When the Church Bought Slavery Mistaken

A Unhappy Chapter in Historical past

This is without doubt one of the saddest chapters in American historical past. You’ll be able to take a look at the historical past of the traditional church—as Kyle Harper has in a few vital books that he has printed—and see how Christianity, the results and penalties of Christianity, performed a component within the waning and the dissolution of slavery within the previous Roman Empire.

The truth that Christians had performed that half within the dissolution of slavery that was not racially based mostly, that was not marked mainly because it was within the American context by race, may be very unhappy. It’s one of many nice tragic notes in all of church historical past that within the 1500s, when African slavery got here into view and got here to such prominence, the church in all of its quarters (although it had criticisms of the establishment and significantly of the slave commerce) didn’t take a transparent stand in opposition to it.

Now, it’s the case that in 1818, the PCUSA Normal Meeting issued a powerful assertion mainly condemning slavery—chattel slavery because it existed in America—and calling for its extirpation, calling for the tip of slavery. However after that time in 1818, if American historical past and the way issues went, what occurred was slavery was turning into an increasing number of worthwhile.

Many had thought that it might wane within the late eighteenth century, however the invention of the cotton gin meant that slavery was going to grow to be a worthwhile enterprise. It’s unhappy to say that, nevertheless it turned a really worthwhile enterprise, and some huge cash was being made in order that by the 1830s and 1840s, an increasing number of it turned enured, so far as many individuals had been involved, from criticism. It turned sacrosanct for many individuals.

The spirituality of the church started for use as a approach of claiming that as a result of the church is to not concern itself with politics as such, the church ought to maintain its mitts off this query of slavery. Charles Hodge of Princeton didn’t agree that the church, as a part of its activity of prophetic ethical calling, couldn’t deal with the wrongs of slavery. And he known as for the tip of slavery. He was an emancipationist, and he took up that trigger in that respect. However it’s very unhappy to see how there have been some specific distinguished figures within the American Presbyterian church, the Baptist church, and the Methodist church. This led to splits within the church. Within the 1840s, the Baptist and Methodist cut up. The Presbyterians didn’t cut up till 1861.

Among the many Presbyterians, this doctrine of the non secular independence of the church that the Scots had, calling for the church to not be beneath the state, was used, and I believe wrongly so. It was mistaken and misused to say the church mustn’t deal with this concern. The actual fact of the matter is that among the greatest proponents of slavery within the southern Presbyterian church weren’t shy about preaching sermons that instructed slaves to obey their masters.

So they’d deal with the topic in that method, however not within the method that the Covenanters addressed it, which was when it comes to 1 Timothy 1:10, which stated that man stealing was opposite to the legislation of God. And the slavery—actually chattel slavery—concerned man stealing. And as Charles Hodge stated very frankly in his work on the unity of the race, we’d by no means have accomplished this had been these white males. We’ve accomplished this to black males from Africa. And that wasn’t a mistake. There was a racial bias there that was all through a lot of the nation.

Alan D. Unusual is the creator of Empowered Witness: Politics, Tradition, and the Religious Mission of the Church.

Associated Articles