answer, unhesitatingly, Xo. These obligations having been imposed by the Creator, cannot be re- moved by human legislation. 6. Slaves cannot be Christians, because, in order to slavery, they must part with the humanity which God 90 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. has given them, and in doing so, they commit sin. No man has any right to surrender, in this manner, the endowments received from his Creator. We re- ceive onr powers as a sacred trust, and are held re- sponsible for them. If they are relinquished at the bidding of man, the divine law is treated with con- tempt. It is here that the slave incurs guilt. He parts with a treasure, of which he was constituted, if not the sole, yet the principal guardian, and for which he must account to his Maker. JSTo man can thus de- base himself, and be innocent. Men are created that they may be men ; and if they sink down to mere things, and become disqualified for the duties of hu- manity, they cannot escape the guilt of deserting their post in life. We are well aware that the slave law is imperative and clamorous ; it clutches, and threatens to swallow its victims alive and " whole, as those that go down to the pit :" but all this is no sufficient apol- ogy. The slave may have to elect between death and obedience to his God, or to the constitutional law of his nature ; but, in this necessity, he only stands beset by the same difficulty which attends all other men, whenever danger lies in the path of duty. " He that departeth from iniquity maketh himself a prey." Either the slave is under no obligation to use his fac- ulties, or he sins by refraining from their use. We believe the obligation rests upon him as fully as upon other men, and that in consenting to be less than man, he wickedly debases himself, and, therefore, cannot be a Christian. The argument, in form, stands thus : Christians SLAVES CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. 91 must obey the law of God : but slaves cannot obey the law of God ; therefore, slaves cannot be Christians. As we have advanced this sentiment editorially, it has met with considerable remonstrance, and some have denounced it in no measured terms. The follow- ing may be taken as a sample : " The Northern Christian Advocate has made a new discov- ery in relation to the institution of slavery. It is now ascer- tained that the relation is equally fatal to master and servant, and that submission on the part of the slave, as certainly and effectually excludes him from a right to the fellowship of the Church, as the holding him in slavery does his master. Tliis new theory, horrible as it is, will have a host of advocates, both in the ministry and membership of the Northern Church. Rea- son, experience, and even the authority of Revelation, can pre- sent no effectual barrier to such a fearful delusion. We may hope, at least, for a check to its progress in that principle of reaction which is the safety-valve of the universe." The above is an extract from a recent letter of Bish- op Soule to the editor ttf the Southern Christian Ad- vocate. However horrible our position may be, it is impregnably just. N~o man has attempted to disprove it. Nor is the discovery a new one. It was known at least as long ago as the days of Homer. "Jove fixed it certain that whatever day Makes man a slave, takes half his worth away." {Odyssey, Book xvii.) All we have ever affirmed is, that Christianity ne- cessarily raises man above the condition of a brute. It exacts of him duties which a chattel cannot per- 92 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. form. It imparts to him an inspiration and an im- provement which break through the trammels of civil authority, and make every slave converted a " brother beloved." It makes him the " Lord's free man," " an heir of God," and "joint heir with Christ." But the slave law says the slave is " as nothing, as dead, as a quadruped." It accordingly denies him the rights of a man, and seeks to obliterate from his nature all traces of manhood. Christianity, on the other hand, tries to develop the manhood in man — to bring out the noblest qualities of his soul, and build him up in wisdom and holiness. And in order to this, it must necessarily free him from all obligation to do wrong, whoever may command it. Between slavery and Christianity there is, there- fore, an eternal antagonism. Bishop Soule thinks it horrible, that a man cannot submit to be stripped of his manhood and of his obligation to God, and still be a Christian. And he will, perhaps, allege that the claims of heaven are graduated to man's temporal circumstances, so that of the slave nothing more is required than obedience to his master in all things. But we totally deny that this requisition of obedience to masters, involves an obligation to do the slightest wrong. The slave may not break the Sabbath, nor lie, nor steal, at the bidding of his master — hence it follows that a slave, by his conversion, is made free from the power of man, whereinsoever that power is contrary to the will of God. Even Bishop Soule will admit that the master's power is limited in this re- spect. This limitation, however, is fatal to the whole SLAVES CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. 93 system of slavery. For, if the master may require nothing wrong, then the slave is free to do his whole duty — free to be a man and a Christian, in spite of the law which makes him a chattel. This is practical abolition. The law may remain, but it is a dead let- ter. The slave is emancipated by the gospel of Christ. ^Ye maintain that the obligations of slavery and the obligations of Christianity are diametrically opposite — that slavery has excluded humanity, and with it, the possibility of religion — that conversion, by resto- ring the functions of humanity, virtually annihilates the slave law. And so far as we have any knowledge of slave character, this view is sustained by actual occurrences. Slaves have held fast their integrity by resisting the unrighteous requirements of their mas- ters, and suffering the consequences. Unless the slave States are greatly belied, many of the sable sons and daughters of Africa have preserved their virtue only by preferring martyrdom to apostacy. That is to say, they have thrown off slavery — have "resisted unto blood, striving against sin." Uncle Tom, the fictitious hero of Mrs. Stowe's celebrated work, is only a famil- iar illustration of the common fate of invincible piety, under the workings of the horrible slave system. In every such case, religion or slavery must give way ; if the master cannot corrupt the slave into obedience, the slave bows to death, and asserts his freedom by gaining a martyr's crown. Should it be said the slave may have a good mas- ter — one who will both treat him kindly and require nothing wrong of him, and that, in such a case, the evils 94: SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. we have mentioned would not exist : we reply that the supposition yields the whole question ; it concedes that the slave law may be inoperative — the very thing for which we contend. In so far as the slave- master treats his slave as a human being, he treats him contrary to the slave law, and thus practically nullifies the law. All rights accorded to the slave are violations of the law by which he is held in bond- age ; if he is not treated as a brute, he is not treated according to the character which the_ statute gives him, nor according to the power vested in the master. That anomalous instances occur in which the authori- ty of the master is not exercised, we are ready to ad- mit ; but this only confirms the truth of our position — it shows that the law must be suspended to make way for Christianity. We do not, by any means, deny that the master may cease from his unrighteous exactions and give his slaves a chance to become Christians ; we only insist that he must so cease, or that the slaves must discard his authority, if they are ever con- verted. What, then, becomes of slavery ? Is not the chat- tel at once a man 1 and is there not laid on him the duties of a man ? Has he not a God ? and are not all his powers of body and mind to be supremely de- voted to his God ? Is he not under just the same ob- ligations in this respect as other men ? and if so, can he, more than any other man, submit to anything which contravenes the will of Heaven ? Now, unless these questions can be answered in the negative, the controversy is settled — slavery expires as Christianity SLAVES CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. 95 progresses, and the presence of the latter displaces the former, as surely as light displaces darkness. "We have dwelt the longer on this point, because it has too commonly been supposed that future happi- ness might recompense the slave for present misery. Slavery has been considered no barrier to religion, and the slave not much to be commiserated, since an- other and better life would make ample amends for his wretchedness in this. But the case is widely va- ried, if slavery cuts off eternal as well as temporal prospects. It is our deliberate conviction that the slave is ruined for both worlds. "Sin kills beyond the tomb." And the sin of slavery kills quite as certainly as any other sin. If the slave could die into freedom and felicity, we would not dispute about the injuries in- flicted upon him here ; but when it is understood that his condition is no less hopeless for Heaven than for earth, his fate appeals to Christian sympathy with no common force. Heaven is not to be peopled with chattels. The slave-holder cannot console himself with the reflection that the evils which he occasions will end with this life. His brutes here will be brutes hereafter. Having driven the poor slave from all vantage ground, and denied him all opportunities of improvement, till the grave closed over him — hav- ing, in short, defeated every purpose for which pro- bationary life was given, he must not expect the vic- tims of liis cruelty to be recompensed by the joys of Heaven. For Heaven, preparation is necessary, but 96 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. this preparation the slave may not acquire. It would no doubt be very convenient if a portion of mankind could be degraded to utter brutality through all their lives, and then pass safely into Paradise ; oppression and spoliation might be pushed to any length without endangering the soul, and Heaven would become the receptacle of all the cast-off and worn-out tilings which inexorable death had placed beyond the op- pressor's reach. The slave-holder might then bargain and sell, and drive his property while life lasted, and God would kindly take it at the grave, and enthrone it in everlasting light. But such is not the economy of Providence. The gospel of Christ provides that the redeemed shall be saved here ; it provides that the men admitted to Heaven shall be men on earth — men purified and trained for that holy place. It is this soul murder — this double and eternal death, which renders the institution of slavery so horrible. The blow is professedly aimed only at the body ; but in order to make the physical powers of the human being available for this awful service, it is necessary to en- feeble and extinguish, as far as may be, the intellec- tual and moral faculties. This is done by positive edicts against education, and against all the more effi- cient means of improvement : it is further done by the most abject and suffocating restrictions of person- al liberty, and by inhibiting every right, relation, and pursuit calculated to impart mental force. And as if determined that nothing should be wanting to complete his ruin, the slave is deliberately cast from the pale of humanity. What the chances of such a SLAVES CANNOT BE C1U11STL- 07 being are for religions culture, is but too evid With this deadening process going on bier nature — with the law interdicting his right to be human, he certainly cannot be expected to rise in the scale of excellence. If he does rise, it must be in defiance of the circumstances by which he is sur- rounded. In obedience to the higher instincts of his nature — not quite obliterated by the extinguishing appliances of slavery — he must assert his humanity and become a man. Finally, however hard it may seem to un-christian- ize the slave for remaining a slave after his conver- sion, there is no other alternative. We must either deny that human beings are under obligation to cul- tivate their powers, and discharge the duties incident to the several relations of life, or hold slaves, as we hold all other men, bound to act up to their human nature, and not as mere brutes, the only character which the law assigns them. Slaves should be men, or they should not ; if the former, they must of ne- cessity throw off the trammels of the slave code, though at the peril of life ; but if the latter is true, then their obligations are canceled, and the virtues required of men are a dead letter to all in bonds. Dare any take this position I Dare any say that souls may be trained for Heaven, without being taught to obey the law of God in all things ? We admit that slaves may be converted, but their conversi< >n is one thing, and their Christian culture another. We have no right to infer that they may live and enjoy religion out of the pale of humanity, because Buch a state 98 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. does not debar them from repentance. The greatest sinners may be converted — the drunkard, the liar, the swearer, and the adulterer—but can they live in the practice of the same things after their conversion ? Certainly not. No more can the slave be "a servant of man " in anything contrary to holiness. His own moral integrity thenceforth becomes to him of sovereign consequence — he is the Lord's freeman, and none may oblige him to sin. "We must not be deceived by appearances. ~No mere professions — no religious feel- ings or exercises, are to have weight as proofs of reli- gion, where the life is not right. If the slave still remains a submissive tool of his owner' — if his obligation - to God is not considered paramount to everything else, he is not a Christian. But if his allegiance to God is sacred, he is not a slave. Men may call him a slave, but the mastery over him is in Heaven. CHAPTER II. SLAVE-HOLDERS CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. If slavery incapacitates the slave for religion, it equally incapacitates the slave-holder. The disastrous effects of the system are, indeed, even more conspic- uous in the latter case than in the former. That the robber surfers a greater moral injury than the robbed^ SLAVE-HOLDERS CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. 99 admits of no dispute. But this principle applies to all who commit crime, and to the slave-holder as truly as to other criminals. It is not denied that the slave- holder may he converted and become a Christian ; he is not beyond the reach of grace, but in order to obtain it, he must renounce his sins. The drunkard may become a Christian, yet not without putting away his drunkenness ; mercy is gained only by repentance. Still further, it is not denied that men may be Christians and be merely technical slave-holders — that is, slave- holders according to the letter, but not according to the spirit of the law. As a mere formalist is not a Christian, so one who only formally holds slaves is not a real slave-holder. In order to slavery, the law must be carried out ; men must be regarded and treated as chattels, to the utter sacrifice of their per- sonal freedom, and all the collateral rights of human- ity. Having premised these things, we shall now present the argument against the religious character of slave-holders. 1. Slave-holders cannot be Christians, because slave- ry is sin. We are aware that this proposition appears to assume the point in dispute. But the objection is of no force, unless it can be shown that slavery is not a sin. We maintain that slavery is a sin, a great sin, and a sin under all circumstances : and if this position is impreg- nable — it ought to be made to bear up the question under consideration. That sin destroys Christian character, is indeed a plain truth ; but there is a strange reluctance to apply it here. The law is ac- knowledged to be wicked, and slavery itself is pro- 100 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. nounced an abomination ; but yet no blame is attached to the slave-holder — he is allowed to pass as the victim of circumstances — his sin is no sin, for the simple reason that the State is also involved in the crime. Did men look at the sin of slavery as they do at other sins, and hold all parties to a strict ac- countability for their participation in it, there would be little need of announcing a truth so palpable as that now before the reader. The argument itself is indisputable. The sinner cannot be a Christian. This is conceded by Dr. Fuller. " That sin must at once be abandoned, is a proposition which admits of no debate. If slavery, then, be a sin, it should at once be abolished." {Letters to Dr. Wayland, Letter 1.) Thus, it is only by denying slavery to be a sin, that its advocates pretend to claim a religious character for the slave-holder. And the denial extends not merely to slavery under certain circumstances, but to slavery per se : the institution must be pronounced right, if rightly used. But we have shown that it cannot be rightly used — that it is a crime in itself, and no more admits of improvement than murder or adultery. The fact that a sinner cannot be a Christian, is all we insist upon, in this connection, as this fact fully sustains the conclusion to which we arrive — namely, that the slave-holder is not a Christian. The argu- ment is valid, if the premises are good. Hence, no one will accuse us of unfairness, unless they, at the same time, reject the proofs which we have adduced to show the essential wickedness of slavery. Let SLATE-nOLDEES CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. 101 those who stumble at the idea of unchristianizing slave-holders, remember that the conclusion is inevi- table, if the premises which we have assumed are correct. That slave-holders cannot be Christians, is no arbitrary and harsh judgment, provided simply that slavery is a sin. Why, th-^w, shall the proposition at the head of this chapter be considered bold ? Why shall it be deemed uncharitable? It amounts to no more than this — that sin is incompatible with religion. Slave-holders 'and their apologists admit this, and still profess to be shocked when we say that slave-holders are not Chris- tians. They do not perceive, that in order to avoid this conclusion, they must absolutely deny the sinful- ness of slavery, and that the argument is nothing more than the legitimate application of a truth, always insisted upon by the opponents of slavery — viz : that slavery is a sin. The Christian is required to be holy, and if slavery is unholy, it is plain to demonstration that no Christian can be a slave-holder. Let those who dispute our position, set themselves to demolish the foundation on which it rests. Let them show, if they can, the immaculateness of slavery — that it is neither sin, nor of sinful tendency. When they have done this successfully, we will acknowledge our argu- ment unsound. 2. Slave-holders cannot be Christians, because slavery usurps the Divine prerogatives. No Christian can exercise unlimited control over another human being. The Christian is aware that himself, and all other men, are bound to obey the law of God, and he 102 SLAVERY AKD THE CHURCH. cannot presume to exercise a power which he knows belongs to God alone. That the master has absolute, unlimited authority over the slave, is beyond ques- tion. The slave has no power to do anything contrary to the will of the master. Let it be ever so great a crime, in the sight of God or man, that is exacted of him, the right of resistance is equally denied. He is made to know that the master's will is his supreme law for both worlds. What the master commands — be it right or wrong — that he must do. Here, then, is the most absolute and unqualified tyranny of which it is possible to conceive. It sets at naught the di- vine supremacy, and renders man accountable, not to his God, but to a human owner — a slave-master. Such an assumption of authority is wholly unknown in any other relation of life. An attempt has been made to find something analogous in the authority of a husband over his wife, of a parent over his children, and of a monarch over his subjects ; but the attempt is a failure. It is ridiculous to make such a compari- son. The mild and limited authority belonging to these relations, has no resemblance to the brutal des- potism of slavery. In the one case, there are always reserved rights, which operate as a check to abuses ; in the other, there are no reserved rights whatever. The conscience of the wife, and the child, and the subject, is never surrendered to human authority ; those who govern them, govern in subjection to a higher law, and it is always understood that a command to do wrong, emanating from such a source, would carry vith it no obligation, inasmuch as God has forbidden 6LATF.-nOT.DKR3 CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. 103 all wrong-doing. But the slave-holder's authority has no qualification ; his victim not being human, in the eye of the law, is supposed to have no conscience to preserve inviolate, and no soul to be endangered by compliance with sinful requirements. The master is, therefore, entrusted with supreme control, and the slave bows to his every mandate, as to the decision of his final Judge. There is a further difference, too important to be overlooked : in the relations afore- said, the persons occupy their true positions in the social world — the wife was destined to be a wife, the child to be a child, and the subject a subject ; each is in his appropriate place, and subject to such authority only as is demanded by his natural position in society. But not so with the slave ; his powers must be crushed to keep him degraded ; the authority ne- cessary in this case, must be so perfect that it will cut off all return to manhood, and leave the man a brute forever. It is no common power that the slave-holder exercises ; on him is devolved the dreadful work of blasting the humanity of the negro, through every scene in life, and in every possible relation to society. He must execute the horrible purpose of the State ; the State has placed the slave among brutes, and it is the owner's business to keep him there. He is bound, as a law-abiding citizen, to see that the design of the government is not frustrated ; he is entrusted with the fearful responsibility of keeping the slave pre- cisely what the law has made him — a thing, a chattel. That no Christian can do this, without a forfeiture of religious character, is just as obvious as it is that 104 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. no Christian can commit a variety of the highest crimes, one of which shall be the denial of a God. One of the first attributes of Christianity is, the ac- knowledgment of God in his several relations of Crea- tor, Preserver, and Governor. Where this recognition of Divinity is wanting, there can be no religion. But slavery sets aside the authority of God, as com- pletely as if he had never issued any command to the African. The slave is forbidden to be a man, and may neither know nor serve his God in the only rela- tion which he was created to sustain. He may, it is true, if the master chooses, learn something of reli- gion, but he must learn it out of character — learn it, not as a man and a member of society, but as one disinherited and forbidden to return to the common brotherhood of the human family. But even this, be it remembered, is completely optional with the master, and herein lies the grievous wrong. It was never designed that one human bein«; should stand in such a relation to another human being as to nullify the Creator's supremacy. Yet slavery makes this relation necessary — ■ it compels the owner to stand in the place of God, and exercise a power which does not belong to man. Even if the slave consented to the surrender of his powers in this manner, it would be wicked for the master to accept the surrender. How much more wicked, then, must it be when the wrong is inflicted by force ! If the slave has no right to consent to be a slave, surely the master has no right to compel him to be one. Before God, the slave and his owner stand on ex- SLAVE-HOLDERS CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. 105 actly the same ground, and one lias just as rrmcli right as the other to interfere with any question of duty. Both are alike responsible to the Supreme au- thority for every act, and both must refrain from all improper coercion, or sink their Christian character. The slave-owner, however, cannot refrain, and still be the owner of human chattels ; if he refrains, his chat- tels immediately become men, and the slave law is a dead letter. If he fails to govern in everything — if he allows the slave to act as a man, and to choose what he will or will not do, then again the same result follows — the slave is virtually free, and the law is null. Thus a constant and unscrupulous usur- pation of the slave's rights as a man, must be kept up, or slavery ceases of its own accord. But the Christian cannot usurp the rights of any — he must " render to all their dues ;" consequently he cannot be a slave-holder. 3. Slave-holders cannot be Christians, because slavery is a violation of the law of love. A Chris- tian must love the colored man as himself, and must do to him as he would wish, circumstances being reversed, should be done to himself. Xow, as " no man ever hated his own flesh," it is not possible for any one to wish for slavery — slavery for himself and children, through interminable generations. For this reason, every converted man will be utterly incapaci- tated to hold a slave. We do not say that lie may not nominally and technically hold a slave, but we say he cannot really hold one. lie will regard the re- lation as wicked, and will treat the law as a dead letter. 5* 106 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. Let it be observed, then, that we place the non- slave-holding of Christians on the ground of ac- tual incapacity. God has so constituted them that they cannot commit the abomination, and still retain the elements of their religious nature. In order to justification, they must not only renounce all desire to invade the rights of others, but actually attain to such a knowledge of right and wrong as will enable them to abstain from all unrighteousness. A Chris- tian cannot be a pirate, because piracy is of the devil ; and yet piracy is no worse than slavery. The laws of our country have long regarded the foreign slave trade as piracy ; but the foreign slave-trade is no worse than the domestic, and the trade in slaves, whether foreign or domestic, is no worse than the simple ownership of slaves. Moral purity justly ab- hors the whole traffic, counting every part of it equal- ly guilty — the seller, and the buyer, and the owner are all on the same ignominious level. Each and all consent to have and hold what honesty forbids — ■ what is not their own, and cannot be, for the simple reason that eternal justice assigns it to the slave. The law of love will not allow the Christian to participate in this robbery ; he may not even sanction it by his si- lence, much less by sharing, though it be ever so re- motely, in the vile transaction. Rebuke, not partici- pation, is demanded ; but not rebuke alone. It is not enough that the Christian reproves such deeds of darkness by words ; his acts, conservative of the slave's rights, must declare his heart-felt abhorrence of the abuse practiced upon his fellow man — though that SLAVE-HOLDERS CANNOT BE CHRISTIAN. 107 man be a slave. In a word, the Christian is so con- stituted that he must, of necessity, regard the slave as a brother man, and treat him as such. lie cannot take advantage of a wicked law to oppress him, any more than he can to murder him — he cannot perform any one of all the several acts which are enjoined by the slave code. To carry out such laws, demands an- other kind of being — one who feels himself under no obligation to treat man as man — as a brother, for whose welfare even the sacrifice of life, if it were necessary, would be both a pleasure and a duty. 4. Christians cannot be slave-holders, because slave- ry depresses men. The Christian is bound to elevate all around him, as fast as possible. ~Ko truth — no principle in religion, is plainer than this : that all men are to be cultivated and improved, as far as we have power to do it. It becomes impossible, there- fore, for a religious man to aid, either less or more, in the work of degradation — he views the African as his brother, and is compelled, by every consideration of duty, to educate . and improve him to the utmost of his power. Hence he must accord to him all the rights which the God of nature gave, and all the ten- der regards which the gospel of Christ enjoins. It would be singular, indeed, if Christianity, after im- posing the duty of culturing humanity — the human- ity of all men — to the highest extent, had, neverthe- less, excepted large classes, towards whom nothing was due, but the most rigorous and systematic depres- sion. Such an anomaly in religion there is not. portion of the human family is given up to ruin — 108 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. none are predestinated to the crushing influence of slavery. Laws against education and liberty, against marriage and the rights of property, against con- science and manhood, are laws against God ; they are a direct attack upon Christianity, and must inevitably be spurned by every believer in divine revelation. Before a Christian can be a slave-holder, the law of God must be repealed, in every particular affecting the relations of man to man. The fraternal spirit, now so conspicuous in all parts of the law, must be utterly obliterated. When this is done, the work of desolation can go on, but not before. Until then, the obligations of the Gospel will make it impossible for any Christian to join in a conspiracy with civil gov- ernment against the rights of any man. But may not the Christian become the depositary of the slave's rights, and thus guard for the slave's good, what the law had taken from him ? Not at all. As to any guardianship of such rights, it is absurd — nay, more, impossible. ISTo man can, innocently, be the depositary of what belongs to another's manhood. The slave must regain his rights before he can be a man. None can act for him in this matter. God has laid certain duties on the slave, as a man, and will hold him — not his master — responsible for their performance. The master cannot answer for any but himself, in the day of judgment. Aside from the im- possibility of this transfer of obligations, is the in- trinsic guilt of the original transaction. The Chris- tian slave-owner, by consenting to hold the slave as a slave, endorses the conduct of the Legislature or SLAVE-HOLDERS CANNOT BE CIIKISTIAXS. 109 law-making power, and thus becomes as guilty as those who perpetrated the enactment. Can an hon- est man consent to be the depositary of stolen goods ? He might, perhaps, for the purpose of restoring them to the owner, but not for a moment for any other pur- pose. The goods are not his, and never can be his ; to retain them, therefore, an instant, except for the sole purpose of returning them to their owner, is to be par- taker with the thief. AYe may render the case still plainer, by supposing the right in question to be, not that of personal freedom, but the right to life. Had the law, without cause, doomed the slave to death, could a Christian participate in the infliction ? Could he become the depositary and administrator of this cruel power? All will see at once, that to do so would be murder. The government should be left to execute its own wicked laws, if they must be execu- ted, for no honest man can lend himself to such a work. The plea that Christians hold slaves to shield them from a worse fate, is altogether fallacious. No worse fate is possible. He that is a slave, has lost all he had to lose, except life, and that is his only in a very qualified sense. As an animal, he might suffer more in the hands of one master than in the hands of an- other. But his rights as a man are sacrificed to the same extent, whatever may be the character of his owner. The slave-owner who recedes from the prop- erty principle, does not execute the law, and in so far, is not a slave-owner. If the Christian respects his slave, and counts him a brother — as we contend he 110 SLAYEET AND THE CHTJECH. must do — the slave law is no longer in force, and lie cannot be said to hold a slave. But if he does apply the law, and reduce the man to a chattel, what better is he than another — than the common run of slave- holders ? It is no matter what hand does the deed, if it must be done. Robbery, committed by a pious man, is just as much robbery as if committed by a professional highwayman. The assassin's knife, plunged to the heart by the hand of a friend, is not less fatal than if driven there by the hand of an enemy. The whole argument resolves itself into this propo- sition : Man was never made to be a slave, and who- ever enslaves him, sins against God. There is no avoiding this conclusion, unless by assuming that a portion of mankind were created to be slaves, and nothing else. It must be right to degrade men, and keep them degraded forever, or slavery is a sin, and being a sin, it is forbidden, both to the Christian and all others. " He that committeth sin is of the devil." 5. The Christian cannot be a slave-holder, for the reason that slavery deranges and even annihilates those relations of man to man, and of men to God, which Christianity is especially designed to purify and conserve. One great object of the gospel is to restore fraternal feeling to mankind — to revive the principle of brotherhood, and blend nations and races together as one family. But we have seen that the slave-holder cannot conform to this design without sacrificing slavery — to treat the slave as " a brother beloved" is to raise him up to the rank of a man, and accord to him all the rights which belong to liumani- SLAVE-HOLDERS CANNOT BE CHRISTIANS. Ill ty. But this is not all. The slave is intended for marriage and its various responsibilities, as really as other men. The conjugal and parental relations are devolved upon him by the appointment of the Crea- tor, and no man can lawfully crush him down so as to render him incompetent to these positions. Again, the slave is designed for citizenship, and must be per- mitted to act as a virtuous member of society. His obligations in this respect are the same as those of other citizens, and they are not to be canceled at the bidding of any human authority. Yet further, his relations to God and to eternity — or in other words, his relations as a moral being — are precisely identical with those of the rest of the human race. Slavery makes the man a blank, so far as religious obligation is concerned. He may pray, or do any other religious duty, it is true, if the master permits ; but the crime consists in taking from him the right to do these things of his own accord and without consultation. As a man he is required to serve God, irrespective of hu- man permission. He has an equal right with other men in all these particulars ; he has rights which no Christian can either deny or grant. It would be mockery to grant men the right to take care of their children, or to pray, since God has formally command- ed them to do these things, and no man has any right to prevent their doing them. We might as well com- mand the sun to rise or the winds to blow. Permis- sion here is out of place — we have nothing to permit. Where duty has been assigned by the Creator, cither by his written word, or by a law of our nature, it is a 112 SLAVEEY AND THE CHURCH. wicked farce to superadd our leave for its perform- ance, especially when, by so doing, we imply that the right would not just as fully exist without such leave. Every act of indulgence accorded by the real slave- holder is a blasphemy. He re-enacts the law of God, not reverently, and as a matter of solemn obligation, but capriciously, and as something that would have no force but for his ratification. A higher insult to divine authority cannot be conceived. But aside from this mockery of granting men per- mission to obey God, slavery, by whomsoever admin- istered, directly reverses all the established rules of virtue and religion — it beats down the lowly, be- cause they are low, the poor, because they are poor, and the weak, because they are weak. This system, instead of teaching men to " bear one another's burden's and so fulfill the law of Christ," cruelly heaps upon the helpless colored man all the disabilities that law can impose, and dooms him to drag out life in the character of a brute. Instead of raising him up, and enduing him with advantages, as both religion and humanity dictate, it strips him of even the natural rights that God had conferred upon him in common with mankind. Such a system must forever be intol- erable to all upright minds. Christians can have no more to do with it than they have to do with highway robbery and murder. It is impossible to frame any plea that shall excuse the slightest connection with the abomination. Here we leave the argument. If any can show its unsoundness, let them do it. But until then, we shall SLAVE-IIOLDEKS CAXXOT BE CimiSTIAXS. 113 continue to regard slave-holders as necessarily exclu- ded from the pale of Christianity. That they are not Christians, and cannot be, while continuing the prac- tice of slavery, is to us just as plain as that the gospel of Christ is a system of benevolence. Did Christianity sanction rapine, violence, spoliation and oppression — did it set apart the African, or any other class of men, to receive as their only portion the utmost indignities that lawless power can inflict — did it command the believer to be the instrument of this infliction — and did it not enjoin us to love our neighbor as ourselves — ■ then we might admit that slave-holding and religion could be united in the same person. Perhaps some may think we have advanced far enough in this direction. ■ But we must go one step farther, however bold it may appear, and affirm that slavery and slave-holding are not only incompatible with religion, but with manhood itself. To be a slave, is to sink below the order of humanity into that of brutes. So that, religion aside, slavery is impossible to our nature — a man cannot be a man, "in any proper sense of the word," and be a slave. The same is true of the slave-holder. He descends not only below religion, but below all the more hon- orable principles of humanity. For instance, it is dishonorable, even among men who make no preten- sions to religion, to injure the weak and the defence- less, or to take advantage of women and children, the sick and the lame. But here a poor, weak, ignorant African race, whose misfortunes appeal for sympathy to every honorable feeling of nature, and 114 SLAVERY AND THE CHUSCH. for whose protection, common honor, to say nothing of piety, demands that we should peril our lives, if need be, and yet the slave-holder ■ — ■ we mean the bo- na tide slave-holder, makes these his prey ! These he attacks with all the ferocity of a beast, and strips them of every right, merely because he can. Such a being outrages the feelings which are congenial to humanity, apart from the lofty maxims of Chris- tianity. So far, therefore, is it from being an act of te- merity, or uncharitableness, to affirm that slave-hold- ers cannot be Christians, that all consideration of their pretensions to religion, is somewhat misplaced. It is a condescension even to bestow the slightest atten- tion upon claims so evidently preposterous. The moral character of the slave-holder does not rise high enough to entitle it to such investigation. A being so fallen and depraved that all the nobler instincts of his nature have ceased to operate, cannot be ranked among Christians till he has been created anew, nor among civilized men till he is greatly reformed. Such brutality as makes women and children slaves for life, is repugnant not only to religion and the civil law, but to every manly sentiment, and necessarily fixes an ineffaceable stain upon its foul perpetrator. When such an one — forgetful how much more pol- luted he is than the common run of men — seeks to be considered a Christian, then Satan himself may aspire to the honors of saintship. Slavery is, in fact, so gross an offence to humanity, that its removal is the province of civilization rather than of religion. SLAVERY CANNOT EXIST IN THE CHURCH. 115 CHAPTER III. SLAVERY CANNOT EXIST IN THE CHURCH. Of course, if neither slaves nor slave-holders can be Christians, slavery can have no existence in the Church of Christ. But we allude only to the true or invisible Church ; for sinners as well as saints may be members of the visible Church. Through the infirm- ity of human judgment, and the concealment of sin by those who practice it, the bad are often associated with the good in Church fellowship. But we are not, on this account, to suppose that all are alike Chris- tians. Judas, though ranked with the apostles, was still only " a devil." The same is true of all the wicked, whatever may be their relation to the exter- nal Church. Our reasons for affirming that slavery cannot exist in the Church, are these : 1. The Church, to use the language of the Thirty- JSme Articles, is " a congregation of faithful men, in which the true word of God is preached," &c. Now, as lias been shown in the previous chapter, no slave- holder can be a faithful man. He must be recreant to his duty as the friend of the oppressed, and the enemy of oppression — he must degrade those whom God would raise up — he must lend himself to the State, as an instrument of cruelty to accomplish de- signs which the gospel abhors. His own imagined justification may be that by thus doing, he mitigates, in some degree, the extreme evils which the slave 116 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. would otherwise suffer, But we have already shown the fallacy of this reasoning. The State has no right to oppress — no right to make slaves, and, therefore, cannot confer this right upon others. Let the case be varied ever so slightly, and all will see the monstrous absurdity of the thing. Suppose, the State should en- act that every man might swear profanely, or steal, or commit adultery, at his own option, and without any penalty or censure whatever ; would the Chris- tian thereby acquire any right to practice these vices % Could he participate in them because the civil law allowed him to do so % Most certainly he con Id not. But suppose, further, that the State enacted that these vices might be committed with additional circum- stances of atrocity — such as swearing with unusual frequency, or with a needless multiplication of unlaw- ful words, stealing what the thief does not want, or must destroy at once, committing adultery with females peculiarly happy in their domestic circumstances, or where the disgrace would fall with the greatest weight on the family connections. It would be natural for a conscientious man, if he should commit these sins at all, to do so without the aggravations here specified ; but could he practice them even, if he strove to avoid the excess which the law enjoined ? Above all, would he be justified in practicing them in this tem- perate manner, merely to prevent the excess of which others less conscientious, by taking advantage of the law, might commit? For him to do so, would be " to do evil that good might come" — a doctrine point- edly reprobated by the word of God, SLAVERY CANNOT EXIST IN TIIE CHURCH. 117 But we will suppose further, that all contingency is out of the question — these vices must be committed ; either through the corruption of human nature, or from some other cause, such " offences must come." Does this necessity afford any pretext for their commission ? By no means. The " woe " is upon " him by whom the offence cometh." The Christian himself is under no necessity of this kind, and he may not volunteer to do wickedness because others will certainly do greater wickedness until God converts them. The slave-holder, therefore, whatever may be his inten- tions, is doing an unlawful work, and consequently is not in the Church. He is a worker of iniquity, and the Lord knows him not. He may be outwardly a church-member ; he may have prophesied, cast out devils, and done many wonderful works in the Lord's name, but still is not a Christian, because he does not the will of God in abstaining from all unrighteous- ness. 2. Slavery cannot exist in the Church, because the Church is holy. We talk of excluding slavery from the Church, as though it had really gained a footing there. But we might just as well talk of excluding drunkenness and murder from the Church — sins which all know preclude Christian character, and with it exclusion from the spiritual Church. He that commits these things may, indeed, have a name to live, but is dead while he liveth — spiritually and religiously dead, having at most only a dead form of godliness. Slavery never had a place in the true Church, and never can have, till crime ceas< 118 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. be an impediment to admission into the fold of Christ. So long as " putting off the old man with his deeds " is a condition of church-membership, so long must slave-holders, with other sinners, "remain in the con- gregation of the dead." The slave-holder may felici- tate himself on his admission to the visible Church, but this shall avail him nothing — his name must be written in the Book of Life, before he can be consid- ered in the Church, or have any ground of hope. Hence the Church is placed far above corruptions of this character ; it cannot be invaded by a lax-admin- istration of human authority. Men may decree that slavery is no bar to religion, but this makes the way to heaven no wider — it will not introduce the op- pressor into the family of Christ. 3. But, strictly speaking, slavery is impossible in the Church anywhere — yes, impossible even in the visible Church. In order to have slaverv, we must have a state of things altogether inimical to the nature of religion. Popery, by taking on a polit- ical element, and by assuming unlawful power, has become more nearly a civil than a religious insti- tution. It is a political league, not a Church. The same is true of any evangelical Church, when it in- corporates slave-holding. There must be a lower caste — a class of persons distinguished from others by the denial of privileges intended for all. The slave in the Church is still doomed to ignorance, depen- dence, servility, concubinage, and sale — he is the same chattel as before, and follows the laws of prop- erty just as necessarily as he ever did. The owner- SLAVERY CAXXOT EXIST IX TITE CHURCH. 110 ship of men by members of the Church, is an innova- tion fatal to that equality and fraternal regard peculiar to such organizations. A Church thus corrupted, deserves to be considered as a political oligarchy — it is a Church only in name. 4. It cannot be in the Church, because a genuine church-membership is in theory and spirit subversive of all unrighteousness. Every wicked act must be disclaimed — abhorred. All usurpation and improper control over others, is rendered impossible by the very constitution of the Christian. He might, as a man of the world, buy and sell men, or as a merely formal professor, he might "lord it over God's heritage," but not as a true Church member. Were there no rule against the practice, he could not conform to it, inasmuch as he has no heart to such a work. The Christian's kindly disposition is not the only preven- tive of slavery ; he is, by his position in the Church, far too much penetrated with a sense of his own in- firmity, unworthiness and dependence, to attempt the exercise of slavocratic. functions. A community living under the immediate eye of God, with their affections set on things above, must be illy prepared for the slightest participation in that greedy absorp- tion of power which marks slave-holding. Having been pardoned and restored to the divine favor wholly by grace, how can such people prove so ungracious as to rob their fellow men of a single particle of their natural rights % In the church, each has a master, and each for himself "to his own master standeth or falleth." No improper or unholy interference is pos- 120 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. sible here, without such a derang anient as assimilates the Church to other corrupt institutions. Should it be said that this argument proves too much, from the fact that there are wicked men in all Churches, the answer is, then all Churches are in so far corrupt. A true Church is not made up partly of the good and partly of the bad, for none but the good — the chil- dren of God — are rightfully members of even the visible Church. Why do we exclude sinners, if they have a right in the Church ? If they have no right there, the Church is injured by their presence, and ought to consult her own safety by separating " the precious from the vile." 5. If slavery may be in the Church militant, then it may be in the Church triumphant. Nothing should be tolerated on earth that is not holy enough for Heaven. But can we conceive of slavery in Para- dise % Will the disgusting, barbaric system transmit itself into the immediate presence of God, and there riot in eternal oppression? If men may be fit for Heaven, and yet be slaves or slave-holders, — if, with this character, they may occupy a place in the Church here, we cannot see why they may not hold these re- lations through eternity. They certainly will have the same character in a future state that they had in this — if they die slaves and slave-holders, we know not what shall make them more pure, or place them in different relations in the world to come. These relations being good enough for time, may be pro- nounced good enough for the eternal state. Such is the astonishing absurdity which must follow from ad- SLAVERY CANNOT EXIST IN THE CI1U1H. li. 121 mining that slavery may have existence in the Church. 6. The constitution of the Church, however, is de- cisive upon the point — it determines the relations of members, in spite of all disturbing causes. Men cannot come into the house of God as they juease, and make it what they please ; the power to effect a revolution is not in their hands. Here, at least, in his own house, " the Lord sitteth King forever." The members of the Church are brethren ; they have one master, even Christ, and all are brethren of one fam- ily. This excludes the possibility of slave ownership. All are Christ's, and none can claim aught as his own that belongs to another. There are no lawless, no unjust, no unbrotherly acquisitions or possessions here. The law of brotherhood is the great organic law of the Church ; men can enter into its communion as brothers, but in no other capacity. They can neither buy, nor sell, nor own one another, nor yet those out of the Church, any more than children of the same family can buy, or sell, or own each other as chattels personal. 7. To the Church, slavery is and must be unknown, except as one of the most criminal and grievous out- breakings of human depravity. It contravenes ev- ery purpose of religion, and defeats every object for which the Church was brought into existence. If slavery could have a place in the Church, reli- gion would be an idle delusion — a grotesque ab- surdity. A reformatory and humanizing institution that should tolerate the worst possible despotism, and 6 122 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. an aggregation of the greatest crimes ever committed would deserve the scorn and contempt of mankind — if, indeed, it were not beneath contempt. Kone of the apologies offered in extenuation of re- ligious slave-holding have any weight, They are only had excuses for a bad cause. The favorite plea of mercy we have exploded, as a most unfounded abuse of terms. There can be no mercy in slave-holding. Besides the plea, if not wanting in sincerity and hon- esty, is utterly fallacious. Christian slave-holders do not change the nature of the business at all. Their slaves are still chattels — still subject to the laws of property — still unable to marry or to own property, or to obtain an education, or to serve God. Slavery is slavery, whether in the Church or out of it. It is a crushing despotism, which the Christian is equally unable either to endure himself, or inflict on others. It is a vile abuse, as repugnant to Christianity as any other crime peculiar to the most debased heathen na- tions. The idea of adopting it into the Church, is an extravagance of error — a madness and desperation of purpose that has no parallel. Happily for the reputation of Christianity, its benign principles are too well known to suffer materially from these at- tempts to link its destiny with this rank and enduring off-shoot of pagan cruelty. A system which teaches that man was made in the image of God — made to be holy and happy — is grossly slandered when rep- resented as patronizing such a shameless crime as slavery. PART III. DUTY OF THE CHURCH U RELATION TO SLAVERY. CHAPTER I. EXTIRPATION OF SLAVERY FROM THE CHURCH. Ha veto affirmed, and, as we believe, demonstrated that " slavery is a sin, a great sin, and a sin under all circumstances," it would be somewhat worse than idle to affect any difficulty in determining the duty of the Church towards it. What the duty of the Church is in relation to crime, can never be doubtful. Even slave-holders have no doubt here. Their controversy is solely with the premises — not with the conclusion to which we arrive. If slavery is a sin necessarily subversive of Christian character, no one — not even the most guilty offender — can object to its immedi- ate exclusion from the Church. The duty of the Church is precisely the same towards all the varied catalogue of crimes — renunciation and exclusion are the only lawful treatment that can possibly be ac- corded to them. So far as the slave-holder is con- 124 SLAVEEY AND THE CHTTKCH. cerned, the treatment due is the same as that which is due to the adulterer or the thief, the burglar or the murderer. But, by the extirpation of slavery, we mean still more. It is not enough that slave-holders be expelled ; the man who consents to be a slave equally deserves expulsion. lie had no right to yield himself to human authority, to the exclusion of the authority of God ; nor had he any right to part with endowments and faculties which the Cre- ator had bestowed upon him as a human being, and take a station among the brutes. The man or woman who will do this is not prepared for Church membership, and should not be permitted to assume obligations, the fulfillment of which is ren- dered impossible. The Church requires chastity in its members, but how can the female be chaste when she relinquishes the right to control her own conduct, and becomes subject to her master, or to any whom he may appoint, in all things ? If her owner insists upon defiling her, it is unquestionably her duty as a slave to submit, and if she does not submit, the mas- ter can inflict what punishment he pleases — if she resists with becoming spirit, he is authorized to kill her at once. The Church requires parents to take care of their children, but how can slave parents do this, when their children are taken from them and sold to the slave trader ? Thus we might specify all the varied duties exacted by the Church, and slavery would be found to render them impracticable. For this reason, no slave should be allowed in the Church. Unless persons can throw off the shackles of bondage EXTIRPATION OF SLAVERY FROM TIIE CnURCH. 125 far enough to be Christ's freemen, it is a sad perver- sion, to devolve upon them the responsibilities of Christianity. If they are to be kept degraded to the condition of brutes, nothing unsuitable for brutes should be exacted of them. Christianity was de- signed for human beings, and we must bring the slave up to tin's, his natural position, or deny him a place in the Church. It would be deemed a profanation to take horses and cattle into the Church, but if we re- duce men to the same condition, they become equally unfit for Church relations. Slavery, it is true, is only factitiously and outward- ly in the Church. But this merely external connec- tion is reprehensible, and ought to be repudiated. It is a great scandal that so vile a sin is allowed even a nominal relation to a body professing holiness. Either slavery should be put down, or all sin should be tol- erated. Few will object to this position, provided we have reference only to the worst kind of slave-holders, and the most besotted of slaves. It is conceded that these are not Christians, and, therefore, ought not to be Church members. But, it is insisted that many are involuntary slave-holders and slaves, and by con- sequence, not chargeable with the guilt so evidently resting upon others. A satisfactory reply to this al- legation is at hand. Do we excuse men from the commission of crimes merely because they suffered themselves to be enticed into them ? Is the man who involuntarily gets drunk, or involuntarily kills anoth- er, excusable? Never — unless he did all in his power to prevent such acts. He may be less guilty, 126 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. perhaps, than if he had deliberately planned and ex- ecuted these crimes, but he is guilty of not control- ling his powers. The will is ours, and we are respon- sible for its exercise ; but not the will alone. It is the province of the will to regulate the other powers, and keep them from sin ; if it does not effect this, the individual is pronounced to be guilty — his involunta- riness is no exculpation. A man must not lend him- self as an instrument for others to use in the accom- plishment of purposes which his own judgment and conscience condemn. These involuntary slaves and slave-holders are, therefore, guilty ; they have not resisted an odious system, but have allowed it to draw them into crime. It has been said that non-slave-holding is, in many instances, utterly impossible — that a man may have slaves left him by will, and without his knowledge or consent. This is simply a fallacy. No man can be a slave-holder, any more than he can be a murderer, without his knowledge or consent. Slave property may be devolved upon any man, but that does not oblige him to accept it. He can refuse to acknowl- edge or treat such persons as his slaves — can set them at liberty, or leave them to be disposed of by others, as the law may direct. He is no more obliged to own slaves contrary to his will, than he is to own any other kind of property. Until the man accepts the property as his own, and receives it in the char- acter which the law gives to it, he is not a slave-holder in the proper sense of the word. The same is true of the slave. ~No man is a slave, merely because the law EXTIRPATION OF SLAVERY FROM THE CHURCH. 327 pronounces him sucli. lie can only be a slave by the actual enforcement of the law. The law is naught to him until it takes effect, and strikes him from among men. This may be prevented by that stubborn re- sistance with which every human being is bound to meet enactments that contravene the laws of God. But if slavery is to be extirpated from the Church, there must be a rule to this effect. Many sins are so well known, and their character so little in dispute, that ecclesiastical legislation is unnecessary : nothing is wanted but action. Ko Church presumes to enact a rule against robbery or murder, and yet all Church- es promptly expel members thus offending. "Were slavery fully understood, a Church law prohibiting it would be equally xiseless. At present, we need an express prohibitory statute in the Church, in order to secure action. The moral sense of community is not sufficiently developed in this direction, to effect the removal of the guilty without some provision of this kind. "With such a law embodied in Church disci- pline as expressive of the sense of the membership, the administration could go on with due regard to all exceptional cases. It might be found, occasionally, as is ofun the case in other instances of alleged crime, that the offence was only nominal. Thus the truly innocent would be acquitted, while the guilty were condemned, to the great relief of the Church. Until slave-holding, under all possible circumstances, is re- garded as a crime, and so defined upon the statutory records of the Church, we shall see no reform in this matter. "Without a specific rule, there is no way of 128 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. reaching any enormity practiced nncler the slave code. The master, being permitted to hold slaves, must, of course, be permitted to hold them as other men do — that is to say, he must be allowed to execute the slave law in all its details. He cannot be expected to op- press men without availing himself of oppressive laws. But if slavery is outlawed, and declared to be incompatible with Church relations, the Church then becomes judge in the case, and merely nominal slave- holding, if any such there be, will appear in its true character. As things are at present, slavery is sanc- tioned by not being condemned. The absence of law against it, proves that toleration was intended. And if, in given cases, slave-holding is rendered merely nominal by the force of those elevated precepts which Christianity inculcates, the Church gains no credit, and deserves none, because she did not prohibit an evil so clearly repugnant to the principles of religion. If slavery is modified and reformed so as to comport, in any degree, with humanity, it is purely accidental. The Church has made no provision for such a result. Slave-holders are left to do as they please ; they riot in unbounded liberty, and will continue to do so while slavery is tolerated. The sum is this : Slavery is sin, and the Church, following the word of God, condemns all sin, but yet does not specifically condemn slavery. This, as we have said, would be no detriment, were slavery fully understood and promptly repelled, as are other great sins ; but it is not, and the only rem- edy is to enact a prohibitory rule. EXTIErATION OF SLAVERY FROM THE WORLD. 129 CHAPTER II. EXTIRPATION OF SLAVERY FROM THE WORLD. The influence of the Church should extend far be- yond its own communion. When ecclesiastical rules are right, and rightly administered, their effect cannot be limited to the Church alone ; it will be felt in the world, and will powerfully contribute to the subver- sion of every species of wickedness. The Church must be the assailant of all sin, and hot merely of that which is within its own pale. Its mission is to estab- lish the kingdom of God on earth by the banishment of unrighteousness, and the introduction of universal holiness. But as slavery, though sinful, is a legal institution, it is claimed by some that the Church cannot oppose it without improperly descending to secular strife ; and above all, it is claimed that such an opposition would be an unlawful interference with the functions of civil government. The absurdity of these objec- tions we shall briefly expose. That piety which overlooks crime under a pretence of refined or elevated spirituality, is of a very suspi- cious character. Pharisaism and Jesuitism, in their murderous, diabolical career, have never been want- ing in precisely this kind of discrimination. They have set at naught all principles of justice and hu- manity for the avowed purpose of carrying religion 130 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. forward by other than the usual methods, or of uni- ting it with character in the absence of practical mor- ality. Thus, while they were planning assassinations and robberies, committing adulteries and perjuries, wallowing in all the debasement of Machiavelian in- trigues — they were models of devoutness, and pillars of the Church. Such spiritualism must not be mista- ken for religion. It is a morbid, hypocritical piety, and worthy of the deepest abhorrence. And it is so mainly for the reason that the common duties of life are divorced. Those ordinary and lesser virtues pecu- liar to social, every-day life — those duties which man owes to man — are eschewed, and in place of them, we have nothing but blind devotion to the Church. These are characters trained for the Church as a sys- tem, and bound to build it up regardless of religious obligation. Forgetting the first principles of the re- ligion they profess, and devoting themselves wholly to Church extension, they vainly attempt to build up the cause of God by trampling his own holy precepts un- der their feet. This is done for the Church ! They compass sea and land to make proselytes, and those proselytes, when made, are only so much the more children of hell. Yet this is the inevitable effect of all attempts to propagate religion by neglecting rigid attention to all kinds of practical morality. If, for the sake of extending the Church, or keeping it free from secular contamination, we pass over as unworthy of notice, the cruel injustice inflicted by slavery, the effect will be, not spirituality, but the reverse ■ — car- nality and death. The Church cannot wink at these EXTIRPATION OF SLAVERY FROM THE WORLD. 131 wrongs and keep herself pure. It is the business of the Church to teach men their duty in all the rela- tions of life. To pass by temporal affairs, and over- look minor duties, with a view to higher interests, is quite consistent with the gospel, provided no real in- justice be done. But we must not leave men in deadly sins, we must not sanction vice in our efforts to teach virtue, nor kill the body to preserve the soul. Here is where this description of religious propa- gandists signally fail. They incorporate the precious with the vile ; they sanctify the sin of slavery, and give it a place in the Church, rather than encounter the opposition of slave-holders. 2. The conflict with civil law, where such law is corrupt, is absolutely unavoidable. But still, it is said, " we have nothing to do with government. Slavery is the creature of law, and we must obey the powers that be." All this may be very convenient for Jesuitical purposes, but no Christian can, for a moment, tolerate such a sentiment. Suppose the civil law should prohibit the worship of God. Would it not be our duty to oppose the law even unto death I 2sone can deny that it would. How, then, can it be said that we have nothing to do with government but to submit implicitly to its requirements ? If we may resist goverment in one case, we may in another, provided both are equally wrong. Hence there is no way to make the authority of the civil law any apology for slavery, but by supposing that the law is right. We must take for granted that Blavery is not a sin, and that the law is right because it exacts no- 132 SLAVERY AND THE CHTJECH. tiling wrong. On no other principle can a refusal to interfere with the law, be justified. Unfortunately, however, those who plead the authority of law, ac- knowledge that slavery is wrong. They do not per- ceive the fatal character of this admission ; surely, they are not ready to do all the wrongs that law might possibly enjoin, but are contented to do this wrong. If they would reflect for a moment, it could not escape them that the law had no more authority to uphold slavery than it has to uphold any or all other crimes. Let it be remembered that all the martyrs were the victims of unrighteous civil law. They bled because they would not violate their consciences by obeying man rather than God. It was not enough for them to know that human government required certain things — " they confessed that they were pilgrims and strangers on earth," and consequently, that the law of God was supreme over them, and utterly forbid their doing wrong, no matter who might command to the contrary. That slavery is established by law, we must admit ; but this does not, in the least, prove its innocence. Laws often ordain vice as well as virtue, and the Christian who attempts to do all that the civil law allows, will often find himself grossly at variance with the gospel of Christ. The law of God enjoins holiness, and all human laws which either command or tolerate wickedness, are not only of no authority, but deserve to be rejected with abhorrence. Happily the slave law is only permissive ; no man is required EXTIRPATION OF SLAVEEY FEOM TnE WOELD. 133 to hold slaves. It is, therefore, evidence of sometl ling worse than blind reverence for civil law, when Chris- tians condescend to the practice of slavery. It shows a love for slave-holding — a proclivity for crime which gladly seeks shelter under the umbrage of human au- thority. This is the more evident, as the same class of persons who are so remarkably reverent towards the civil law wherein it establishes slavery, have no hesitation in opposing the same law in other respects. If the government should trample upon their rights in any respect they would not withhold the most in- dignant remonstrance. But when the usurpation is in their favor — ■ when the law gives the colored man's services to them for little or nothing, and makes him an article of property, then they bow to law witli strange precision, and preach against all resistance of the horrible statute. When the advocates of slavery, and of this passive, indiscriminate submis- sion to human government, are ready to become slaves themselves, or to obey the law in all things, however palpable its wickedness, then we may count them sincere, if not wise. 134 SLAVERY AND TIIE CHURCH. CHAPTER III. THE EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY DEMANDED BY AN IMPARTIAL ADMINISTRATION OF CHURCH DISCIPLINE. There are many sins not named either in the Bible or in the canons of the Church, for which men are excluded. It avails nothing, therefore, that slavery- is not specifically prohibited. The general rule in all Churches is, holiness in all things. This rule abun- dantly justifies the exclusion of everything sinful, whether specified or not. As Church discipline is now administered, it takes effect only in particular cases. The robber meets with exemplary punishment, and so do the extortioner and the thief — that is, they meet with punishment when these acts occur apart from slavery. But when the slave law sanctions the robbery, the theft, and the extortion, all combined, and carried to such an extent as they are never car- ried by the professional bandit, the deed is passed over in silence. In the case of adultery, or criminal intercourse of the sexes, we have a still more striking instance of injustice. These crimes are rigidly ex- cluded from all orthodox Churches, except as slavery introduces them. Slaves not being permitted to mar- ry, must of necessity live together without marriage. Hence the Church tolerates this unlawful commerce of the sexes among slaves, as she does not among oth- ers. There is no application of discipline to slavery, EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY DE^IANDED. 135 in this respect. Promiscuous, unbounded licentious- ness exists without any possible check. The Church may repeat its form of marriage over the slave and his companion, but the law heeds it not, and the parties so married are just as remorselessly sold and separated, and polluted, as if no such ceremony had been performed. The slave husband and wife are on- ly such in name — the law knows them as property, and nothing more. They live together as property, and may be sold at any moment without the slightest reference to the vain ceremony which pretended to make them one forever. We question not the motives of those who thus marry slaves, but we pronounce the act a most egregious trifling with sacred things. Thus, despite of all rules against concubinage, the Church is compelled to tolerate it wherever slavery exists within its pale. £so administration can correct the evil without removing the cause — the slave must cease to be property before he can be married, as marriage is affirmed only of human beings. Besides this illicit intercourse between the sexes, which the Church is obliged to sanction in the slave, while she condemns it in everybody else, there is also a necessary neglect of domestic and parental duties. But says the apostle, " if any provide not for his own, and especially those of his house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel." While the Church generally is held strictly responsible for the performance of this Christian duty, all slaves are allowed to neglect it altogether, as, indeed, they i must be. The slave has nothing, and can acquire 136 SLAVEEY AND THE CHIJECH. nothing ; his family — so called — are, therefore, wholly dependent upon others, and the law which applies to all other members of the Church, becomes inoperative upon him. The Church can do no better than to pass him by, while she allows the slave-holder to claim both his body and soul as chattels personal. But the lack of providing for a family in mere temporalities, is not the worst — the offspring of this universal con- cubinage must grow up without parental control or care. The parents cannot fulfill even the most obvious duties towards their children. The master has the only real authority, and whatever may be the design or wishes of the parents touching the regulation of their children, nothing is practicable but at the in- stance of the proprietor. And as it is for his interest to have all slave-children kept in ignorance, that they may with greater convenience be kept slaves, culti- vation is out of the question. The parents are power- less ; and the owner having no design but to degrade, the Church is obliged to witness the slave-growing process in all its stages — nay, more, is obliged to be the patron and approver of the abomination. Disci- pline there cannot be in the case, for the slave is sur- rendered to just the fate which is thus meted out to him. In consenting to tolerate slavery in the Church, we give our sanction to all the degradation necessary to keep the institution unimpaired. The slave-breed- ers of Yirginia and Maryland who stock the Southern market, have Church authority for their infernal busi- ness. The children whom they thus raise and sell, were permitted to grow up just as other slaves are, EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY DEMANDED. 137 that is, fitted for slavery. "Were the Church to object to this rearing of slaves ; were she to insist that no child should he kept degraded in this horrible man- ner, the institution of slavery would soon be at an end. It is almost equally impossible to administer disci- pline among the slave-holders themselves, even setting aside the immorality of slavery itself. As slaves are not allowed to be witnesses in any case against a white person, the slave-holder may practice any enormity without the slightest danger of expulsion from the Church, unless some one besides slaves can be brought to testify against him. Wrongs inflicted on slaves, a class peculiarly exposed to every species of abuse, are, of course, seldom actionable. ISTo cruelty, or debauchery, or profanity, or falsehood towards a slave, has any reasonable chance of correction. It is easy to practice the greatest crimes, and keep them forever out of the reach, if not out of the knowledge, of the Church. Slave-holding Church members, therefore, constitute an exception to all rules of morality, and to all Church discipline. They are left to do as they please with their slaves, save when others than slaws are present. ISTone but slave-holders ever had such indulgence, and it is not possible that ecclesiastical discipline should be much better than a farce, while crippled in this extraordinary manner. But we will not insist on minor objections. Tho grand reason for the abolition of slavery in the Church is, that without it no sufficient standard of purity can ever be attained. The acts of other men arc subjec- 138 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. ted to careful supervision, and visited with appropri- ate censure ; but the slave-holder escapes uncensured. His conduct must pass without inspection. Though slavery is " the sum of all villanies," it may not be investigated and adjudged like other crimes. It is at once classed among venial faults, and the Church covers it with a mantle of charity. Justice demands that slavery be analyzed and classified — that its es- sential character shall be its justification. Now it stands upon prescription, and though marked in every part with the greatest atrocities, no censure is inflicted, because the institution is uncondemned. The slave- holder may steal all that a man has, and the man himself, but it is no sin, and the Church is quiescent. But let the non-slave-holder pilfer even a single shil- ling, and he is promptly excluded from religious soci- ety. Is this impartial ? Is it equitable to punish severely the less guilty, while the greatest culprits are allowed to escape with impunity ? The Church legislates in vain against the pec cadil- loes of its non-slave-holding members, while the* cry of the oppressed is suffered to pass unheeded. It is impossible to establish virtue in communities where the greatest crimes are either openly or secretly abet- ted ; the most that can be attained, under such cir- cumstances, is to follow in the steps of the Pharisees, who paid tithes " of mint and rue, and passed over judgment and the love of God." Nothing but the externals of religion, can have any existence in the heart or life until all sin is put away. Let slavery be made an exception because the law wills it or the EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY DEMANDED. 139 people desire it, .and all evangelical influence is at an end. We might as well seek to unite piety with blasphemy, as with slavery. Perhaps the religions blasphemer might be a shade more decent than the avowed infidel, but his crime would be the same in substance, and equally fatal. So the religious slave- holder may be less heartless in crushing men down to brutes, but, as he accomplishes the same result, he must incur the same guilt as the most unprincipled oppressor. Upon the whole, neither religion nor Church disci- pline can be maintained in connection with this evil. The former is superficial to the last extent, and the latter is downright mockery. It is of no use to preach holiness, and countenance villany — none, whatever, to be " valiant in words," and yet so pusillanimous in deeds, as to spare the greatest atrocities. Decency requires that religion should be abandoned entirely, or else have its principles applied fairly and impar- tially. It is a very needless contempt of Christianity to expel men from the Church for common robbery and theft, while we retain in good standing the man- owner and man-stealer, and the trafficker in the souls and bodies of those for whom Christ shed his blood. This rottenness corrupts the Church to its centre, and sets at defiance every effort to produce moral sound- ness. "The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint," and ever will be so long as slavery is tolerated. Such a vile agglomeration of the greatest crimes — such a mass of moral putrescence — cannot but carry death to everything connected with it. The Church is com- 140 SLAVEEY AND THE CHURCH. missioned to teach not simply stern justice — the ex- actest equity — between man and man, but to inspire the most devoted kindness, the most tender sympathy, and the most pure love : and if, with this high com- mission, it cannot elevate men above the ferocity, the barbarism, the wanton cruelty, and the immeasurable injustice of slavery, we may pronounce its claims as a reformatory agent, utterly unfounded. If it cannot or will not correct' so palpable a wrong as slavery, it cannot, with decency, assume to improve the morals of mankind in any respect. It is out of all character to teach honesty and connive at dishonesty — nay, worse, to teach honesty in minor things, and teach dishonesty in things of the highest consequence. Such perverseness may ally itself with the mere form of religion, and may consist, perhaps, with the sem- blance of ecclesiastical discipline ; but it can never have place in the true Church, nor abide for a mo- ment a righteous administration. Slavery is a moun- tain of guilt that must sink down before the order of the Church can be observed ; and were there no word in all the Bible against it — were the several crimes of which it is but the aggregate, unnamed — still the duty of cultivating purity would necessarily array every Christian in eternal hostility to an insti- tution so contemptible in spirit, and so debasing in practice. EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL. 141 CHAPTER IV. THE EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL TO THE PEACE AND UNITY OF THE CHURCH. It is believed by many that all discussion on the subject of slavery, and especially all attempts to ex- clude slavery from the Church, are subversive of peace, and productive of secession. That these ap- prehensions are wholly unfounded, is quite evident. But unfounded as they are, they have been industri- ously used to bring into discredit every effort to dis- cuss the question of slavery. Those who would not be silent, have been charged as disturbers of the peace of Zion — as ambitious aspirants and reckless dis unionists. The Church is supposed to be endan- gered and ready to fall to pieces, whenever the subject of slavery is mentioned. Against these idle fears, and these unjust imputations, we enter our protest. Secession is always possible, inasmuch as men may secede with or without cause, there being no law that can keep them in the Church, contrary to their wishes. But the bare possibility of secession does not prove even its probability, much less its necessity. Why, then, the cry of secession ? It looks to us like at- tempting to break down the inquiry by an approbrious suggestion — as though investigation would be defeat, and the discussion must be stifled by connecting it with something odious. This is a common, but not 142 SLAVERY AND THE CHUUCH. very profound way of carrying a point, where the cause is bad and cannot be sustained by fair means. To give a man a bad name, will often injure him with the public, or exasperate him ; the first leads to dis- couragement, the second to indiscretion. This early, wide-spread noise about secession, may not have been designed to forestall public opinion, but whether de- signed or not, its effect will naturally be the same. It is a very cheap mode of warfare — it requires neither learning nor talents to call hard names, and breathe suspicion. And can it be that there is no disposition to meet this question on its own merits 1 Must sober discus- sion be put down by the ribald cry of secession ? If so, what better evidence could we have that the ad- vocates of pro-slavery cannot maintain their ground % They are conscious of the weakness of their cause, or they never would seek to substitute vituperation for argument. We do not believe the Church will be satisfied to dispose of the subject in this way. Slave- ry is among us, and our relation to it is not a trivial matter, to be passed over carelessly or contemptuous- ly. A sneer and a fling will not answer. We must have good reasons for slave-holding in the Church, or abandon it forever. If the practice can be defended by reason and Scripture, it is due to the Church that it should be so defended. But if it cannot be thus defended, the fact ought to be known, that the evil may be put away at once. It has been too much the fashion to stave off inquiry on this subject, as though things might be suffered to go on as they are, and ev- EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL. 143 ery effort at reform were a willful blow at the peace of the Church. Prescription thus becomes the su- preme authority. Justice, mercy and truth are set aside, to conciliate the slave interest, and with the vain hope of making " peace where there is no peace." In order to this, a course of treatment such as would not be tolerated in any other case, is continually re- sorted to, and the trick — for it is nothing else — will, perhaps, succeed with some, but we are confident that the public at large will not be duped by an artifice so exceedingly shallow. That the slave is wronged, is a conceded fact. Why, then, this pertinacious resistance to all inquiry into the measure and character of his wrongs. The Church sustains a certain relation to slavery, and if slavery be " evil, without mixture or intermission," it illy becomes the hiovhest moral institution in the universe to pass over it lightly. There ought to be deep and prayerful scrutiny here, if anywhere, and by the Church, if by any institution under heaven. It is not a small matter to keep such an immense moral evil — such a great national and individual sin — pressed, age after age, ivpon the heart of the Church. However pure the Church may be at first, it cannot fail to become corrupted by such a foul embrace. The loathsome vices of civil authority will surely prove infectious, and the, Church will be as the State. Circumstances compel us to believe that the deadly virus has already taken effect. The fear of discussion, the naked and stupid dependence upon prescription instead of argument, the unjust and shameless cry of 144 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. secession — are ominous of a sad decline in morals, and wholly unworthy of Christianity. Such an exhi- bition never takes place till a moral paralysis has supervened. "We come now to one of the main objects of this chapter, which is, to answer the following question : Has the anti-slavery movement any tendency to se- cession ? And we hope to show that if there is such a tendency, it is, at least, not on the part of those who advocate the exclusion of slavery. 1. There is nothing in the nature of the subject to induce secession. Slavery is but a sin, aud to put away sin is the professed aim of every Church regu- lation — it is the one work of all Church discipline. Unless it can be shown that there is something pecu- liarly explosive in ceasing from slavery, we can see no reason to apprehend division or alienation in any part of our work. Breaking off from this iniquity is, on the contrary, a highly conservative movement, as all holiness tends to union. Secession is fostered by vice, not by virtue ; active reform is conservatism, but stolid inaction is decay and death. Again, slave- ry, as it exists in the Church, is either right or wrong : if right, it will surely bear investigation — it will lose nothing by the most rigid inquiry ; but if wrong, who would wish to cover it up ? All we ask is, that the truth may come to light ; that a bad practice may be condemned, or a good one approved. Is there any- thing preposterous or unreasonable in this ? Do not candor and common honesty require that the relation of the Church to slaveiy should be openly and freely EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL. 145 examined by every one of its members ? How else shall our people have a good conscience in the mat- ter? To discuss slavery is, or should be, the same as to discuss any other question. The Christian is bound to know that what he does is right — nay, even more, that it will appear right, for he must "abstain from all appearance of evil." lie may not plead custom, he is not privileged to do as others do, but is under the most solemn obligations to know that his acts are conformed to the law of God. 2. Neither is there any tiling in discussion itself to cause secession. IsLen may examine epiestions of morality and duty without the least offence, and with great profit, as is proved by every evangelical volume or sermon given to the world. It is not bare discus- sion of religious subjects that produces evil, else we must cease from all doctrinal investigations — we must neither refute heresy nor vindicate truth. If evil arises, then, it can only come from the manner of conducting the controversy. An angry, unchari- table, supercilious debate would be injurious, because these tempers are in themselves an evil, and can only lead to evil. But there is not the least necessity for the indulgence of such dispositions. They are as un- suitable and foreign to this as to all other grave and important subjects of inquiry; they have no more in- timate connection with slavery than with drunkenness and avarice. Guilt, however, dreads exposure, and an irrascible temper, in those who plead for slave-hol- ding in the Church, has too often borne Btronger v timony against the practice than all the arguments of 7 14:6 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. Its opponents. A feverish anxiety to suppress all de- bate, and a sensitiveness that rushes to desperation at the very mention of change, are indications not to be mistaken. " Every one that cloeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved." Those who are confident of the recti- tude of their principles and practices, always invite scrutiny — they challenge that investigation which all who have not this confidence so much dread. It is evident, therefore, that the searchings of the pres- ent anti-slavery movement will not disturb any who should not be disturbed. The inquiry must be grate- ful to those who think themselves unjustly accused, and troublesome only to such as dare not come to the light. It will tend to union, and not to disunion. 3. The condition of those engaged in the movement is not such as to invite secession. Disappointed aspi- rants, idle speculatists, and visionary enthusiasts are one thing ; cool, determined, practical men are an- other. There is no excitement, no disaffection, no haste ; the movement is oue of sober second thought. It is an honest and frank declaration of sentiment, accompanied by a firm determination to support the declaration by corresponding action. But if those who believe slave-holding should not be tolerated in the Church, cannot effect an amendment in this par- ticular, they have sense enough, we trust, to know that time and perseverance are requisite in all great undertakings. Should they fail now, they will suc- ceed hereafter, and can afford to wait. Men who are in a hurry are not fitted for great achievements. Re- EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL. 147 form is a life work ; it is not tlic accident of a day, but the patient, unwavering effort of a whole exist- ence. That men of unflinching firmness and subdued expectation, of clear perception and moral force, will think it wise to leave the Church for this cause, we do not believe. Secession is too extreme a remedy for such a disease. The very mention of it is an in- sult. It implies that men do not know enough to de- sire and labor for an object without bolting from the Church, in case of failure. "We despise secession, where the liberty of working is allowed. It is down- right folly ; for once out of the Church, all hope of benefiting it is at an end. Nothing would please the slave-holder better than to have those opposed to him leave the Church ; he could then have it all his own way. Besides, we are not for deserting the sick. Slavery is a moral disease, and while it preys upon the vitals of the Church, we ought to be peculiarly devoted and unshrinking in our attachment. A friend should never be forsaken in the hour of need. 4. Secession must have a motive, but there is no pos- sible motive in this case. AVe have just as much lib- erty to oppose slavery in the Church, as we could have out of it. There is no restriction whatever. The Church meditates unsparing opposition, and in- vites us to it. The Methodist Episcopal Church, in particular, asks, " What shall be done for the extirpa- tion of the evil of slavery?" and bids us respond. Shall we meanly shrink from the work solicited at our hands ? Shall we abscond in the hour of peril and of action ? Did Luther forsake the Catholic Church, or 148 BLAVEEY AND THE CHUKCH. did that Church forsake him ? The latter. Did Wes- ley forsake the English Church ? Never. Both had other work to do. They hazarded life to restore the fallen — they labored long and arduously to build up the waste places, the " desolations of many genera- tions." So should every reformer do, and only cease from his Church relations when he ceases from life. To dash out of the Church is a foolish expedient ; it has been the ruin of many a well begun work. 5. It is not a little ridiculous to suppose that a calm, fraternal discussion must end in the convulsive throes of ecclesiastical dissolution. Freedom of speech is essential to liberty in Church and State. Corruption and tyranny invoke silence, but truth and righteous- ness invite utterance. The latter have nothing to conceal — nothing that they do not wish to have cir- culated to the remotest extent. But tyranny claims to rule without a reason ; it maddens at the thought of inquiry, and exacts a blind and brutal submission. The idea that this free expression, so harmless and so necessary to religion, is dangerous, is an unmatched absurdity. It is to mistake the best friend of reli- gion for its greatest enemy. The blood in our veins is not more important to the health of the body, than free speech in our mouths is to the health of the Church. Let no one, therefore, agonize over the dangers of discussion. It is to borrow trouble from what should be our greatest consolation. Where is liberty in the State, or purity in the Church, at this moment ? Is it in Italy or Russia, where freedom of speech is un- EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL. 149 known? oris it in England and the United States, where men write and speak as they please? If we wish for the midnight of error and corruption, then let ns declaim against investigation. We shall n<:>\v show more directly that the extirpa- tion of slavery is not only safe, but every way con- ducive to the peace and unity of the Church. 1. Slavery is sin — so conceded to be, even by the most of those who plead for its continuance in the Church — and sin is the cause of all disturbances and divisions in the Church. If, therefore, we can remove the cause, the effect will cease. Unity and peace are ever in proportion to holiness. To put away sin is to produce union, not to d • tr< »y it. Hence, in assuming that the extirpation of slavery will occasion secession, we also assume that slavery is a pure institution. But, in spite of this unavoidable inference, we are met with the objection that the tares and the wheat must grow together, lest, in pulling up one, we pull up the other also. But this construction of the para- ble of the tares and the wheat, is by no means tenable. If good here, it is good everywhere, and the conse- quence will be that no sinner, however great his crimes, can be expelled from the Church. Drunk- ards and adulterers, murderers and blasphemers, must be retained as well as slave-holders. Such an inter- pretation arrays the Bible against itself, and makes the existing usage of all Churches — for all Churches exclude murderers and blasphemers — unjustifiable oppression. Moreover, the passage cannot be so 150 SI AVERT AND THE CHURCH. construed without palpably contradicting the ex- position giv r en by Christ in the subsequent verses of the chapter. " He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man ; the field is the world ; the good seed are the children of the kingdom ; but the tares are the children of the wicked one ; the enemy that sow- ed them is the devil ; the harvest is the end of the world, and the reapers are the angels." (Matt, xiii, 38.) It is plain enough that the caution was not against excluding flagrant sinners, or "the children of the wicked one" from the Church, but against extermi- nating them from the world. The field is the whole world, not simply the Church. Whitby's note on this parable is remarkably just : " Some collect that even the tares must he members of the Church of Christ, as well as the good seed, which, if it only signify they by profession may be so, is in itself true ; but if it be designed to prove that they are true members of that body, of which Jesus Christ is the head, that cannot follow from these words: for 1, our Savior saith expressly, 'the field is' not the Church, but ' the world.' 2. The seed sown in the field by Christ is good seed, ' the children of the kingdom,' (yer. 38,) ' the just', (yer. 43 ;) they, therefore, only can belong to him, because they only are sown by him ; the tares were sown in it by the envious man, that is the devil, {yer. 28,) the enemy of Christ and the Church ; they are sown while the overseers of the Church were asleep, and are expressly called ' the children of the devil.' And is it reasonable to conceive that the devil, the great enemy of the Church and of its head, should beget members to his Church, since ' there is no com- munion betwixt Christ and Belial,' or that the devil's children should be members of Christ's body ? Vain hence is the col- EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL. 151 lection [inference] of the Erastians, that the wicked, and those that cause offences, are not by excommunication to be excluded from the communion of the Church, seeing the field in which the tares spring up is not the Church, but the world." 2. Slave-holders may complain, and doubtless will, of any effort to separate them or tlieir practices from the Church, but as they are not of the Church in any proper sense, it will not disturb the peace of Chris- tians ; and if all slave-holders secede, instead of refor- ming, they will go out of the Church only because they are not of it — there will be no loss. The exclu- sion of such can have no other than a salutary effect. Unless it can be shown that corruption is necessary to purity — that a diseased limb promotes the health of the rest of the body — that contagion is prevented by pestilence — we can see no reason why the extir- pation of the evil of slavery should not greatly pro- mote the welfare of the Church. Something in point of numbers would perhaps be lost, but that loss would be an unspeakable gain. "While it subtracted nothing from the life of the Church, it would remove a dead weight — a useless, putrescent incumbrance — as dangerous as it is unsightly and loathsome. 3. Slavery impairs the discipline of the Church, and thus paves the road to ruin. We have seen that no faithful, impartial application of Church discipline is possible where slavery obtains. Neither master nor -lave can be required to do what God has enjoined upon every Christian. In this case a gradual deterio- ration . must supervene. Where the morals of the Church are left to chance, or to an inefficient super- 152 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. vision, the worst corruptions cannot be long delayed. The master is allowed to do what is wrong, but this is not all ; for even those crimes which are prohibited, escape censure, because slaves are not permitted to be witnesses. This restriction of testimony is enough to sap the foundation of any Church. But the slave is almost wholly beyond the reach of Church regula- tions. ]N"o relief can be brought to him from this source. Church member though he be, education, marriage, parental authority, self-government, and freedom are as far from him as if no Church existed on earth. Xow these imbruted beings, so far as they have a nominal or real connection with religion, must certainly be every way improved by emancipation. As they are at present, the Church has little to do with them ; the rending of their chains might bring them up to Christian privileges, but it could not pos- sibly deprive them of such privileges, for they never had them, and never can have them as slaves. The Church occupies a feeble, trembling existence — if it exists at all — in connection with slavery, and the whole effect of abolishing slavery would be beneficial in the highest decree. 4. Slavery impairs the morals of the Church, and therefore puts it in continual jeopardy. A low state of religion is necessarily fruitful of discord and strife. It is the pure who dwell together in unity. The history of Church divisions would show that they have inva- riably proceeded from a lack of moral principle. But nothing could more effectually blunt all perception of right and wrong than an institution which at one EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL. 153 sweep strikes clown to the dust innocent men, together with their wives and children. This enormous, un- provoked offence, if allowed to pass without censure, opens the way to fathomless corruption. It is the fit- ting precursor of any subsequent villanies that the most shameless depravity can suggest. Where the moral sense of the Church must be kept so obtuse as to acquiesce in the " sum of all villanies," other and lesser evils will of course follow in due time. The canker of unrighteousness will be constantly spread- ing, until the whole system sickens and dies. With moral perceptions deadened sufficiently to endure such arrant wickedness, no community can long sus- tain more than the form of religion. Hence, to abol- ish slavery is an indispensable condition of religious prosperity. 5. Slavery impedes the progress of the Church. The religious culture of slaves must be exceedingly limited, and that of their masters not less so. The latter, it is true, may be taught to read, and may, with- out mockery, be instructed in the duties of conjugal, parental, and filial relations, but who shall teach them to let the oppressed go free ? Who shall teach them to do to others as they would that others should do unto them, and yet not subvert slavery ? This neces- sity of inculcating all holiness, and still leaving un- touched one of the grossest crimes ever committed by man against his fellow man, obliges the Church to in- vent apologies for slave-holding, and to enter upon a course of extenuation where reproof and conviction were needed. In such a community, reform can pro 7* 154: SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. ceed only to a certain extent ; if the axe is laid at the root of the tree, the system of slavery perishes at once. Here, then, is a source of perpetual irritation and de- feat. Every effort to extend the work of reformation recoils upon itself, or else attacks the vitality of slave- ry. Can the Church prosper when its onward march is thus interrupted — when it marshals its forces for the onset, and is compelled to disband them without striking a blow ? 6. But the grand reason is yet to be named. Re- ligion and slavery are utterly and eternally hostile to each other. They cannot be reconciled, and all at- tempts to reconcile them are worse than useless. Vir- tue and vice have no affinity. Consequently, so long as slavery is in the Church in any shape or degree, it must be the occasion of an exterminating warfare. Good men must hate sin, and, hating it, must always aim at excluding it from the Church and the world. As well might we hope to make fire and water coa- lesce — as well blend light with darkness, or the sum- mer's heat with the winter's cold. What one gains, the other loses ; just as slavery is spared, the Church is depreciated. It is this antagonism that makes the abolition of slavery so essential to the peace and unity of the Church. The pure are so constituted that they cannot and will not fellowship sin ; and while sin is tolerated in the Church, there must inevitably be con- tention, if not disruption. A burning, incorruptible holiness will loathe and abominate such filthiness of flesh and spirit as is engendered by the slave code ; nor can prudential considerations, whether of civil or EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL. 155 ecclesiastical origin, long hold the rampant hatred in check. Men may tk cry peace, but there is no peace." There never can be peace between sin and holiness. In vain are all expedients to unite what God lias put asunder forever. It is this unavoidable collision of hostile elements that renders every effort to gloss' slavery and incorporate it with the Church so perfect- ly futile. The effort cannot be successful ; but if it could, the result would be interminable strife — it would be to fasten upon the Church chaotic ruin and unmatched anarchy to the latest hour of time. Chained to the dead body of slavery, the living Church could only drag out a brief and sickly existence. To pro- long such a connection, whatever may be the motives, is moral death. The Church must die, or cast off slavery. CHAPTER V. THE EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIA! TO THE EVAN- GELIZATION OF THE WORLD. It has often been said, that to exclude slave-holders from the Church would hedge up the way of mission- aries, and prevent the progress of the gospel among slave-holding nations. But the objection is unfor- tunate — it claims too much. We might with ex- actly the same propriety say, that all other legalized 150 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. iniquities shall be tolerated because an attack upon them would embarrass the missionary. In many coun- tries idolatry and polygamy are upheld by law as firmly as slavery. And if we are to excuse the practice of oue of these crimes on account of the prejudice or hostility which might arise from an eifort to exclude it from the Church, why not the other ? Why not any and all other crimes whatever? The right to make an exception in favor of slavery, for the sake of expediting the conversion of the slave-holder, or securing protection to the ministry, must be broad enough to answer in every similar instance of con- flict betwixt the law of God and the law of the land. And, yielding fully to this principle of compromise, we should only have, on a large scale, what now oc- curs in lesser degree, wherever slavery is tolerated in the Church — a religion without holiness — gospel progress without gospel morals ! On this plan, the Church might extend itself without disturbing sin ; the world might be converted, and yet be as wicked as it now is. Such progress is a farce, and can never be countenanced by any who do not wish to burlesque Christianity. The true state of the case is this : the gospel being a system of holiness, cannot be allied to sin, without destroying its own identity — it can only endorse corruption by becoming itself corrupt. Here, then, in the outset, arises a fatal embarrassment to all evan- gelical efforts. The very instrumentality that should convert the world, is rendered powerless. But fur- ther : not only is the gospel powerless for good, and EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL. 157 wholly incompetent to bless the world, but i\ dually becomes one of its greatest curses. It mis! ids and debases, by sanctioning and perpetuating vi{' expediting the conquest, her forces will recoil — will be beaten — will be taken captive, and arrayed against her. Tin of Achan was not more fatal to Israel at the walls of 160 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. Jericho, than the sin of slavery is to Christians in their assault upon the world, the flesh, and the devil. There is nothing in this sin, more than in other sins, to make it exceptional. Men are as ready to relin- quish slavery as they are intemperance and debauch- ery ; they will no more despise or decapitate the minister of Christ who condemns them for this, than if he condemned them fdr other wrongs. But it is supposed that the civil law makes a wide difference, inasmuch as to keep slaves, special stringency is requi- site, and he who declaims against the institution is a disturber of the peace, if not an insurrectionist. All this is very plausible, and may possibly happen in a given case ; but it requires no great sagacity to per- ceive that men hold slaves as they do other wicked things. They are, therefore, approachable on the subject, and may be reasoned with, if the proper steps are taken. They are not always armed cap a pie, and ready for an encounter ; the heart, even of the most hardened criminal, has its occasional relentings, and there are times and ways in which it is quite safe to counsel or reprove him. At least, we find no diffi- culty in doing this in reference to most men, and there is no good reason to believe that slavery breeds such special malignity as to render all its victims callous to reproof. Should it appear, however, that martyrdom is the only condition on which the gospel can be propagated among slave-holders, the Church will not decline the task on these terms. It will then be quite as easy as it was in apostolic times, when not only slavery but idolatry was upheld by the sword. EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY ESSENTIAL. 1G1 The first ministers went forth everywhere, and no- where had the protection of law* — nowhere spared the dominant, legalized idolatry. It Las been well said that "the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church." We are not to judge of the success of preaching solely by the favor accorded to it in the first instance. When a few have shed their blood in defence of the truth, perhaps the cause has gained more in depth and permanence than it could if they had spent their whole lives without opposition ; cer- tainly more than if they had spent them in softening the message of the Lord so as to make it agreeable to the unrenewed heart. By extirpating slavery in the outset, the Church will stand on the only basis she can ever hope to occupy with success. She will then he seen in her true light, and cast her entire influence against all sin, making no deceptive concessions, playing no double game, and 'ng herself to no corruption. Teaching men not only to amend their lives in some grosser faults, but to "perfect holiness" in the fear of the Lord, she will have the abiding presence of her invincible Head, and go forth to triumph over sla- very as she now does over other crime-. Until then her strength will not return, and she will grind in the house of her enen 1G2 SLAVERY AND TIIE CHURCH. CHAPTER VI. THE EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY INEVITABLE. Were the Church, disposed to compromise and retain slavery for a time, on the ground. of expediency, still she has no power to do it. Every step of pro- gress is death to slavery. The whole evangelical process, from beginning to end, subverts sin and establishes righteousness. Take, for instance, the first great truth of all religion, and especially of revealed religion, namely, the existence of God. In order to convert the slave or his master, this truth must be set forth as it is — that is to say, the true character and attributes of God must be developed to the mind of those whom we seek to convert. But here at once the master sees that human authority is not the high- est, and therefore cannot be the ultimate standard of right and wrong. He sees that there may be an appeal to a higher power, and that he himself is answerable to this power. Above all, he sees that his slave has, equally with himself, the right of appeal to this higher authority. Knowing this truth, it must thenceforth be utterly impossible for him to claim ultimate or supreme authority over his slave. He will, moreover, see that the existence of such a being as God, implies rights infinitely greater than any finite being can possess ; that his slave is the creature of God, and can never belong to a fellow creature in EXCLUSION OE SLAVERY INEVITABLE. 1G3 any proper sense. The civil law may affirm one way or another, may call the slave a man or a chattel, make him the property of one or another, bnt he sees that God alone is, in fact, the real proprietor. Hence he can no more "lord it over God's heritage." Take, again, the doctrine of immortality. Both master and slave find that they are to live forever, ami this truth not only relaxes their gra>p upon the present life, so that neither can wish to do wrong by coveting or claiming what is not his own, bnt both have their thoughts turned to the supreme object — Heaven. Both are necessarily intent upon securing at once a full preparation for their future and eternal inheri- tance. This state of mind precludes slavery, because slavery precludes culture. The being who is to live forever, and whose eternal destiny depends upon an instant preparation for death, cannot be made the subject of that systematic depression peculiar to sla- very. The master will be aware that the slave should have all possible facilities for moral and mental im- provement — that the slave needs these helps quite ! much as other men, having to prepare for the same rigorous Judgment, and the same holy Heaven. It will not be in his heart to cramp and restrict one on whom snch responsibilities are devolved. lie will aid the slave all in his power, and accord t<> him the utmost liberty that one human being can give to another. The preciousness of the soul will infinitely outweigh all temporal considerations, and virtually extinguish all power in the master t<> task the >lave in any way, except as one Christian brother may task 164 SLAVEEY AND THE CHUKOT. another. There could be no wasting of the slave's life and opportunities — no drudgery — no oppression, under the influence of such a truth. But there is yet another view of the case. The slave and his master are to live together forever — they are co-heirs of im- mortality. If the master injures the slave — bruti- fies, degrades, crushes him — the wrong will upbraid him forever — it will stare him in the face through eternal ages. He will spend his eternity in company with his now slave, where " the servant is free from his master." Can any man, with the impression that his slave is to be elevated at death to equal privileges with himself — to eternal glory — keep him degraded here ? Can he treat the slave as a chattel, or with- hold from him any privilege that men esteem valua- ble ? Can such a man hold a slave ? We pronounce it impossible. It is not in the nature of things that such studied and shameless wrongs as slavery inflicts, should be perpetrated by one who looks forward to a beatific state, in which the slave is to be associated with him forever, and to be an equal sharer with himself. But, suppose the preacher sets forth the doctrine of holiness. He must explain the nature of sin, and es- pecially show that it is a violation of the law of God. He must, also, explain its fearful penalty, and bring both the slave and his master to repentance. JNow, if there is anything wrong or sinful in slavery, it thenceforth must cease, or the preaching is in vain. It is only on the assumption — wholly gratuitous and untenable — that slavery is not a moral evil, that its EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY INEVITABLE. L65 longer continuance is possible. Tlicre is just one way of obviating this conclusion, and that is, by supposing tliis sin still undiscovered — a sin of ignorance. But the objection would be equally valid against adultery, robbery or murder. As these crimes must be discov- ered before Christianity can make any saving pro- gress in the soul, so must the crime of slavery — or rather, that accumulation of crimes denominated by the term slavery — and when discovered there is the same imperative necessity for reformation in the one case as in the other. If the preacher neglects his duty in the premises, and fails to teach that slavery is sin, his progress in the work of evangelism will be such as if he had neglected to teach that lying and theft were sins against God. lie may have a Church in form, but not in fact. AVe will now leave the master out of the question entirely, and examine yet further the effect of reli- gious teaching upon the slave. To make the case the stronger, let us suppose that the missionary In '-ins his instruction of the slave with these words : "Ser- vants, be obedient to them that are your masters ac- cording to the flesh." It is not enough barely t'» enunciate this passage by itself : the reason for the injunction must be assigned, which is, that God wills this obedience. The slave, then, must know the com- parative claims of this authority, or, in other words, that it is higher than the authority of man. He will henceforth feel himself to be the subject of a new power, and one transcendently greater than he had before known. But tar more musl follow. With the 166 SLAVERY AND THE CHIJECH. knowledge of that part of the gospel which we have referred to, there must be connected all the essential truths of Christianity. The slave will see that obedi- ence to his master is not the sum of God's requirements, and not by any means an unconditional duty. He w T ill learn that he also is a man, and has the duties of a man to perform — that a life of holiness is in- cumbent upon him as well as other men, and that no human authority can oblige him to sin, because God has forbidden it. He will see it his duty to be mar- ried, to take care of his wife and children,- and to do all the duties which Christianity imposes upon men. This knowledge the Christian missionary is bound to communicate, and the slave is equally bound to heed it — for there is no gospel for slaves, as such, no de- fective messages, graduated to the limited and con- tingent scale of their privileges. The same glad tidings which come to other men, come to them, and must have the same purifying effect on the bond as the free. It would be mockery to make a gospel out of a few isolated precepts, as is virtually clone when- ever the instruction of slaves is confined to a given class of duties, or a particular set of religious truths. Such teaching may pass under the name of religion, s but it deserves the severest reprobation. It is mur- dering the souls of men, under a pretence of saving them. Thus mutilated, the gospel becomes a power- ful instrument of oppression, and is made to add its authority to the vilest enactments of the State. Ta- king for granted, then, what cannot be denied — that the slave must be taught to obey God rather than EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY INEVITABLE. 167 man, whenever human and divine requirements come into collision, we are utterly at a Loss to know how any man can be a slave. It is conceded that he is a man — that, as a man, he has important rights, with which the slave code interferes — that on these rights are founded duties which must not be neglected. This being the case, Ave ask, how can the slave be taught that he is a man, and that the rights and duties of a nam appertain to him, without being thereby inca- pacitated to yield those rights or neglect those duties ? . Why teach men that they are men, and yet compel them to relinquish the attributes of their nature '. or, rather, why attempt it \ — for it cannot be done. The faithful instruction of the slave is his emancipation by the act of God. lie is thenceforth free in Christ, and free in the world, to all intents and purposes, save the unrighteous exactions of the civil law, which he is under the most solemn obligations to abjure and t, whereinsoever they conflict with his duty to himself or his God. It is admitted by many of the warmest advocates of religious slave-holding, that slavery and Chrisl ity are inimical, and that the former must ultimately be subverted by the latter. Tin- admission of the truth would be satisfactory, were it not for the par- alyzing anachronism which attends it. Christianity will abolish shivery not only ultimately, but instant- ly. The work is done at once and forever. When the slave be - a man, and assumes tfc 'risi- bilities of a man — as he must nnderproper r teaching — his degradation ends, lie may still be a 168 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. slave in name, and the civil law may count him pro- perty only ; yet he is obliged to regard himself as God regards him — a man ; and being a man, he mnst act as a man, and not as a brute — the only character assigned him by the slave code. We differ from those who assert, as above stated, only in reference to the time in which the emancipating effect of Christianity is felt. They assume that it may be delayed ; but we affirm that delay is impossible. The emancipa- tion is precisely coeval with the belief of God's word. This must be, because that word involves truths re- specting the slave that cannot fail to revolutionize his conduct. Instead of regarding his owner as su- preme, the moment he believes in God this suprem- acy is transferred, never to return. He then has a Master in Heaven, to whom he is under infinitely greater obligations than he can be to man. Like all other believers, he may neither live nor die " to him- self," nor to any created being, but only " unto the Lord." The power of the master to dispose of him and to control him, is dependent on the will of God, as ajyprehended by the slave. He is constituted judge of what is duty. Before him is the straight and nar- row way, " which leadeth unto life," and before him, also, is martyrdom — if need be — as the inevitable consequence of walking in that way. But he may not decline the path of holiness, on account of perse- cutions — if early death must, in his case, be associa- ted with purity, it will only give him a brighter crown at last. This necessity of obeying God in all things, is not EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY INEVITABLE. 109 something that arises in particular stages of religious experience, or in peculiar circumstances of life; it is, on the contrary, the one unvarying condition of all religion ; there can be no saving faith where this im- plicit obedience is wanting. Professions and exerci- ses there may be in any quantity, but not salvation. " Xot every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." An in- stant obedience is demanded, and all conflicting au- thority is crushed as soon as the soul is affianced to its God. Over such an one the brutal slave law can- not bear sway — it must select other and more pliant material for its tyranny. Redeemed souls, who have covenanted to renounce the world, the flesh, and the devil, will not bow their necks to the God-dishonor- ing statutes of men. AVe have, then, this single alternative — freedom or no gospel — freedom with the gospel, or slavery without it. The law of God must extirpate the law of man, so far as the latter interferes with the require- ments of the former, or the kingdom of heaven can. never be established among men, nor the will of God be done in earth as it is done in heaven. It is most remarkable that any one should ever have hesitated to take this position or to make war upon human legislation in those particulars wherein it usurps the divine prerogatives, and destroys the rights of man. Such laws are clearly sinful, and ought to be — in- deed, must be — resisted by all who would live un- blamably. Human law is to be respected and 170 SXAVEKY AXD THE CHUECH, obeyed when it is right, but in no other case ; to obey it when sinful, under the mistaken idea that we are thereby obeying God, is a manifest absurdity. All commands of this character are conditional. Hu- man authority is good until it clashes with a higher, and then it is good for nothing. The extirpation of this form of vice — ■ that is, legal vice — is as much incumbent upon the Christian, as is the extirpation of other forms of wickedness. Sinful legislation is to be counteracted by the preaching of the Cross, just as much when it relates to slavery as when it relates to idolatry, or Sabbath-breaking, or swindling. Or, in other words, sin is not to find a sanctuary in law. If men do wrong in making laws, the Christian is bound to overturn, if possible, those laws, and make better ones : at all events, he must not obey them. The Christian missionary is, therefore, a direct sub- verter of the slave law ; he cannot preach without attacking it, nor be successful in his mission without breaking it down. Religion is a war against sin of every kind, and if slavery is sin, there is no alterna- tive — it must be extirpated, or religion must cease to do its work. We have too long been deluded with the idea that Christianity has nothing to do with cor- rupt governments, and must make its way by Jesuit- ical artifices which conceal the truth or corrupt it by the adoption of error. Such a policy may answer for the spread of superstition, but it cannot promote evan- gelical religion. The apostles did not denounce slavery by name, nor is it necessary in all cases, but they did what is quite as effectual, they taught justice EXCLUSION OF SLAVERY DTEVITABLE. 171 between man and man — they taught slaves that they were men, and should act like men — they enjoined all holiness upon both masters and servants — they taught all to set their affections on things above, and to remember that they had " a Master in Heaven." Xow, the teaching of men thus, precluded all n< sity of specifying particular sins in every instance. If we teach honesty in all things, stealing is just as effectually prohibited as it would be by a special pro- hibition. If we teach kindness, it is not indispensa- ble to add a precept against cruelty and murder. The greater includes the less — positive virtue compre- hends negative goodness. The apostles did not, in so many words, forbid killing a thousand men, or steal- ing ten thousand dollars ; but as they forbade the kill- ing of any man, and the stealing of any sum, no prohibition against these enormities was necessary. In condemning the lesser crime, they also condemned the greater. The same is true of slavery. They taught virtues and duties with which slavery is in- compatible — they brought a system of kindness to bear upon a system of cruelty, a Bvstem of right upon a system of wrong, a system of holiness upon a system of sin — they let light in upon darkness, restored the slave to God and to manhood, and struck the slave law dead. AVe can now see the absolute contrariety between these two systems, and .the perpetual, inevitable, uni- versal war which one must wage against the other. Christianity teaches jnstice, mercy. Love, and truth; but slavery ignores them all in theory, and discards 172 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. them all in practice. Hence, every effort to build up the former, must be a direct attack upon the latter. Slavery must die just in proportion as Christianity lives. To teach the virtues of the one, is to discoun- tenance the vices of the other. All compromise is out of the question, for religion can never be made to sanction crime. The systematic oppression — the utter contempt of all justice and humanity, by which alone slavery is brought into existence or kept in be- ing — is rebuked by the entire spirit of the gospel as well as by its every precept. How, then, is it possi- ble to propagate this religion of purity and benevo- lence, without, at the same time, breaking down the corrupt and unjust system of slavery ? Not to oppose the latter, would be equivalent to suspending all the functions of Christianity. We must cease from the Bible, or else pervert its meaning altogether, if we would spare the slave code. There is not a single truth to be uttered, nor a single precept to be en- forced by the minister of Christ, which does not directly and fatally assault " the peculiar institution." It is, therefore, impossible to retain slavery, if we would ; the Church has no option in the matter — she cannot raise hell to heaven, nor give saintly purity to diabolical crime. No : the constitution of the Church excludes this foul sin, and will forever exclude it in spite of all human authority. INFLUENCE OF CIVIL FREEDOM. L73 CHAPTER VII. CIVIL FREEDOM SHOULD BE MADE BUBSERVIENT TO THE ( APSE OF EMANCIPATION. It is unquestionably the duty of the American Church, in the prosecution of its high designs, to take advantage of our republican form of government. Here the people are sovereign, not in theory only, but in fact. They make their own laws, and execute them when made. Our system of popular elections under constitutional law, effectually prevents all he- reditary power, and also the accumulation of power in the hands of government functionaries. The right of the people to control and modify their form of gov- ernment, and all the laws originating under it, is fully admitted. It is not esteemed disorderly, or contuma- cious, or unreasonable, to aim at any improvement in civil polity. So far from it, indeed, is the general sentiment of the country, and the spirit of our gov- ernmental institutions, that he who neglects to study the character of the laws, and to aid in all suitable ways the work of amendment, is justly considered as recreant to duty. It is very evident, that a Church enjoyingsuch a form of government becomes, in part, responsible for whatever laws are enacted. This re- sponsibility is precisely according to the measur< influence which the Church is capable public opinion and at the pells. Knowing that slave- 174 SLAVERY AND THE CHUECH. ry is oppression, and that all oppression is forbidden by God in the most pointed manner — it becomes the duty of every member of the Church to aid in the re- peal of the slave law, and in the restoration of the slave to all the rights and immunities of citizenship. Even under an absolute monarchy this result would inevitably follow the propagation of Christianity, but not so speedily, nor with so little inconvenience to the Church. Such a government might not heed the wishes of Christians, however respectfully expressed ; and in that case there would be no redress, save the common privilege of piety -that of laboring and suffering in conformity with the law of God, in spite of all human authority. The foundations of such a monarchy would be slowly but surely sapped by the progress of religion, and, in the end, the Church would triumph over oppression. As fast as men were converted, the government would be annihilated in all its bad features ; and at last, when the number of converts was sufficiently multiplied, Christianity would assume control, as it did in the days of Con- stantine. Where governments are despotic, long years of suffering are requisite to accomplish ameliora- tions which can be reached almost at once in a repub- lic. And since Providence has favored us, not only with a republic, but with such an one as gives to us a greater share in the regulation of civil affairs than was ever enjoyed by any other people, we are bound to make this advantage contribute to the freedom of those who are now so strangely enslaved in this land of liberty. The laws which enslave them are, in no nuiOTJCB ot civil vamxat. IT.', bconsid^Ue degree, dependent for ^ch^ ££^^-^" .o f nv as evils the correction of which is alto- :,;':;;:;::;,:,,,; ,<> ?<— -5 i i ^ int wicked legislation, which original SJ^VpSahl^ahletc force them ye, l Xfact that Christians in the apostle J ,had litfle or no political hinnen^an^e not ^ consnltedin^eena^^^f^,^ ^^ ^'^riaX jostles. They con, slavery was treated t> : i servants of ^f , -:; i ;S ..SlU" Tb^iiga. men.'' rhej saia tc , appear- tiontodono-ong-d^ — *^ » ance of evil, w * ** emancipating the Fehendedmnch-orethanmerely * ^ Blave, as it honnd the mast* as ^ aiifeot t F ;: a nU"i-'-^- the same fomily, and neirsi t G0 d. thnstheaposflesd^notrefrj^ political teaching, thongh they tions on the subjecting; ^^ * wb ition tobeholyisjns -<- - '• ,.„ , of mOT der as is the injnnction thons ^ It has heen supposed that the *» silent onpoliticalsnh|ectsand&at^iU JJ of the Chnrch in matter* 176 SLAVERY AND THE CHUBCH. occasion of this silence. But we contend they were not Blent By prohibiting all sin, they have as effectu- ally condemned the sin of slavery as it was possible for words to do. No concession can be made here for if the apostles shunned political questions on the above ground, there is no good reason why they should have confined their caution to slavery. Chris turns were just as powerless in reference to other po- litical grievances. The law upheld idolatry, and he same prudence which dictated silence in reference to slavery, should have prevented all mention of idol- worship The truth is, slavery became an impossi- bility under the gospel dispensation. It could not live a moment m the kingdom of God. It was condemned by every precept and spurned by every truth in the gospel message. Hence, there was no more need of particularizing it among things prohibited, than there was of particularizing cannibalism. Minuteness of specification here would have been out of place As teachers of supernatural and immaculate holiness, it did not become the apostles to waste words on so gross a complication of villanies. After enjoining all kindness and brotherly love, it could not be expected that they would specifically inhibit the grossest bru- talities. We therefore have no difficulty in account ng for any absence of formal prohibitions against slavery. It is not necessary to find reasons for apos- tolic silence, since that silence does not exist. Every command was a prohibition in fact, and every prohi- bition was as plain as language could make it. It should be observed, that our democratic form of INFLUENCE OF CIVIL FREEDOM. 1 I ' government opens every question of law to publ discussion. This is true oven in the slave Stat. The constitutions of those States are subject to revision whenever the people choose, and nothing more is t qnisite to effect any legal reform than simply to chang the state of public sentiment. Churchee situated m slave-holding States have notion- to do but avail themselves of their acknowledged political rights. n the exercise of these rights, they can soon restore the slave to manhood, and blot out every slave law from the statute book. As vet, anti-slavery principles have flourished most in the'free States, ami for the best of reasons ; though some have deemed all agitation of the subject, except on slave territory, quite out of place. But it so hap- pens that truth must be spoken where it can be spo- ken The earliest preachers were especially charged, when persecuted in one city, to flee to another. B the slave States will not endure to be told of their sins, by men living within their own borders, i be- comes necessary to teach them from some ^stand- point. We do not go into taverns and < .-ulhrn- to lecture ou temperance, nor into infidel club ro I to preach the gospel. Yet lecturing and preaching are SeS, notwithstanding weare unable *£*«""* directly the most guilty. A rding to .he objecben above stated, Christ, when he came to establish the g Ssho-d Reappeared, not in Judea , where there w^somelmowledgeofthetrueWutmthedarkes regions of paganism. Why did he not go atfiiat wSere there was least light 1 Plainly, because there 173 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. was less prospect of success. For the same reason the anti-slavery movement must be confined in its incjp.ency, to places where there is some light-where the principles of civil liberty are well enough under- stood and sufficiently appreciated, to serve as a step- ping stone to the new platform. Why did not Wash- ington and Jefferson go to England to inculcate their republican and revolutionary doctrines ? Doubtless they thought it better to make the effort here, where revolution and republicanism were more congenial to the public mind. They found opposition enough even here, and so does the anti-slavery cause in the free States. It is well known that many slave-holders thirst for the blood of those who oppose slavery, and it is only justifiable prudence to avoid their rage so long as we can, without retardingthe progress of truth. We have the highest authority for this careful regard to per- sonal safety, while battling with the errors of wicked men. « After these things Jesus walked in Galilee ■ for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews' sought to kill him." Although we have no slaves or slave-holders in this region, we have great numbers of people who need enlightening on the subject, in order to discharge their duty. If they remain ignorant of slavery, we shall look m *ain for them to aid, by precept or ex- ample, when the Church and the Government under- take to put down the evil. Ignorance is weakness ; not to know the horrors of slavery, is to be feeble in opposing it. Again, if slave-holders perceive that KO MIWlW. GROrXD. "' non-slave-holders arc ignorant and indiffereiH on the subject, they wiU constme this indifference into p* tive approval, and hold on their way. Finding that the practice of slavery does not sink them m the esta- mation of mankind, they will be confirmed in the vice: whereas, if they see themselves branded with infamy and treated as pirates, they will naturally pay some respect to the opinions of the world and such Z desire to be respectable, will quit the abominable bu iness. Another reason for discussing slavery m the ee States is, that the Churches and .he Govern- Lnt sthingsn'owavc, accord to the institution their support. We have no slaves, but we are willing tin XL should have them. We give our sane t, on o slavery, by not entering our protest against it. tuoldin, slaves indirectly. We would quite as soon o the wrong, as give countenance to *-^b- ably "abounded in the Human Empire, where they planted the gospel personally," yet nothi aid about excluding such culprits from the Church : - not a single command to this effect can he found m their letters to the Churches." Now we contend that eman- cipation might be omitted for the same reason that operated in the latter case- that is, because the enu- meration of so palpable a duty was superfluous. Christianity aimed to establish universal holiness, ami it was quite sufficient to lay down the rule, and < a few cases, as mere illustrations of its application. A system which teaches that it iswrongto Bteal ^ the smallest sum, surely cannot be considered as teach- ing that it is righl to steal a thousand dollars. Nor do we need an express ml, on the subject bo oi emancipation. ffo express prohibition wasi «ry, because the general law of doing g I, and only good 182 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. to our fellow men, included this as well as all other blessings which the master had power to bestow on his slaves. It appears also that " obedience to masters is en- joined upon slaves in the strongest terms." But any inference drawn from this in favor of slavery would be as absurd as to suppose that an exhortation ad- dressed to laborers absolved their employer from all obligation to pay them their wages. The slave's duty was one thing, and his master's another. Christian- ity inculcates fidelity in every relation of life, and even kindness towards the wicked ; but this does not at all justify the wicked, nor authorize them to con- tinue on in their course. Commanding the slave to be faithful, is no approbation of slave-holding. If it were, then the command to him that, is smitten on one cheek to turn the other for the next blow, is an appro- val of smiting. Again, " did the apostles therefore sanction the sys- tem of slavery which prevailed in their day ? Surely they did not." We fully agree with him in this con- clusion. His mistake lies in assuming that the apos- tles did not make emancipation a condition of Church fellowship in fact, because they did not do it in form. He takes for granted that what is not specifi- cally commanded, is not commanded at all. But we maintain that no specific injunction was necessary, inasmuch as the entire system of Christianity was dia- metrically opposed to slavery, and in favor of eman- cipation. Yet on this slender and deceitful founda- tion — the absence of a formal precept — it is vainly NO MTPPLE QEOTJND. attempted to build up a system of religions Blai holding. As well might we erect thereon a Bystem of sanctified piracy, because piracy is qoI specifically condemned in the New Testament. K the apostles did not "sanction the system of slave- ry as it prevailed in their day," they Burely did w sanction it in any form, nor at any time. We have no rightto infer that they sanctioned some other form of slavery, and, above all, have we no right to gel up a form of slavery which we think the apostles would have sanctioned, and palm this upon the world as a scriptural institution. The slavery of those days was, in substance, the slavery of all time; and improve the institution as we may, it will always cxhil.it, in greater or less degree, the same diabolical feature The system defies all essential modification — it may be destroyed, but cannot be reformed. If we strike at the master's supremacy by limiting the slave's obedience to such commands as are con- formable to the law of God. slavery is at an end— for, in that case, 'the slave is constituted the judge of his master's commands, the law of God, and his • ■■ duty. What he judges to be contrary to right. 1. under obligation not to perform. He is in fan fr< as free as any man living. Hut if this elemenl slaverv is suffered to continue, all freedom is out of the question: the master assumes the place of God, and the slave is no1 permitted to have a cons AW- may suppose that his master is a good mai , will exact nothing wrong of him: but this d« vary the case, for the simple reason that we have 184: SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. right to give up our consciences to the keeping of even good men. The master cannot answer for his slave at the Judgment ; " for every one of us shall give account of himself to God." This necessity of answering for himself at the bar of God, obliges eve- ry man to act an independent part — and the slave as much as other men. Good men may err, but if they were infallible, they should not be blindly followed. Our own faculties were intended to be brought into exercise, and should therefore be allowed to choose between good and evil. The slave, in order to be anything more than a machine, must occupy the po- sition of a moral agent. Yet it is utterly impossible that he should be a moral agent and still be a slave. The slave code divests him of all power to think and act for himself, and commits the determination of his conduct wholly to his master, whoever and whatever he may be. No exception is made, or can be made, in favor of any right of conscience ; the fact that the slave is a moral being is totally ignored. The same is true of the slave, intellectually. There is no right of private judgment — mo recognition of intel- lectual character. In all these respects the slave is on the same level with the horse or the ox. And the law is perhaps as favorable as it possibly can be under the circumstances ; its aim is to give the master " entire control," and this could not be done if the slave were recognized as a man, or permitted to judge for himself in anything. Hence, while we have slavery at all, we must have it with every shade of ancient and modern barbarity. Deep- NO MIDDLE GEOTTND. 185 er tinged at times it maybe, through the accumula- tion of superfluous wickedness; bul no variations can ever change its essential character. It may to exist, but cannot cease to be evil while it < If we strike at the property aspeel of slavery, we find the system equally unimprovable. Thi well shown by Mr. Groodell,in his late valuable work on the American Slave Code : "The slave cannot be considered by the Government as tided to its protection while he is not regarded by it as having. any rights to be protected. And the Government thai recog- nizes and protects slave chattelhood has already, in thai very act, denied to the slave the possession of any rights, by deny- ing to him the right of self-ownership, which is the foundati and parent stock of all other rights, and without which they cannot exi-t. " Having no right to himselfj to his b tdintel- lect. (being all of them the property of hi- "own r,") he has no right to his own industry, to its wages, or it- products ; no right to property or capability of possessing it, a- a shown. Of course he has no H by the Government, and none of the rights thai gro^ them. ' : Having no recognized right of making anj no contracts with others I forced by th< G and no one has any legal pecuniary claims upon him to forced. He can neither sue nor be sued. Tin- is no arbitr rule, Il is the inevitable resull d. "Unable to no action at law againsl the violator of hi- bed. II.- 186 -SLAVERY AND THE CHTJECH. marital or parental rights, he has none for the Government to protect. " Not being accounted a person, but a thing, he can have no personal rights to be protected — no rights of reputation or character — no right to education — no rights of conscience — no rights of personal security — no social rights — no political capabilities or rights — not even the right of* petition, as the Federal Congress (very consistently with its recognition of le- gal human chattelhood) have affirmed. It would be an anom- aly to receive the testimony of such an one in a Court of law ! " It is futile, it is absurd, it is self-contradictory, it is short- sighted and foolish (to say nothing more severe) for any per- sons to find fault with any of these things, while they recognize- as innocent and valid " the legal relation of master and slave" the relation of slave-oivnership, which includes, implies, and necessitates it all. Such persons should ask themselves seri- ously what they ivoald have 1 ? " Would they have the Government stultify itself, and add mockery to injustice by pretending to attempt known impos- sibilities in the enactment of contradictions'? by making a show of civil protection where none is intended, or where they have rendered it impossible % What protection can they be- stow so long as, by sustaining or even permitting or tolerating human chattelhood, or failing to suppress it as a crime, they leave not the slave the possession of one single right of humanity to be protected % " Or, suppose the Government to be honest and successful in its attempts to confer upon the slave civil rights, to recog- nize and treat him as a member and component element of civil society. Suppose it to protect, instead of denying these rights — rights of conscience — rights of security — rights of reputation — right to education — free speech - — parental rights — marital rights — right of testimony — right to sue and be sued — right to make contracts — rights of property — right NO MIDDLE QBOTOD. 187 to his earnings and producta. What would fi< n f I right to dave-ownership, "the legal relation of master and slave?" Would it n..t vanish and disappear! Assuredly it would.'' {Part i. Oh. 1.) Again, if we attempt reform in the element vitude, nothing can be effected without annihilati slavery. Tate Palsy's definition— "an obligation to labor for the benefit of the master, without the con- tract or consent of the servant"— and before we a place the relation on Christian grounds, we musl eliminate all that gives vitality to the slave system. The servant must have a fair compensation for his labors, and be permitted such a choice of labor as * compatible with the rights of conscience. He must also be allowed the right of " consent and contract far enough to secure the proper distribution of Ins tone and talents on the several objects for which *tM should live. He cannot plod forever ma single direction, without reference to his own welfare, and eolelv for his master's benefit; becausetod , - would be to neglect the duty which every man owes to him- self, to mankind, and to God. Now it ia obvious that servitude thus denuded of its oppressive or anti- Christian traits is no longer slavery— no, it is not slavery even according to Paley, who bas cut down the meaning of the term much below its real imp But if the reform is eanied still farther, and to risht of choice is added the rightsofpn , of marriage, and of citizenship, the resemblai Wishes entirely, and .fie man,tbongh B - rvant, 188 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. is nevertheless free in everything essential to moral character. The impossibility of getting up a compromise sys- tem — midway between slavery and Christianity — ■ is also apparent, from this consideration : Religious slave-holding is jnst like all other slave-holding, be- cause the law by which alone a slave can be held, is precisely the same, whether administered by a Chris- tian or a man of the world. ~No man of common intelligence can dispute that piety has sometimes made the slave law a dead letter. But this is not slave-holding — it is emancipation in fact, if not in form. On the other hand it is but too evident that where this effect does not occur, and the slave law is not at once practically abrogated by Christianity, the slave gains nothing by being in the hands of a professedly Christian master. It has never yet been reported of slave-holding Church members that they use their slaves better than other slave- holders do ; nor is there any reason why they should, if it is right to keep men slaves. Christians are not expected to use their cattle and horses better than common men ; the nature of these animals makes no special demand upon Christian graces. So is it with the slave. If it is right to keep him a slave, it is un- questionably right to degrade him — if right to hold him as property, it is right to treat him as property. "We treat the horse as a horse — that is, as he was made to be treated ; in like manner, if the Christian may have a slave, that slave can have no claim to be NO MIDDLE GROUND. L89 treated as other human beings are treated. A Blave should be treated like a slave, and if is altogether unreasonable, if not impossible to bold Blaves, and j not bold them — to practice slavery withont the spirit of slavery. The law determines what slavery shall be — the law makes it what it is. There is not one slave law for the Church member and another for the worldling — no, both must hold slaves, if they hold them at all, by the same law. This law will take effect impartially — it will cntoff every right of the slave and reduce him to just as low a level for the Christian as for the infidel. Wherever it opera: one uniform and inevitable result must follow — the man must cease to be a man, and take rank as property, or as a brute. Xo Christian sympathy can prevent it, no human sagacity elude it. And as the law unmakes the man who ever may be his owner, it leaves him to the full tide of desolation which sla- very pours over the soul. The Christian's property has the same disabilities and liabilities a- other an property; the Christian's brute is just as mnch a brute as he would be in other hands. In short, I law being the same, the legal and practical evils -1' slavery are in no wise lessened when the slav< owned by a Christian. It is idle to think that I tian principle can execute Mich a law — can tr men as slaves — and yet not abuse them. "Slaves as a class cannot be treated kindly. We might as well sa\ a person was run over bj a wagon, and had both crushed mildly. The wheels of slavery cannot crush In.: 190 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. hearts with mild force. It is the force of hell — it burns while it strikes." (iV. T. Tribune, May 18, 1853.) This is the exact truth. No matter who may exe- cute the infernal law — its diabolical effects are ever the same. An angel could not make slaves of men without doing violence to the nature which God has given them. It has been proposed to modify slavery by restric- ting its motives. The advocates of this plan think to give slavery a moral character, by excluding from the practice everything mercenary. They propose to treat all who hold slaves for gain, as sinners ; while those who hold them for any or all other reasons, are to be esteemed as innocent. But it is rather late in the day to enact that slaves shall not be held for gain, wdien even slave-holders themselves acknowledge the institution to be an impoverishing affair. The whole south is a monument of desolation produced by slave- holding, and with this sad example staring us in the face, common sense is quite sufficient, without the aid of Church-discipline, to keep us from holding slaves for gain. Wicked men see that the curse of God is on all slave-holders — the very soil on which they live is scathed and blighted, till it bears most unequivocal marks of divine indignation. There is no gain in slave- ry, and this fact is so well known that the Church need not make any prohibitory rule in that direction. The sum of the matter is this ; those who make the above proposition, object to slavery only on one ground — ■ that of gain: whereas it is objectionable on every ground. They leave the Church open to slavery for NO MEDDLE GROUND. L91 all reasons save <»ne, and thai one, it happens by the providence of God, no Blave-holdef of common would ever think of avowing. But the effort to distinguish between the two kinds of slave-holders will always be abortive, and a ml.' excluding only those who hold slaves for gain, will never meet tlie wants of the Church. It will be im- possible to apply it justly, and uiconvenienl to ap] it at all. Slavery allowed in the Church under some circumstances, will remain in the Church under all circumstances. So it hasbeen,and bo it ever will b We do not believe that the attempt to distinguish I tween those who hold slaves foT gain, and those who hold them not for gain, can ever be successful. But if it could, it would not improve the character of slavery. There is a sufficiency of other m ao better than that of gain— as for instance, Laziness, licentiousness, pride and power — and if the practice when based upon th still tolerated, ir< characi will remain unchanged. The truth, however, is, that no excellency of motives— no peculiarity of circum- stances caa -justify the act. Hence we oppose all slave-holding. We make i distinction m I se ,andbu1 ,thatb l real and ap- parent— slave-holding in fact, and slave-holding in form only. There may be Dominal or formal Ch tians who are not real Christians and will not aved; bo also there may be nominal or formal Bla holders who are not real slave-holders, and, thi will not be lost A- to any distinction in the char- acter of slave-holders, other than 1 ■ ewne, 192 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. If the man really holds a slave, we count him a sin- ner ; but if he only appears to hold a slave, and does not hold one in fact, we say he may be a Christian. "We place slavery in the category of crimes, and can as little approve of slave-holding when not practiced for gain, as we could of piracy when not practiced for gain. Since the foregoing was written, a circumstance has occurred which bears with some weight upon a re- mark or two, and may be thought to enhance the im- portance of the distinction between holding slaves for gain, and not for gain. Our observation that " slave- holders themselves acknowledge the institution to be an impoverishing affair," was based partly on per- sonal knowledge, and partly on the following from Dr. Bond, who is both a native and a resident of a slave State, and whose extensive opportunities have enabled him to form an opinion every way entitled to respect. " We have already said that we have never known a Meth- odist — and we will now add any other Christian — who avow- ed, or would acknowledge, that he held slaves for gain, or pecuniary profit — no, not even in the most southern States of 1 the Union. We have spoken with none on the subject who did not profess to lament the existence of slavery as a great', evil, which they were compelled to endure ; and for the most part they all admit that the evil is not compensated by pecuni- ary advantages — that hired labor would be more profitable, if slave labor did not exclude the free ; a truth which is abun- dantly proved by the exhaustion, nay, the absolute denudation of a great portion of the land in the slave-holding States." NO MIDDLE GROUND. 103 But it seems that the progress of things has devel- oped a man, who, in the light of the nineteenth cen- tury, is willing to stand up and declare that in his Church slaves are held for gain. At the General Assembly of the (ISTew School) Presbyterian Church, which convened during the last month at Buffalo, one of the members distinctly avowed the principle which we had supposed the retributions of Providence, and respect for the opinions of mankind — if not for the gospel — would forbid any sane man to assume. The N. y. Tribune thus reports the gentleman : " Rev. Mr. McLane, of Mississippi, marched up to the mark and ' faced the music' without winking. Such a committee aa this which the report contemplates we will not receive. But if you ask how many if our Church members are slave-hol- ders, I answer, all who are able to be. If you ask how many slaves they own, I answer, just as many as their means will permit." A friend of ours who was on the spot and heard for himself, gives the language in still stronger terms : "Mr. McLane, a Presbyterian minister from MiflflWBippi, with Southern frankness said : ' We disavow the action of tlio Detroit Assembly. We have men in our Churches who buy slaves, and work them, because they can make MOBl money BY IT THAN IN ANY OTHER WAY. And the VlOre of Such RMfl Wd have the better. All who can, own slaves; and those who cannot, want to." He further adds : 194 SLAVERY AND THE CHURCH. " No Southern man objected to this, at the time, as a wrong statement of the case. But two days after, when McLane had gone home, and when they saw what use was being made of this frank avowal, two men, one from Missouri, and one from Tennessee, said it was not true in their sections. There, the brethren held slaves not for gain, but as an act of benevolence !" Now, to our mind, there is nothing especially hor- rible in this acknowledgment, inasmuch as gain is a lawful motive when connected with a lawful business. Slavery is, in every sense secular; slave-breeding, slave-trading, and slave-working, constitute a regular branch of business from which it is impossible to ex- clude the desire of gain, though we were of opinion that the judgments of God had so blasted the coun- try, and the prospects of those who pursue it, that no one could rationally hope to make it profitable. "We thought that slavery had become as many other pur- suits in which men continue because they have made large investments, and find it difficult to effect a change, though they are conscious the business is a losing one. It appeared to us that the condition of the Southern States, as contrasted with the Northern States, was enough to make it quite obvious, even to slave-holders, that slavery could only impoverish a nation. But we accept the testimony of Mr. McLane, and correct our statement accordingly. Be it, then, that many, or all the members of Southern Churches hold slaves for gain, rather than for benevolence — ■ they have not fallen in our estimation. To be sure, they avow a less exalted motive, but still an honora- NO MIDDLE GROUND. 195 ble one ; and they might pass as Christians, were slavery under any circumstances compatible wtth re- ligion. Indeed, there are reasons why we might even prefer that gain should be set forth as the reason for slave-holding. It is more creditable to slave-holders themselves — it shows that they do not affect virtues which all the world knows they do not possess. It is better that practice and profession should correspond ; bnt they cannot where the latter is benevolence, and the former a congeries of malevolence. Yet, some men, more shameless than others, have the effrontery to say in the light of Heaven, that slavery is a mercy I But if slave-holding is an act of mercy, we should like to know what is an act of cruelty. What a com- ment is this argument on society in slave-holding States ! Men must be reduced to a level with brutes as the only means of escaping from a worse fate ! Kay call it not an escape, for their can be no worse fate Slavery is worse than death. So will every freeman decide in an instant. Why, then, talk of holding men in chattelhood, in order « to protect them from greater evils 2" We deny the >ce of greater evils of a social character, and challenge any man to show that slavery is not "the bum oi ail vil- lains " Those who hold slaves to save them f* - worse condition, should know that a worse c« ■ndmnii, short of the bottomless pit, is not possible. worthless, nonsensical plea has too era- ted When a man's rights arc all g himself and posterity doomed to perpetual - let him not be insulted, and let not the comma 196 SLAVERY AND THE CHTTRCH. of mankind be outraged "by the declaration that all this has been done to save him from a worse fate — been done in kindness, and with a true intention to fulfil the law of love. Let the crime stand as a crime, and add not hypocrisy to robbery. Say, if possible, that it was done for gain, and thus avoid pouring contempt upon the doctrines of Him who has taught us by example as well as precept, that " we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren." Upon the whole, we are more than ever convinced that no discrimination of motives can avail anything towards improving the character of slavery, or reliev- ing the Church in any degree from this dreadful men- bus. Sinful it is, and sinful it will remain, in spite of the most accommodating casuistry. It must be prohib- ited entirely, or nothing is done. It is prohibition that we want — not a sublimation of motives. The Church must put away the evil, instead of attempt- ing merely to regulate it. It is not regulation that slavery calls for, but extirpation. The monstrous in- iquity is just as well without regulation as with it. Yillany is no better for being systematic. We must have the whole or nothing — the institution admits of no amendment, nor does it need any. Slavery is theft, and when the Church opens its door to thieves, she will of course not be particular whether they have stolen little or much. CONCLUSION. 197 CHAPTER IX. CONCLUSION. vv"e must now bring this work to a close, but not without a word in vindication of the objects which are ever kept in view by those who truly appreciate this great branch of Christian enterprise. There are those who — mistaking the genius of Christianity— complain bitterly of the whole anti- slavery movement. They regard it as unauthorized intermeddling, or at best as a mere refinement in morals, alike impracticable in itself and mischievous in its effects. Hence they have no patience with the advocates of emancipation. If all men of this stamp would bring the question home to themselves, they would be able to judge with more wisdom. Were they chattels personal — were they, together with their wives and children, down to the latest generation, doomed to the and u >n 1 ►lock — to the rice swamps — to the slave driver's lash— to brutal ignorance — to concubinage — to poverty— to bondage and shame - would they think onr feeble efforts extreme \ Impossible ! It is only 1 .ecanse all this burden rests upon other shoulders, that they so easily bear it. Not an honr — not a moment would they groan under such nnrighteons oppression. They would sav with the noble Patrick Henry, « Give me liberty, or give me death." But they arc quite 198 SLAVERY AND THE CHUECH. j willing to bind this intolerable load upon others, and make them bear it forever, although they would not themselves touch it with one of their ringers. Were they suffering in this manner, discussion would be to their ears a music sweeter than the ^Eolian harp. Were they unable to speak, how gladly would they listen to the outbursts of insulted humanity, as it broke forth in impetuous advocacy of their rights ! Every philanthropist who stood up to plead their cause, would seem an angel, and every word of con- demnation uttered against their oppressors, would sound as if emanating from the throne of eternal jus- tice. It is easy to bear other men's misfortunes, and so long as these men can have all the liberty they want for themselves and theirs, they will not much heed the fact that millions around them have none at all. The story of the slave's wrongs will tire upon their ear, and prove disgusting. Such, of course, see nothing momentous in the is- sues of this controversy — nothing at stake of suffi- cient importance to justify stern effort — nothing that should disturb the peace of the guilty, or enlist the energies of the pure. So trivial is the whole matter, that all attempts to keep the question before the pub- lic, are resisted as though anti-slavery was already an effete speculation. Persons of this stamp do not hesi- tate to declare that the subject is entirely exhausted. But however true it may be that the arguments and resources of these apologists are exhausted, it is not at all true of the slave question. The moral miasma of this great national sin is spreading everywhere, and CONCLUSION. 199 corrupting the life-blood of the whole country. There is not a single free State, nor a single Church in the land, but what feels the deadly evil creeping to its heart. The subject exhausted! Never 1 Never till oppression ceases; never till the last slave is free. Tell us not that the subject is exhausted, while more than three millions of human beings in our midst have not the right to worship God or protect their own virtue. Tell it not while these millions — on whom rest all the obligations of humanity — are forbidden to read the Scriptures, denied marriage, and sold like cattle in the market. We envy not the man who can survey this accumulated mass of unrighteousness with indifference. It is no sight for languid solicitudes. These hoary wrongs make no transient appeal to Christian sympathy ; they move the heart, and keep it moved till God takes away the evil, or withdraws the blessing of religious sensibility. But it may be said, "this belongs to Cresar — the Church has noth- ing to do with the evil." We deny it utterly. The Church has everything to do with slavery, if Blai is sin. Ciesar belongs to Christ. Sins of the State are to be reproved and extirpated as truly as the sins of individuals. It is not enough for the Church to sav, "it is the State, it is the State," and deem her own responsibility ended. TheState must be rebuked for its wickedness, [f our Christianity cannot do this — cannot remonstrate against iniquity in the high pla- ces of our own semi-Christian government- -how isil tit to grapple with the legalize., f pagan natioi Our religion is not worth exporting to foreign coon- 200 SLAVERY AND THE CHUECH. tries, if it is thus impotent at home. Exhausted ! Yes, when the kingdom of God has fully come, and not before. Until that auspicious hour, the Church must keep her armor on, and push the battle to the gate. THE END. 3^77-2