II. Whether the interposition of God, in that case, was such as to make it proper for us to derive any conclusions as to his § 2. What the Mosaic institutions in regard to servitude were § 3. Comparison of the Mosaic institutions in relation to slavery CHAP. VI. Hebrew Servitude in the time of the Prophets 1. The inquiry in regard to the condition of the native in- habitants of the land of Palestine 2. There was no foreign traffic in slaves 3. The prophets felt themselves at liberty to animadvert upon § 2. The apostles did not openly denounce slavery as an evil, or require that those who were held in bondage §3. The question whether the general conduct of the apos- The case of Onesimus, the servant of Philemon INTRODUCTION. THE subject of slavery is one in which all men have an interest, and which all have a right to discuss. It pertains to a great wrong done to our common nature, and affects great questions relating to the final triumph of the principles of justice and humanity. Wherever wrong is done to any human being, there is no improper interference if the conviction is expressed by any other one. Wherever principles are held which have a tendency to produce or perpetuate wrong, it is a right which all men have, to examine those principles freely. The race is one great brotherhood, and every man is under obligation, as far as he has the ability, to defend those principles which will permanently promote the welfare of the human family. These obvious principles have a peculiar applicability to our own land. Our country is one. What promotes the honour of one portion of the nation, promotes the honour of the whole; what is dishonourable, in like manner pertains to all. Pre-eminently, the subject of slavery pertains to the republic, as such. There are no interests of our common liberty or religion which are not affected by it; there is nothing which our fathers valued, and which we have been taught to prize,— no principles of justice, or humanity, or equal rights, or industry, or morals, which are not more or less affected by this institution. If it be a good institution; if it be in accordance with the divine arrangements for the welfare of society, it is the duty of every man to defend it, and to seek its extension in the world. If it be contrary to the principles of the Bible, and if its tendency be evil, he is under no less obligation to 5 lift up his voice on this subject, and to do whatever he can, that truth and justice may prevail. Every citizen at the North whose situation is such, or who has secured such a reputation that his arguments will receive respectful attention, owes a duty to his Southern brethren which he should not fail to discharge, and should not die without giving utterance, in the best way he can, to his convictions on the subject of American slavery. It may be little that the testimony of any one individual can accomplish, but by the accumulation of numerous testimonies, and the multiplication of appeals and arguments, the conviction may gain ground all over the nation that slavery is wrong, and the means may be devised for its entire removal. As one having a common interest in whatever affects the welfare of my country, in the prevalence of true religion, and in opposing whatever seems to me to militate against the gospel, I desire to discharge this portion of my duty to my generation, however humble my individual influence may be, and to record my convictions on a subject of so much concern to our whole land. The work which is now submitted to the public, is limited to an examination of the Scripture argument on the subject of slavery. This is done because this seems to me to be the most important department of the general argument respecting slavery, and because it better falls in with my whole studies and habits of investigation than any other question pertaining to it. There are questions in regard to the general subject-its relations to agriculture and commerce; its political bearings; its influence on the means of national defence and security, and kindred topics, which I do not feel competent to examine, and which can be much better pursued by those who are familiar with the science of political economy than by one whose studies have had a different direction. To a man, however, who has spent more than twenty years in an almost exclusive study of the Bible, it may be permitted to examine the teachings of that book on a subject so important as this is; and whatever may be the inference as to the strength of his argument, there are none who will charge him with a departure from the proper sphere of his duty. I have been led to the discussion of the Scripture question in this manner, by the following considerations :— (a) Because the institution of slavery is defended by many individuals of respectable names, and by entire bodies of men, by an appeal to the Bible. (See ch. 1.) (b) Because, although there have been some professed investigations of the Scriptures on this subject, evincing considerable research, submitted to the public, yet they did not any of them furnish so full and thorough an examination as seemed to me to be desirable. Believing that the spirit of the Bible is against slavery, and that all the arguments alleged in favour of it from the Bible are the result of a misunderstanding of its true spirit, and that the honour of religion demands that that argument should be placed fairly before the world, I was desirous of doing what I could to make the teachings of the Bible seen and appreciated by my fellow-men. (c) Because it did not appear to me to be proper to preach on it so fully as would be necessary if I had gone into a thorough examination of the subject in my pulpit instructions; and besides this, the critical nature of many of the investigations is little fitted to the pulpit. Nor if I had deemed it proper to make this a more prominent subject of my preaching, could I have reached one of the main objects which seemed to me to be desirable. The people to whom I minister will bear me witness that I have not concealed my views from them on the subject of slavery. I have endeavoured to give it the place which it appeared to me it ought to occupy in my ministrations in the circumstances in which I am placed. But my lot is not cast in a slaveholding community. I do not know that I have an advocate of slavery in my church, or that there is one who statedly attends on my ministry who would willingly be the owner of a slave. I confess also that it seems to me that any one topic, except the cross of Christ, however important in itself, may be introduced too frequently into the pulpit, and that undue prominence in preaching is given to this in many churches where slavery does not exist. I do not suppose that this occurs too frequently in those places where slavery does exist; but where the pen is free, and a man may make his voice heard beyond the bounds of his own congregation, however important it may be that he should make his views decidedly understood in reference to every form of national sin, and should exhibit the fair teachings of the Bible on every subject in the proper proportions, it is better to endeavour to influence the public mind in some other method than by making any one topic a very constant subject of discourse in the pulpit. Slavery, though a great evil, is not the only evil in the land. Its influence is indeed vast, and there is no part of the republic that is wholly free from it, but there are other bad influences in our country also. I will not undertake to say how prominent a minister should make this topic in communities where slavery exists, and where he is called constantly to address those who sustain the relation of master and slave; nor will I venture to say that I should be in any way likely to be more faithful in this respect if my lot were cast there, than I fear is the case with most of those who reside there, but I may be allowed to suggest that the prominent evils which we should assail in preaching are those which are near, and not those which are remote; those which directly pertain to our own people, rather than those which pertain primarily to a distant community; and those in reference to which we may expect immediate action on the part of those who hear us, in forsaking their own sins, rather than such topics as will lead them to judge of others who are living in wickedness. (d) I have been led to adopt this course because it was in this way only that I could hope in any manner to influence those whom I desired to reach. I |