CHAPTER IX.
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.