ANDOVER, 10th Apr., 1837

REV. AND DEAR SIR,--Yours is before me. A sickness of three

month's standing (typhus fever) in which I have just escaped death,

and which still confines me to my house, renders it impossible for me

to answer your letter at large.

1. The precepts of the New Testament respecting the demeanor of

slaves and of their masters, beyond all question, recognize the

existence of slavery. The masters are in part "believing masters," so

that a precept to them, how they are to behave as masters,

recognizes that the relation may still exist, _salva fide et salva

ecclesia_, ("without violating the Christian faith or the church.")

Otherwise, Paul had nothing to do but to cut the band asunder at once.

He could not lawfully and properly temporize with a _malum in se_,

("that which is in itself sin.")

If any one doubts, let him take the case of Paul's sending Onesimus

back to Philemon, with an apology for his running away, and sending

him back to be his servant for life. The relation did exist, may

exist. The _abuse_ of it is the essential and fundamental wrong.

Not that the theory of slavery is in itself right. No; "Love thy

neighbor as thyself," "Do unto others that which ye would that others

should do unto you," decide against this. But the relation once

constituted and continued, is not such a _malum in se_ as calls

for immediate and violent disruption at all hazards. So Paul did not

counsel.

2. 1 Tim. vi. 2, expresses the sentiment, that slaves, who are

Christians and have Christian masters, are not, on that account, and

because _as Christians they are brethren_, to forego the reverence

due to them as masters. That is, the relation of master and slave is

not, as a matter of course, abrogated between all Christians. Nay,

servants should in such a case, _a fortiori_, do their duty

cheerfully. This sentiment lies on the very face of the case. What

the master's duty in such a case may be in respect to _liberation_,

is another question, and one which the apostle does not here treat of.

3. Every one knows, who is acquainted with Greek or Latin antiquities,

that slavery among heathen nations has ever been more unqualified

and at looser ends than among Christian nations. Slaves were

_property_ in Greece and Rome. That decides all questions about

their _relation_. Their treatment depended, as it does now, on the

temper of their masters. The power of the master over the slave was,

for a long time, that of _life and death_. Horrible cruelties at

length mitigated it. In the apostle's day, it was at least as great

as among us.

After all the spouting and vehemence on this subject, which have been

exhibited, the _good old Book_ remains the same. Paul's conduct

and advice are still safe guides. Paul knew well that Christianity

would ultimately destroy slavery, as it certainly will. He knew,

too, that it would destroy monarchy and aristocracy from the earth:

for it is fundamentally a doctrine of _true liberty and equality_.

Yet Paul did not expect slavery or anarchy to be ousted in a day; and

gave precepts to Christians respecting their demeanor _ad interim_.

With sincere and paternal regard,

Your friend and brother,

The Anti-Slavery Examiner, Part 4 of 4 · 第 9 / 76 题