DISCUSSION IN PHILEMON'S CHURCH AT THE RETURN OF ONESIMUS.
"My equal will he be again
Down in that cold, oblivious gloom,
Where all the prostrate ranks of men
Crowd without fellowship,--the tomb."
JAMES MONTGOMERY.
"I will now relate to you," said I, as we resumed our conversation, "the
thoughts which came to me one night as I lay awake meditating on this
subject. I wrote them down the next day.
"The subject in our conversation which suggested them was, The relation
of Christianity to slavery.
* * * * *
"About the year A.D. 64, two men, travellers from Rome, entered the city
of Colosse, in Phrygia. Asia Minor, both of them the bearers of letters
from the Apostle Paul, then a prisoner at Rome.
"A Christian Church had been gathered at Colosse. Its pastor was
probably Archippus. Some think that Epaphras was his colleague. This
church, according to Dr. Lardner and others, was most probably gathered
by the Apostle Paul himself. Mount Cadmus rose behind the city, with its
almost perpendicular side, and a huge chasm in the mountain was the
outlet of a torrent which flowed into the river Lycus, on which the city
was built, standing not far from the junction of this river with the
Moeander.
"One of the two men who bore these letters was a slave. His name was
Onesimus. He robbed his master, Philemon, of Colosse, fled to Rome,
heard Paul preach, was converted, and now by the Apostle is sent back to
his master with a letter, in charge of Tychicus, who, with this
Onesimus, was the bearer of a letter to the Colossian Church.
"Let us attend the church-meeting. The pastor, Archippus, presides.
Epaphras is at Rome.
"What an interesting company do we behold as we sit near the pastor's
table, in full view of the audience! The inhabitants of this place were
noted for the worship of Bacchus, and Cybele, mother of the gods; hence
her name, _Phrygia Mater_. Every kind of licentious language and actions
was practised in the worship of these deities, accompanied with a
frantic rage called orgies, from the Greek word for _rage_. This was a
part of their religious worship. From among such people, converts had
been made to Christianity, together with some who had been turned from
Judaism.
"The letter from the Apostle Paul is brought in and is laid on the
pastor's table, and some account is given of the manner in which it was
received. The letter is read. It refers the Colossians, at the close, to
the bearers, for further information and instructions. 'All my state
shall Tychicus declare unto you, who is a beloved brother and a faithful
minister and fellow-servant in the Lord. Whom I have sent unto you for
the same purpose, that he might know your estate, and comfort your
hearts. With Onesimus, a faithful and beloved brother, who is one of
you. They shall make known unto you all things which are done here.'
"Tychicus relates his story, and, when he has finished, Philemon, a
member of the Church, addresses the meeting. He was evidently a man of
distinction in that community, as we infer from the large number of
persons in his household, (ver. 2,) his liberality to poor Christians,
(ver. 5, 7,) and from the marked respect and deference paid to him by
the Apostle. He also had received a letter from the Apostle, and he asks
leave to read it.
"He then tells them that Onesimus is present; that he has been sent back
by the Apostle Paul, and with the full, cordial consent of Onesimus
himself. He would ask permission for Onesimus to say a few words.
"'Come hither,' says the pastor, 'and tell us what the Lord hath done
for thee, and how he hath had mercy on thee.'
"'Let me wash the saints' feet,' says Onesimus, 'but I am not worthy to
teach in the church.'
"He proceeds to tell them, in full, of his escape from his master, after
robbing him; of his meeting the Apostle at Rome; of his conversion; of
his voluntary return to spend his days, if such be the will of God, as
the servant of Philemon.
"The account of these proceedings reaches Laodicea, not far distant, to
which place Paul had also sent a letter, and the Colossians, agreeably
to the Apostle's charge, exchange letters, and no doubt the letter to
Philemon is also read to the Church which is at Laodicea.
"Whereupon, we will suppose, a controversy at once springs up. There had
already appeared in this region of Phrygia, as we infer from the Epistle
to the Colossians, serious errors, among them a kind of angel worship
and asceticism, or abstinence from things lawful, and a state of things
called Gnosis, (Eng. knowledge,) or Gnosticism, a pervading spirit of
worldly wisdom, science, philosophy, which treated the simplicity which
was in Christ as too rudimental and plain for the human mind, and
therefore sought to furnish it with speculations and mysticism, to
gratify its desires for a more extensive spiritual knowledge than it
seemed to many of them was provided for by Christianity.
"Among the speculations and theories of those days, we will suppose that
the idea began to prevail that Christianity was inconsistent with
holding a fellow-being in bondage. A motion is made in the Laodicean
Church that a committee be appointed to confer with the Colossian Church
on the return of Onesimus into slavery. Such a motion would have found
ready advocates in the Church at Laodicea, if, as at a later day, they
were 'neither cold nor hot' in religion; in which case any collateral
subjects wholly or partly secular, would have a charm for them. These
supplied that lack of warmth which they were conscious of as to
religion; their church-meeting, no doubt, seemed to them dull, unless a
subject was introduced which gave opportunity for discussion, and for
things which gendered debate, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings,
evil surmisings.
"The result of the conference on the part of the Laodicean Committee
with the Colossian Church was, that a general meeting was appointed to
discuss the subject of the return of Onesimus into slavery. It was a
private session of members of the two churches. They claimed the
privilege as Christians of discussing any question relating to the
government and the laws, taking care that no spies were present; still,
with all their precautions, false brethren made trouble for them by
giving private information to the civil authorities against some of
their number, whom they disliked; and this led to some oppression and
persecution.
"But the meeting was fully attended. Two members of the church who were
faithful servants to slave-holding brethren were set to guard the doors.
The slaves were allowed to be present and listen to the discussion. This
was carried after much debate, some contending that it would expose the
Christians to just reprehension from the civil authorities; and others
maintaining that it would do the slaves good to hear such doctrines
advanced and enforced as would be quoted from the Apostle relating to
masters and servants.
"The discussion was opened by a brother from Laodicea, an office-bearer
in the church, a private citizen, devoted to study, and an author of
some repute. He was formerly odist at the festivals of Cybele. His
pieces were collected and published under the title of 'Phrygian
Canticles.' His name was Olamus.
"He took the ground that Christianity abrogated slavery. He quoted the
well known words of Paul, so familiar to all who had heard him preach:
'In Christ Jesus there is neither Jew nor Greek, barbarian, Scythian,
bond nor free; but all are one in Christ.' 'The Spirit of the Lord is
upon me because he hath sent me to preach deliverance to the captives,
the opening of the prison doors to them that are bound.' 'Whatsoever ye
would that men should do unto you, do you even so to them.'
"He maintained that to own a fellow-creature was inconsistent with this
law of equal love; that it was giving sanction to a feature of
barbarism; that, practically, slavery was the sum of all villanies; an
enormous wrong; a stupendous injustice.
"If any one should reply that the Mosaic institutions recognized
slavery, he had one brief answer:--'which things are done away in
Christ.' Moses permitted this and some other things for the hardness of
their hearts. Polygamy was allowed by Moses, not by Christianity; its
spirit is against it; the bishop of a church must be 'the husband of one
wife;' slavery is certainly none the less contrary to the spirit of the
gospel.
"But inasmuch as it is inexpedient to dissolve at once, and in all
cases, the relation of master and slave, he contended that while the
relation continued, it should be regulated by the laws which God himself
once prescribed. Every seventh year should be a year of release; every
fiftieth, year should be a jubilee. And as to fugitives, he would refer
his brethren to that Divine injunction: '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.'
"That a slave having escaped from his master could not rightfully be
sent back into bondage, was evident from these considerations:
"All men are born free and equal, and have an inalienable right to life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. If a slave sees fit to walk off,
or run off, or ride off on his master's beast, or sail off in his
master's boat, he has a perfect right to do so. Slavery is violence;
every man may resist violence offered to his person, except under
process of law; the person cannot be taken except for crime, or debt, or
in war; every man owns his body and soul; the person cannot become
merchandise, except for the three causes above named, which he
acknowledged were justifiable causes of involuntary servitude at
present. But to forcibly seize a weaker man, or race, and hold them in
bondage he declared to be in violation of the laws of nature, and
contrary to the Christian religion.
"If it should be replied that Paul the Apostle countenanced slavery by
sending back Onesimus, he would answer, that Paul was a Jew, and was not
yet freed wholly from Jewish practices and associations of ideas.
Gnosticism has supervened upon the rudimental childhood of spiritual
truth. He believed in progress. It was contrary to the instinct of human
nature to send back a poor fugitive into bondage, and he was glad for
one that he lived in an age when the innate moral sentiments, under the
lucid teachings of our more transcendental scholars were becoming more
and more the all-sufficient guide in the affairs of life. He would,
therefore, publicly disclaim his allegiance to the teachings of the
Apostle Paul, if, upon reflection, Paul should insist that he was right
in remanding Onesimus to be Philemon's property 'forever;' it was well
enough that he should be sent back to restore what he had taken by
theft, provided Philemon would immediately release him; otherwise, to
steal from Philemon was doing no more than Philemon had done to him, in
taking away that liberty which is the birthright of every human being;
and Onesimus probably stole merely to assist his escape. He was
justifiable in doing so.
"If one should insist that there can be no intrinsic wrong in holding a
fellow-being as property because God allowed Hebrews to sell themselves,
and in certain cases to be servants forever, and directed the Israelites
to buy servants of the heathen round about them, who should be an
inheritance to the children of the Israelites, he would simply say
either that the whole pentateuch which contained such a libel on the
divine character, is thereby proved to be a forgery, or, that if the
pentateuch is to be received, it only proves that in condescension to a
race of freebooters who were employed, as the Israelites were, in bloody
wars of extermination, slavery was allowed them, to prevent, perhaps,
worse evils, and in consistency with their dark-minded, semi-barbarous
condition. In this enlightened age when Greece and Rome had shed
superior light on human relationships and obligations, and especially
since Christ had promulgated the golden rule, the idea that man could
own a fellow-creature was so preposterous that he would be an infidel,
nay, he would go farther, he would be an atheist, rather than believe
it. Our moral instincts are our guide. They are the highest source of
evidence that there is a God, and they are a perfect indication as to
what God and his requirements should be. He was for passing a vote of
disapprobation at the act of Paul the Apostle in sending back Onesimus
into bondage. Tell me not, said he, that the Apostle calls him 'a
brother beloved,' and 'one of you;' these honeyed phrases are but
coatings to a deadly poison. Slavery is evil, and only evil and that
continually. Disguise it as you will, Philemon holds property in
Onesimus. By the laws of Phrygia, he could put Onesimus to death for
running away. He deplored the act as a heavy blow at Christianity. It
would countervail the teachings of the Apostle. He sincerely hoped that
the Epistle to Philemon would not be preserved; for should it be
collected hereafter, as possibly it may, among Paul's letters, unborn
ages might make it an apology for slavery, it would abate the hatred of
the world against the sum of all villanies. He would even be in favor
of a vote requesting Philemon to give Onesimus his liberty at once, even
without his consent, sending him back, with this most unwise and unblest
epistle to Philemon, to Paul, who says that he 'would have retained
him,' but would not without Philemon's consent. He did hope that the
brethren would speak their minds, be open-mouthed, and not be like dumb
dogs. For his part he wanted an anti-slavery religion. He acknowledged
that the truths of the Gospel needed the stimulant of freedom to give
them life and power.
"His remarks evidently produced a great sensation, for a variety of
reasons, as we may well suppose.
"A man took the floor in opposition to this Laodicean brother. He was a
Jewish convert, a member of the Colossian Church. His name was
Theodotus. Born a Jew, he had renounced his religion and became a Greek
Sophist, practised law at Scio, and heard Paul at Mars Hill, where, with
Dionysius the Areopagite, with whom he was visiting, he was converted.
He had established himself at Colosse, in the practice of law. He was
unusually tall for a man of his descent, had beautifully regular Jewish
features, and was a captivating speaker.
"He said that they had 'heard strange things to-day. If they are true,
we have no foundation underneath our feet. Every man's moral sentiments,
it seems, are to be his guide. Where, then, is our common appeal? For
his part he believed that if God be our heavenly Father, he has given
his children an authentic book, a writing, for their guide, unless he
prefers to speak personally with them, or with their representatives.
When he ceased to speak by the prophets, he spoke to us by his Son; and
now that his Son is ascended, I believe,' said he, 'that inspired men
are appointed to guide us, and seeing that they cannot reach all by
their living voice, I believe that the evangelists and apostles are to
furnish us with writings which shall be inspired disclosures of God's
will and our duty. The Old Testament is as truly God's word as ever;
Christ declared that not one jot or tittle should pass from it, till all
be fulfilled. Some of it is fulfilled, in him, the end of the types;
parts of it refer to local and temporary things; all which is not local
and temporary is still binding upon us. At least, the spirit of its laws
is benevolent and wise. Damascus and its scenes are too fresh in the
memories of the brethren to need that I should argue the inspiration of
the Apostle to the Gentiles. His miracles are known to us. Nay, what
miracles are we ourselves, reclaimed from the service of the devil, once
the worshippers of Bacchus and of our Phrygian mother; now, clothed, and
in our right minds. The Apostle claims to speak and act by divine
authority. We must question everything, if we set aside this claim.
"'I maintain,' said he, 'that the Apostle Paul regards the holding a
fellow-creature as property to be consistent with Christianity. To
prevent all misunderstanding, however, let me declare that he insists on
the golden rule as the law of slave-holding, as of everything else; that
he discountenances oppression, that he warns and threatens us with
regard to it; and that he considers slave-holding as consistent with the
Christian character and happiness of master and slave.
"'In the very Epistle just received by our Church, and by the hands of
Tychicus and Onesinius himself, from the Apostle, we find these words:
"Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not
with eye-service, as men-pleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing
God; and whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as unto the Lord, and not
unto men, knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the
inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ. But he that doeth wrong shall
receive for the wrong which he hath done; and there is no respect of
persons. Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal;
knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven."
"'Where, in this, is there a word that countenances the wrongfulness of
being a slave, or of holding men as slaves? He directs all his
exhortations to the duties which are to be performed in the relation,
and he leaves the relation as he finds it. He does not enjoin slavery;
he treats it as something which belongs to society, to government, and
he leaves Christianity to regulate it as circumstances shall make it
proper. If any one says that the Apostle was afraid to meddle with it, I
reply, that there was never anything yet that Paul was afraid to meddle
with, if it was right to do so. He "meddled" with Diana of the Ephesians
and her craftsmen; he "meddled" with the "beasts" there; he "meddled"
with idolatry on Mars Hill at Athens, I being witness; he has been
beaten, stoned, imprisoned, and is now the second time before Nero for
his life. Afraid to "meddle" with slavery! I am ashamed of the man who
makes the suggestion. He who thinks it, has never yet understood him.
"'Now, where in all his teachings has he ever intimated that it is wrong
to hold property in man? Nowhere; I repeat it, nowhere. But is he
ignorant of the nature of slavery? We all know what has lately happened
at Rome, in connection with slavery. The very year that Paul arrives at
Rome, the prefect of the city, Pedanius Secundus, was murdered by his
slave; and agreeably to the laws of slavery all the slaves belonging to
the prefect, a great number, women and children among them, were put to
death indiscriminately, though innocent of the crime.[A] Such is slavery
under the Apostle's eye; and yet'--
[Footnote A: Tacitus, _Annals_, xiv. 42.--A thrilling tale. See
Bohn's Classical Library, 53.]
"'And, therefore,' interrupted the Laodicean brother, 'the Apostle
approves of murdering innocent slaves for the sin of one. That is the
conclusion to which your reasoning will bring us.'
"'Excusing the brother for interrupting me, I ask, Is that agreeable to
the plain facts in the case?' said the speaker. 'Are the abuses of
parentage chargeable upon the relationship of parent and child?
Moreover, does not the Apostle expressly teach us, in this Epistle, that
such things are wrong? but still, does he condemn the relation of master
and slave?
"'The tale of that horrid butchery was present to the mind of the
Apostle when he sends Onesimus back into slavery. Moreover, he knew that
by our laws Philemon could put Onesimus to death; yet he sends him back.
"'It is said by my brother that Paul enunciated principles which in time
would kill slavery, and therefore he did not care to denounce it, but
prudently let it alone. What else, I inquire, did Paul fail to denounce?
and why is this "enormous wrong," this "stupendous injustice," alone,
left to die, without being attacked? No, Paul treated slavery as he did
all other forms of government; he did not denounce government, not even
its despotic forms; for he knew that a despotism may be the best form of
government in some circumstances. But he spoke against the abuse of
power by rulers, and in the same way he speaks against the abuse of
power by the master.
"'My brother tells us that slavery is "the sum of all villanies." A
comprehensive term, truly. Let us admit the correctness of the phrase.
"All villanies" includes all "the works of the flesh," and the Apostle
enumerates the principal of them, where he says, "Now the works of the
flesh are these;"--concluding his account with the expression, "and such
like." With unsparing denunciation, he portrays each and every
"villany," and shows how the wrath of God is revealed from heaven
against it.
"'But while he is thus bold and faithful with regard to "all villanies"
in particular, we cannot but think it strange that a thing which is said
to be the "sum" of them all, is nowhere spoken against by the Apostle!
On the contrary, he recognizes the duties which grow out of
slave-holding.
"'Let us suppose him to do the same with regard to each villany which he
does to that which my brother calls the "sum" of them all. Then we
should hear him say! Murderers, do so and so; thieves, do so and so; and
ye that are mutilated, do so and so; and ye that are pillaged, do so and
so. I am curious to know how my brother will answer this. What are the
religious "duties" of murderers and thieves, but to repent, to forsake
their evil ways at once, and to make lawful reparation? And what are the
"duties" of those whom murderers and thieves assault, but to resist, and
to seek the conviction of the evil-doer? Oh how strange it seems for the
Apostle to counsel masters and slaves to imitate their "Master which is
in heaven," in their relation to each other, if holding men in bondage
be "the sum of all villanies," and how strange for him to send Onesimus
back to the system to behave in it as Christ would act in his place!
"'Onesimus escapes, we will say, from a gang of murderers, or from a
company of thieves, and the Apostle's preaching is the means of his
becoming a good man. Paul writes a letter to the chief murderer of the
gang, or to the captain of the robbers, sends Onesimus back, and
"beseeches" the brigand for "his son Onesimus," telling him that now he
receives him "forever," and then calls the desperado "our dearly beloved
fellow-laborer"! Why not, with equal propriety, if slavery be,
necessarily, as our brother describes it? There is some mistake in our
brother's theory.
"'I venture to state the distinction which I think he overlooks, and
which, if observed, will relieve his difficulty. Paul never denounces
government; "the powers that be are ordained of God." He appeals to
"Caesar"; he goes before "Nero"; he never counsels insurrection, nor
denounces government, in whatever hands or under whatever forms it may
be; but he enjoins principles and duties which, if observed, would make
"Caesars," even though they be "Neros," blessings, and their despotisms
even would cease to be a curse. So with slave-holding. It is
incorporated into the state of society; it is, moreover, a relation
which can exist and no sin be committed under the relation; hence, it is
not sin in itself, any more than the throne of Nero is sin in itself;
and the Apostle speaks to the slave-holding Philemon as he would to a
father receiving back a wayward son.
"'The claim of Philemon to Onesimus rests only on his having purchased
him. Who had a right to sell him? Trace the thing back, and you come to
fraud or violence, or some form of injustice to Onesimus in making him
a slave. Paul knew that this is the case with regard to every slave; yet
he does not "break every yoke," even when, as in this case, he had one
so completely in his hands, and could have broken it in pieces.
"'But we will suppose, with my brother, that the laws which God ordained
for slavery should prevail under Christianity, if slavery is to exist.
Let every Phrygian, then, a fellow-countryman who has lost his liberty,
go free at the end of six years; and at every fiftieth year, whether six
years be completed or not, since the last seventh year of release, let
all such go free. This, for argument's sake, we approve. But we must
take the whole code. Every foreigner who becomes a slave, and the child
of every such slave, was to be an "inheritance forever." Husbands, who
are Phrygians, must choose, in certain cases, whether to go out free by
themselves, or remain in perpetual bondage with their wives and their
offspring. Paul knew the Jewish laws with regard to slavery; he knew how
favorably they compared with our code; but he says not a word on that
score, and simply sends Onesimus back to his bondage.
"'Yet see how beautifully the spirit of Christ works itself into the
relation of master and slave, and into Paul's views and feelings with
regard to it. In his letter to our Church, he expressly names Onesimus
as one of the bearers of the epistle. He speaks of him as "one of you,"
a resident with us; and he calls this slave "a faithful and beloved
brother." He speaks to Philemon about him as "my son Onesimus whom I
have begotten in my bonds;" "thou therefore receive him, that is, mine
own bowels." "Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother
beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the
flesh and in the Lord." "If thou count me, therefore, a partner, receive
him as myself."
"'What a comment is this on the words: "In Christ Jesus there is neither
bond nor free." Not that there shall be "no bond," according to the
brother's interpretation; for then it would be equally right to
interpret the other part of the passage literally,--there is no Jew, no
Greek, and none free! How perfectly does the relation become absorbed by
that state of heart which makes it proper for Paul to say: "Art thou
called being a servant, care not for it; but if thou mayest be made
free, use it rather." Notwithstanding this advice, he sends back this
man-servant.
"'Paul might have manumitted Onesimus by his authority as an apostle;
this, however, would have been rebellion against government, for our
laws recognize slavery.
"'My brother says that the Hebrew law forbade the surrender of a
fugitive slave. Yes, if the slave fled into Israel from a heathen
master, he must not be sent back to heathenism; but'--
"'But,' said the brother from Laodicea, 'there is no limitation of that
kind. I insist that it was of universal application to slaves of all
kinds.'
"'Find the passage, if you please (in Deut. xxiii.),' said the Colossian
speaker.
"The passage was found by the pastor, and was read, as already quoted:
'Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant that 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. 10, 15.
"'Now,' said Theodotus, 'it is absurd to say that God proclaimed to all
the servants throughout Israel, If any of you are dissatisfied, for any
cause, and wish to run away, you may do so; and wherever you wish to
live, the people-of that place shall provide a residence for you. After
being there for ever so short a time, if you do not like it, you may
flee again; and so keep moving all your lifetime, the people everywhere
being obliged to allow you a place of abode. Did the Most High mean to
encourage such vagabondism?
"'No; He merely provided that a fugitive from a heathen master should
not be sent away from the worship of Jehovah into heathenism.'
"'That is undoubtedly the true meaning,' said the pastor, 'if Theodotus
will allow me to put in a word. "Thee," in that passage, means Israel as
a nation, not each man.'
"'I thank you, Sir,' said Theodotus; 'and now I maintain that the
injunction not to give up a fugitive to his heathen master, but to keep
him in Israel, is a powerful argument in favor of retaining slaves where
they will be most benefited in their spiritual concerns. God thus makes
the soul of man and its eternal welfare paramount to all external
relations, including slavery.'
"'May I inquire, then,' said the Laodicean: 'Suppose that Philemon had
been a cruel heathen master, and Onesimus had fled for his life, would
Paul have sent him back?'
"'If the case were clear and beyond doubt, I am not sure that he would,'
said Theodotus. 'While he would not counsel Onesimus to run away, yet I
can only say, that, fleeing from certain cruelty and death, I doubt if
he would have been remanded. But Paul told servants to be "subject to
their masters," "not only to the good and gentle, but also to the
froward." He speaks to them of "suffering wrongfully;" of "doing well,
and suffering for it;" and he refers the suffering slave to Christ,
"who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered,
threatened not." Moreover, he says: "For even hereunto were ye called;
because Christ also _suffered for us_, leaving us an example that ye
should _follow his steps_." That is certainly death.'
"'If Paul did not send Onesimus back to Philemon, however, it would not
be because it was wrong, in his view, for Philemon to hold him in
bondage; please observe this distinction; but, judging the case by
itself, he would decide whether the slave ought not, under the
circumstances, to have the right of asylum,--Paul himself having once
been "let down by a basket," to escape from the Damascenes. Paul and any
other man would, in certain cases, protect even a fugitive son or
daughter from a father; and this consistently with his recognition of
the parental and filial relation.
"'Let me remind my brother, and you, my pastor, and my brethren, of one
fact which occurs to me at the moment. Manslayers, in cities of refuge,
were to go free at the death of the High Priest then in office; no such
release, however, was granted to the Gentile slaves, showing that
slavery was not a crime in the estimation of the Most High. Otherwise,
He would have legislated for the departure of slaves from their Hebrew
masters, as He did for manslayers fleeing from the avenger of blood.
Excuse the digression. The thought struck me at the moment.'
"'I put it to the brother,' said the Laodicean, 'whether he himself would
not flee to Rome, were he a single man, if he should be made a slave to
that monster in human shape, Osander of Hieropolis?'
"'I cannot say,' replied the Colossian, 'what my temptations might be,
nor how well I should resist them; but slavery being incorporated into
the government, and I being, in the providence of God, sold into bondage
to Osander,--I being either the child of a slave, or one of those who
are called "lawful captives,"--my race, or my capture in war, or my
indebtedness, or my crimes, subjecting me to bondage according to the
constitution of government, I ought to consider my slavery as the mode
which God had chosen for me to glorify him,--by my spirit and temper, by
my words and conduct, by my Christian example in everything, for the
good of Osander's soul, and the honor of religion. I believe that I
should please God more by staying to suffer, and even to die, than to
run away. I doubt even the expediency of running away, as a general
rule. It implies a want of faith. He is the Christian hero who stays
where God has manifestly placed him.
"'I know,' continued he, 'how easy it is to make this appear ridiculous;
and also how often cases occur in which flight, and even the taking of
life, are proper, under extreme hardships. It is frequently the case
that a servant sees and feels his mental superiority to the man who owns
him. Now one may be so disgusted, and be so constantly vexed and chafed
at this, as to make out a strong case for escaping; another, in the same
circumstances, will feel that God has placed him in charge of his
master's soul, to please him well in all things though he be "froward."
Whether is better, to run off or to "abide"? There can be no doubt how
the Apostle would answer the question. Exceptional cases of extreme
distress do not make a rule; the rule is for each one to "abide" in the
calling in which he is called of God. See what perfect insubordination
would everywhere follow if every one who is oppressed, or believes
himself to be oppressed, should flee: children would desert their
parents; husbands and wives would flee from each other, at any supposed
or real grievance. This is not the Christian rule. Patience and all
long-suffering, obedience, endurance, committing one's self to him that
judgeth righteously, is the temper and spirit of the Gospel. This is the
tone-note of the Sermon on the Mount. At the same time, who blames or
judges harshly a man in peril of his life if, in self-defence, he flees?
I say that Paul would probably judge every fugitive slave case by
itself. One thing is clear: It is not his rule to help a fugitive from
slavery in his flight, as a matter of course. His rule is evidently the
reverse of this. I cannot argue with regard to the exceptions. They
generally provide each for itself. The New Testament rule is for slaves
not to run away; and for us, and for all men, not to encourage them to
do so; but to encourage them to return, and to deal with the masters on
such principles, and in such a fraternal, affectionate way, that the
appeals to their Christian sensibilities may permanently affect their
consciences and hearts.
"'I stand by the record. Let me forsake it, and I am like Paul's ship
when it was driving up and down in Adria, and neither sun nor stars
appeared. My impulses were not given me as my guide. They are to be
compared with the divine will. Many questions may be asked which I
cannot answer, and many difficulties encompass this subject of
slave-holding which I cannot solve. I abide by the example and teachings
of inspired men, and am safe in following them, even if I cannot
explain everything connected with their principles and conduct to the
satisfaction of others. I only know that if our masters and servants
would take the Apostle Paul's Epistle to Philemon as the rule of their
spirit and life, there would be no such thing as oppression, nor
fugitive servants. Now, as to revolutionizing society to eradicate
slavery, I would no more attempt it than I would try to dig down Cadmus
to dislodge yonder snow and ice upon his top. The sun will in due time
melt them and pour them into the Lycus and the Moeander. So the Gospel,
when it has free course, will dissolve every chain, break every yoke,
and sorrow and sighing shall flee away.'
* * * * *
"Philemon was now the first to rise.
"'I am the master to whom Paul the Apostle sends back my fugitive
servant. This man, Onesimus, is my brother in Christ; in heaven, it may
be, I shall see him far above me as a faithful servant of our common
Lord. He has given a proof of obedience to the Gospel, of submission, of
patience and long suffering, of implicit compliance with the rules of
Christ, which excite my Christian emulation. My endeavor shall be to
imitate Onesimus as he has imitated Christ, and to surpass him in
likeness to that Lord who is meek and lowly in heart. The bonds which
hold Onesimus to me are no stronger than those which bind me to him.
(Great sensation and much emotion.) Can I ever treat this servant in an
unfeeling manner? Can I recklessly sell him? Can I deprive him of
comforts? Can I fail to provide for his highest happiness? God do so to
me and more also, if I prove deficient in these particulars.
"'Let me ask, What would be the state of things among us if the benign
influences of Christian love pervaded every case of slave-holding as, by
the grace of God, I hope it will in my case? We must have a serving
class; our customs and laws ordain the relationship of involuntary
servitude, property in the services of others, by purchase of their
persons. While this is so, suppose that every servant is an Onesimus and
every master such as I ought to be, under the influence of the Apostle
Paul's directions! It is plain that in no way can we better promote the
spiritual and eternal good of certain men, as the times are, than by
standing in the relation of Christian masters to them. This is the great
thing with Paul. We can mitigate the sorrows of their bondage; we can
compensate for the appointments of providence reducing them to slavery,
by making them the freemen of Christ. While this state of things
continues, it may be a blessing to both parties. God will open a way for
any change which he decrees in our social relation, in his own time and
manner.
"'Now, let us suppose what would happen if, departing from the rule and
example of Paul, we follow the counsels of our good brother from
Laodicea. The community would be in constant excitement by the departure
of servants asserting each his natural liberty; laws would become rigid;
hardships would be multiplied; cruelties would be perpetuated;
insurrections would become frequent; sacrifices of servants, the
innocent with the guilty, would be made to deter from insubordination.
Instead of the spirit of the Gospel in our dwellings, alienations,
suspicion, jealousy, wrangling, strife, and every form of evil would
prevail. He is no real friend of servant or master who would enforce the
principles of our Laodicean brother. I adhere to the Apostle. If
questioned as to my right to hold Onesimus in bondage, the answer
immediately suggested is that an inspired Apostle sanctions it in my
case. If right in my case, it is right in principle; for if
slave-holding be a violation of rights, I am guilty of that violation,
however humane a master I may be. The Apostle does not reprove me, nor
require me to manumit Onesimus, but tells me that I now receive him
"forever," and he teaches me how to treat him. I could occupy your time
by arguing the abstract question relating to property in the services of
men,--but I rest my case for the present on the letter of Paul the
Apostle, brought to me by the hand of my fugitive servant, returning to
what the laws call his bonds.
"'Let me add a few words, however, on the general subject, to the
argument of Theodotus.
"'Our good brother from Laodicea tells us that slavery and polygamy are
"twin barbarisms." He argues that slavery was winked at, like polygamy;
was "suffered," by the Most High. But I propose to refute this, and I
will throw myself on your candor to judge if I succeed.
"'God, in Eden, appointed the marriage of one man and one woman to be
the law of matrimony. "And wherefore one?" says the prophet. "He had the
residue of the spirit," and could have ordained otherwise. "Wherefore
one?" The answer is, "that he might seek a godly seed." The arrangement
was for the highest elevation of the race.
"'Polygamy is in direct conflict with the ordinance of God. Of course
God never ordained it. On the contrary, the appointment in Eden was
equivalent to a prohibitory act, which Jesus Christ revived, forbidding
polygamy, and the Apostles have enjoined upon us that we observe the law
of marriage as given in paradise.
"'So much for polygamy. God never recognized it. The edict requiring
the marriage of a childless widow to the brother of her husband, takes
it for granted that a man would leave but one widow.
"'But how is it with slavery? God never forbade it; he recognized it;
when He framed the Jewish code it was perfectly easy to exclude slavery;
but hardly are the Ten Commandments out of his lips when He ordains
slave-holding, gives particular directions about it, decrees that
certain persons shall be an inheritance forever. Jesus Christ never
uttered one word against slavery, though he did against polygamy; the
Apostles have never written nor preached to us against slavery, but on
the contrary here is the Apostle to the Gentiles sending back a servant
escaped from his master; and in that letter on the pastor's table he
enjoins duties on masters and slaves. I have confidence that my brother
will not again class slavery with polygamy, for it would be a reflection
upon divine wisdom and justice.
"'One thing more. My brother says slavery is the sum of all villanies.
"'But did not the Most High God place his people in slavery for seventy
years, in Babylon? This does not prove that slavery is a good thing, in
itself; for by the same proof heathenism might be shown to be a
blessing. Slavery was a curse, a punishment; but still, God would not
have made use of slavery to punish his people, if, theoretically and
practically, it is by necessity all which my brother alleges. It surely
did not, in that case, prove a "villany" to Babylon. They were the best
seventy years of their probationary state, when that people held the
Jews in captivity. Now I beg not to be misunderstood nor to have my
meaning perverted. I am not pleading for slavery. I simply say that God
would not have put his people, whom He had not cast off forever, into
slavery, if slavery, _per se_, were the sum of all villanies, or, if the
practical effect of it on them would be, necessarily, destruction, or
inconsistent with his purposes of benevolence. I will add, that every
people and every man, who hold others in bondage, should be admonished
that when God puts his captives, his bondmen, into their hands, He is
most jealous of the manner in which the trust is discharged. I do think,
I say it here with all possible emphasis, it is the most delicate, the
most solemn, the most awful responsibility, to stand in the relation of
master to a bondman.
* * * * *
"No further discussion was had at that time, the hour being late, and so
the meeting was closed with prayer and singing. Masters and servants
joined to chant a hymn, of which the following, written many years after
by Gregory of Nazianzum, might almost seem to be the expansion:--
"'Christ, my Lord, I come to bless Thee,
Now when day is veiled in night,
Thou who knowest no beginning,
Light of the eternal light.
"'Thou hast set the radiant heavens,
With thy many lamps of brightness,
Filling all the vaults above;
Day and night in turn subjecting
To a brotherhood of service,
And a mutual law of love.
"'Own me, then, at last, thy servant,
When thou com'st in majesty;
Be to me a pitying Father,
Let me find thy grace and mercy;
And to Thee all praise and glory
Through the endless ages be.'
"Leaning on the arm of Onesimus, Philemon returned to bless his
household.
* * * * *
"Thus far," said I, "you have my Night Thoughts." I asked Mr. North if
he accepted the present New Testament Canon as correct? He said that he
did. I then inquired if he regarded the Scriptures as the only and
sufficient rule of faith and practice.
To this he also agreed. I then asked him if he did not think that, in
making up the canon, that is, in directing what books and epistles
should go into it, God had reference to the wants of all coming times?
He signified his assent. I then asked his attention to a few thoughts
connected with that point.
"Here is the Epistle to Philemon, placed by the hand of the Holy Spirit
himself in the Sacred Canon. It is on a small piece of parchment, easily
lost; the wind might have blown it from Philemon's table out of the
window, beyond recovery; it was not addressed to a Church, to be kept in
its archives; it is a private letter, subject to every change in the
condition of a private citizen. Yet, while the epistle to Laodicea, sent
about the same time, is irrecoverably lost, this little writing,
addressed to a private man, goes into the Bible, by direction of God!
"Do you not suppose," said I, "that God had a meaning in this beyond
merely informing us how a master received a servant back to bondage?"
"What further purpose do you think there was in it?" said he.
"I only know," said I, "that slave-holding was to be a subject, as has
proved to be the case, which would involve the interests of at least
two of the continents of the earth, one of them being then unknown. Here
the Church of God was to have large increase. Here, too, slavery was to
exist, and to thrill the hearts of millions of citizens from generation
to generation. It is very remarkable that one book of the Bible, which
was to be made known to all nations by the commandment of the
everlasting God, for the obedience of faith, should be exclusively on
the subject of slavery, and that the whole burden of the Epistle should
be, The Rendition of a Fugitive Slave!"
"This never occurred to me before," said Mr. North.
"Suppose," said I, "that instead of sending back Onesimus, the epistle
had been a private letter from Archippus at Colosse to Paul at Rome,
clandestinely aiding Onesimus to escape from Philemon, and that Paul had
received Onesimus and had harbored him, and had sent him forth as a
missionary, and that not one word of comment had appeared in the Bible
discountenancing the act. What would have happened then?"
"Then," said Mrs. North, "one thing is certain; the business of running
off slaves to Canada would now have been more brisk even than it is at
present."
"Why?" said I.
"Simply because," said she, "the New Testament would have sanctioned the
practice of running off slaves."
"Why, then," said I, "does it not now equally countenance the 'running'
of slaves back to their masters?"
"Please answer that for me, husband," said Mrs. North.
He smiled, and rose to put some coal on the fire. We waited for his
words.
"Well," said he, "I do not know but it is all right, provided the master
be in each case a Philemon."
"That is a good word," said I. "You show that the Bible has an
ascendency in your mind. You will be safe in following the Bible
wherever it leads you, even into slave-holding, if it goes so far. But I
must now question you a little. You may answer me or not, as you please.
"One day a black man appears at your door, and says, 'I have just
escaped from the South. I was owned by Rev. Professor A.B. of New
Orleans. I preferred liberty to slavery, and here I am.' Would you
shelter him, and encourage his remaining here, and, if necessary, send
him to Canada?"
"What would you have me do?" said he.
"Take him in," said I, "if you please, and give him some breakfast. You
would not object to this. After breakfast you have family prayers. 'Can
you read, Nesimus?' you inquire. 'O yes, master; missis and the young
missises taught us all to read.' Your little boy hands him, with the
rest, a Testament, and names the place of reading. Strange to say,
yesterday you finished 'Titus,' and the portion to be read in course is
'Philemon!'"
"Almost a providence," said Mrs. North.
"How would you feel, Mr. North?" said I.
"Why, feel? How should I feel?" said he. "You will answer for me,
perhaps, and say, 'Read Philemon; pray; and then say, Come, Nesimus, I
am going to send you back to Professor A.B. I will write a letter to
him, and pay your passage.'"
"What objection would you make to this?" said I.
He thought a moment, and in the meanwhile his shrewd wife said,--
"Why, husband, do you hesitate? Say this: 'What! I? and Bunker Hill
within a day's march of my house, and grandfather's old sword over my
library door?'"
"I am sick of hearing about Bunker Hill in this connection," said he.
"Any one would think that it is one of the 'sacred mountains' in Holy
Writ."
"But," said his wife, "If some of Paul's ancestors had had Bunker Hill
privileges and influences, do you think Paul would have written the
Epistle to Philemon? Unfortunate Apostle! Say," said his wife again,
before he spoke, "that you believe in progress, that that epistle might
have been right enough in its day, but that now 'we need an anti-slavery
Bible and an anti-slavery God.'"
She made up a very expressive smile as she said it and stretched her
work across her knee.
"Yes," said I, "the Bible is antiquated! God never gave a written
revelation to be a perpetual guide to the end of time! I can supersede
the Epistle to Philemon: Mrs. North, Hebrews; you, James; and another
the whole of the Old Testament."
"Now," said Mr. North, "I will tell you what I have been thinking of all
this time.
"I will put you into bondage in Algiers or Tunis. Somebody has bought
you or captured you. But by some means you escape to me at Gibraltar.
Now I will read 'Philemon' to you, and send you back to your Algerine
master. What objection can you make to this, as a believer in
inspiration?"
I answered, "If I were a slave in my own country, and slavery existed in
Algiers, you would need to consider the relation which existed between
this country and Algiers. If the governments had treaties with each
other, the surrender of persons held to service in either of the
countries would probably be provided for, and then you would have to
consider whether you would obey what is called the 'higher law,' or
yield me to the requisition of the proper authorities. This brings up
the question of the rendition of fugitive slaves, which we have just
considered.
"But being free in my own country, and having been, therefore,
unlawfully sold into Algerine Slavery, or having been captured, or
stolen, you would, I trust, make proper resistance in my behalf."
"But," said Mr. North, "The ancestors of my fugitive friend Nesimus,
were taken from freedom in their own land and were reduced to slavery.
Must he and his descendants be slaves forever for the sin of the
original captors, or for the misfortune of his ancestors?"
"Birth in slavery long established makes all the difference in the
world, Mr. North," said I. "If I am born in slavery, under a government
ordaining slavery, that is a different case from that of one taken out
of a passenger ship and sold as a slave."
"Then if you and your wife," said he, "were taken out of a passenger
ship, and you should happen to have a child born in slavery, that child
must remain a slave, even if you go free?"
"No, Sir," said I; "the child born under such circumstances is as
rightfully free as its parents. But take this case: I, being captured
and held as a slave, my master gives me a wife, lawfully a slave. Then,
the child born of her is lawfully a slave. You see the distinction. God
recognized it. The condition of both is a limitation and qualification
of natural rights. So the lapse of time qualifies the right to collect
debts, bring suits for libel, or slander, and for the right of way, or
for the possession of land. Will we live under law? or shall each man
or any set of men set up laws for their own conscience?"
"Then," said he, "If a slave-trader lands a cargo of slaves from Africa,
at Florida, I have no right to buy them; they are not lawfully slaves.
Is that your belief?"
"Assuredly," said I; "and if the fugitive whom I have supposed you to be
sending back to the gentleman at New Orleans, were a fugitive from the
cargo just imported from Africa, you would be sustained by the law of
the land in delivering him from bondage; he was piratically taken; the
laws would make him free, and punish his captors, if the laws were
faithfully executed."
"But a poor fellow born in slavery must remain a slave!" he replied.
"He is not lawfully a slave," I said, "if his parents were both of that
cargo. But if his father had received a wife from his master, then the
child is lawfully a slave."
"How do you establish that distinction?" said he.
"The child is born of one known to be, herself, lawfully a slave. It is
born under a constitution of government which recognizes slavery; while
that government provides for slavery, the child must submit or violate
an ordinance of God, unless freedom can be had by law, or by justifiable
revolution."
"I feel constrained," said Mr. North "to hold that liberty is the
inalienable right of every human being, except in cases of crime."
"You mean," said I, "that every human being is entitled to all the civil
rights and immunities which others enjoy."
"Yes," said he, "in proportion to his age, and his capacity. Minors, and
the imbecile, are entitled to protection, but may not be oppressed."
"Ah," said I, "how soon you find your general rules intercepted and
qualified by circumstances. Minors, and the imbecile, then, may not be
admitted to equal privileges with us. But are not all men born free and
equal?"
"Now let me add to 'minors' and 'the imbecile' one more class. There are
two races existing together in a certain country. One has always been,
there, a servile race. The other are the lords of the soil; the
institutions of the country are by their creation; they have acquired a
perfect right and title to the government.
"You know, from all history, that two races never could, and never did
live together on the same soil, unless they intermarried, or one was
subject to the other. You admit this historical fact.
"It is proposed, now, by some, to give the subject race a right to vote
and to hold office, so that their equality in all things shall be
acknowledged."
"Pray," said Mr. North, "will you object to this? Has not God 'made of
one blood all nations of men'?"
"Yes," I replied, "but read on, in that same verse:--'and hath
determined the bounds of their habitation.' There is a law of races;
races must have antipathies, unless they intermarry; he who seeks to
confound them may as well labor for the conjugation of all the tribes of
animals. He and his results would prove to be monsters.
"The Anglo Saxon race on this continent properly say to the Negro, 'If
by conquest you get possession of the land, we must, of course, succumb
to you. We are now in possession, and mean so to continue. Hard,
therefore, as it seems not to let you vote in parts of the country where
your numbers are such as to endanger our majority, or afford temptation
to demagogues to inflame your prejudices and passions by historical
appeals to them, and severe as it may seem not to let you form military
companies, (which would also be mischievous in the same way) we
nevertheless propose to exclude you from this right of suffrage, and
from separate organizations, for our own defence, and that we may
preserve our institutions for our proper descendants. We are very sorry
that our English ancestors began to impose you upon us, and that Newport
and Salem vessels brought so many of you here into slavery; but we
cannot think of requiting you for this by jeoparding our own peace; nor
would it be kind to you, as things are, to be made prominent in any way
as a class. When the Northern people are, generally, your true friends,
and cease to use you in an offensive manner, to excite civil war, we
shall join to elevate you in every way consistent with your true
interests.'
"There will be cases of extreme hardship," said I, "if a slave, fleeing
from the South, however unjustifiably, nevertheless becomes surrounded
here with a family, and the owner comes and claims him. There are
principles of natural humanity which come into force at such a time to
modify or set aside a claim. I know, indeed, that to build a valuable
house on land not mine, does not vacate the land-owner's title; and,
moreover, I know what may be alleged on the principle illustrated by
Paley, who speaks of a man finding a stick and bestowing labor on it
which is more in value than the stick itself. These cases of slaves who
have gained a settlement here, call for the utmost kindness and
forbearance between the sectional parties in controversy; clamor will
never settle them, nor the sword; but the reign of good feeling will
cause justice to flow down our streets like a river, and righteousness
like an overflowing stream."
"As we have conversed a good deal upon this subject," said Mr. North,
"perhaps we may bring our conversation to a close as profitably as in
any other way by your telling us, summarily, what you think of this
whole perplexing subject; what would you have me believe; how ought a
Christian man, who desires to know and do the will of God, to feel and
to act with regard to it? Good men, I see, are divided about it; I
respect your motives, I approve many of your principles, I cannot object
to your conclusions, in the main. Let us know what you consider to be,
probably, the ultimate issue of the whole subject."
"I will do so with pleasure," said I.
"But," said Mrs. North, "let us wait till after dinner."
"As the storm is over," I said to her, "I must go home, but we will have
one more council fire, if you please, and end the subject."
So in the afternoon, my kind friends gave me their attention while I
made my summing up in the next and concluding chapter.