the world was not an abolitionist. He never
forbid slavery directly, but on the contrary,
his inspired Apostle writes to the Colossians,
3d chapter, verse 22 to 24, inclusive, and says:
"22. Servants, obey in all things your
masters according to the flesh; not with eye-
service, as men-pleasures; but in singleness
of heart, fearing God :
"23, And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily,
as to the Lord and not unto men ;
"24. Knowing that of the Lord ye shall
receive the reward of the inheritance; for ye
serve the Lord Christ."
Now, sir, the answer to this is easy. It
was not a part of the mission of Christ or of
any of his Apostles to interfere with the po-
litical institutions of any country. He did
not say to the world that slavery ought to be
immediately abolished—indeed he did not say
that it ought to be abolished at all; but this
he did do. He gave to the world a principle
in moral ethics, which of itself did uproot the
system of slavery as he found it among the
Jews and the Romans, and has since abol-
ished villanage in England, serfdom in Russia,
negro slavery in many of the United States.
and has dealt a death-blow to the peonage of
Mexico. The Apostles did not attempt any
radical change in any of the systems of gov-
erment which they found existing in our world
when they began to teach. On the contrary,
they taught us to "render unto Caesar the
things which are Caesar's," a command posi-
tive in its tone; plain and easily to be un-
derstood; yet a large portion of our people
seem little inclined to obey it. While at the
same time the Apostles attempted no radical
changes in the government of the Roman
people, or of any other nation, they laid down
a law in morals upon which all judicial or
profane law and even governments ought to be
based. They did this when they taught us
to love God with all our hearts—and more
especially did they do this when they said
"love thy neighbor as thyself," and when
they reiterated the doctrine in these words—
" do unto others as you would have others do
unto you."
No, sir, the Apostles of Jesus Christ were
not political agitators, demagogues, reformers
or revolutionists; much less were they dis-
posed to turn rebels or traitors. They did
not recommend any modification of the form
of the government established by the first of the
Caesars—they did not suggest any change in
the Roman or Hebrew jurisprudence—nor sug-
gest any great military enterprise—they made
no new discoveries in law, medicine, arts,
sciences, or government—their mission being
to preach Christ and him crucified, and to in-
doctrinate the world in morals; and in thus
teaching men what was right, they left it for
statesmen, in the providence of Almighty
God, to apply the principles contained in the
lessons taught by the Apostles, to the gov-
ernment of nations and the general regula- |
tions of society. The spirit of the language
which I have just quoted, viz: "Do unto
others as you would that they should do unto
you," is in opposition to slavery in any form,
and is in opposition to all manner of cruelty,
injustice, tyranny or oppression.
Suppose the Apostles had attempted to
bring about any radical change in the politi-
cal condition of things as they found them—
with what, (I ask gentlemen to answer in their
replies,) with what favor would their doctrines
have been received by any of the people?
The same, sir, as would have greeted the
preaching of the abolition of slavery in the
city of Charleston in 1861, and gentlemen
can easily imagine what sort of favor that
would probably have been. Had the Apos-
tles told the people of Jerusalem, of Rome, of
Corinth, of Ephesus and of Athens, that one
leading condition of their entrance into the
Christian Church would be the immediate
emancipation of their slaves, and a promise
to use their best endeavors to bring about the
abolition of slavery in the whole length and
breadth of the great Roman Empire, even at
the risk of exciting seditions among the peo-
ple and a civil war, and the destruction of
that great government, which, with all its
imperfections extended protection to many
millions, and the surest and best protection
that could then be had at the bands of any gov-
ernment—I say, sir, had they done this they
would have been slain without a legal hear-
ing, and would have most signally failed in
making a single convert to the great truths of
Christianity.
True, the Apostles might have turned abo-
litionists or political reformers, and with the
help of a miracle could have succeeded—but
the time for miracles was just passing, and it
had never been the practice of the great Gov-
ernor of the world to work in the affairs of
men by other than human agencies. This was
the rule, and when Moses smote the rock from
which gushed pure water for a people dying
of thirst to drink, the order of nature was re-
versed, and the miracle was but an exception
to the general practice. The history of the
world goes to show that all the great reforms
in politics and religion which we are taught
to believe were effected by the Deity, were
wrought by the aid of human agencies, ope-
rating on human passions, prejudices and
weaknesses.
And again, "the Apostles were not aboli-
tionists." Why, sir, slavery is not the only
thing which we think wrong in principle and
practice, which the Apostles failed to attack
directly, it was, during the Apostolic age, a
common practice among different nations of
the earth for men to possess themselves of a
plurality of wives, yet in no instance did the
Apostles forbid this practice save in the case
of a bishop. This command occurs in the
second verse of the third chapter of Paul's
first Epistle to Timothy. I will read it : |
