‘  as brethren of the human family, and fellow-heirs to immortality, they are entitled.’ Both of the above points are eminently weighty, and would require separate treatises in their elucidation. I am decidedly in favor of the one first mentioned; because all plans will be likely to prove nugatory as long [as] the church refuses to act on the subject—it must be purified, as by fire. It must not support, it must not palliate, the horrid system. It seems morally impossible that a man can be a slaveholder and a follower of the Lamb at the same time. A Christian slaveholder is as great a solecism as a religious atheist, a sober drunkard, or an honest thief. In 1826, the Synod of Ohio held an animated discussion on a question which had been before referred to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, viz.: ‘Is the holding of slaves man-stealing?’ in the affirmative of which a large majority concurred. This is a rational view of the subject; consequently no slaveholder ought to be embraced within the pale of a Christian church. Is not the fact enough to make one hang his head, that Christian men and Christian ministers (for so they dare to call themselves) are slave-owners? Are there not Balaams in our land who prophesy in the name of the Lord, but covet the presents of Balak? What! shall he who styles himself an ambassador of Christ—who preaches what angels sung, ‘Peace on earth, good — will to man’—who tells me, Sabbath after Sabbath, that with God there is no respect of persons—that my Creator commands me to do unto others as I would that they should do unto me—to love my neighbor as myself—to call no man master—to be meek and merciful, and blameless—to let my light so shine before men that they may see my good works, and glorify my Father who is in heaven—to shun every appearance of evil—to rather suffer myself to be defrauded than defraud;—nay, who tells me, as the injunction of my Judge, to love even my enemies, to bless them that curse me, to do good to them that hate me, and to pray for them that despitefully use and persecute me—(alas! how has he needed the prayers and forgiveness of his poor degraded, persecuted slaves!)—I say, shall such a teacher presume to call the creatures of God his property—to deal in bones and sinews, and souls—to whip and manacle and brand—merely because his victims differ in complexion from himself, and because the tyrannous laws of a State and the corrupt usages of Society justify his conduct? Yet so it is. By his example, he sanctifies,
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
Chapter 1 : Ancestry.— 1764 - 1805 .
Chapter 2 : Boyhood.— 1805 - 1818 .
Chapter 3 : Apprenticeship.— 1818 - 1825 .
Chapter 4 : editorial Experiments.— 1826 - 1828 .
Chapter 5 : Bennington and the Journal of the Times — 1828 - 29 .
Chapter 6 : the genius of Universal emancipation. — 1829 - 30 .
Chapter 7 : Baltimore jail, and After.— 1830 .
Chapter 8 : the Liberator — 1831 .
Chapter 9 : organization: New-England Anti-slavery Society .—Thoughts on colonization.— 1832 .
Chapter 10 : Prudence Crandall .— 1833 .
Chapter 11 : first mission to England .— 1833 .
Chapter 12 : American Anti-slavery Society .— 1833 .
Chapter 13 : Marriage.— shall the Liberator die? — George Thompson .— 1834 .
Chapter 14 : the Boston mob ( first stage).— 1835 .
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.