^ 
 
 vl. 
 
 A LETTER 
 
 FROM 
 
 AN ELDER 
 
 IN AN 
 
 1j& ^t\ml ^xtsh^Uxm C|nrc| 
 
 TO 
 
 HIS SON AT COLLEGE. 
 
 J ^ > 
 
 Ti yag, ti r/TnOTrjacev ring ; uij r] ancorta avrcov rrjv 
 :^iOTiv Tov Otov ^aTaQyijOii ; fA.fj ysvoiTO ' ycvso^ca di 
 o Oiog dXrjxftjg, Tidg da av&gco7ioc iptvOrrjg. 
 
 Romans III. 2, 4. 
 
 . Dn«a rib^'Q nin^a nionb nii3 
 
 Psalm CXYIII. 8. 
 
 fe 
 
 
 NEW YOEK. 
 1863. 
 
»5^^'d 
 
A LETTER 
 
 FROM 
 
 AN ELDER 
 
 IN AN 
 
 #Ib ^(\ml |jrcsl)3)!frian €\\\n\ 
 
 TO 
 
 ^I'S 
 
 HIS SON AT COLLEGE. 
 
 Ti yc(Q, ti jjTiiaTtjOav Tivti ; luj t) aTiiOTta avrcov rt/r 
 TtiOTiv toy Otov itaraQytiOti. ; /iifj ysvotro ' yii'to&co bl. 
 
 Romans III. 8, 4. 
 
 .onxs nbaia nin-^a n'cnb nii: 
 
 Psalm CXVIII. 8. 
 
 NEW YOEK. 
 1863. 
 
nv 
 
LETTER. 
 
 New York, April 22, 1863. 
 
 My Dear Son: 
 
 In a recent letter you remark, " Wayland is down 
 on Slavery, and tries to prove that it is wrong from 
 the Bible." You know that I regard Anti-Slavery as 
 a false god, which, forewarned as you have been, you 
 will not surely worship. As the views I entertain on 
 this subject are the result of at least twenty years of 
 careful thought and study, and form a part of my 
 religious faith, you can imagine the importance I 
 attach to them. In full view of my accountability to 
 my Maker, I shall proceed to give you my conclusions 
 upon this subject, with some reasons therefor; and I 
 demand of you, as you shall answer at the great day, 
 that you give the profoundest consideration to what 
 I shall write, and determine its truth or falsity by a 
 comparison with Scripture alone. The fashionable 
 way is "to interpret the Bible so as to conform to the 
 accepted theories of the age. I would have you 
 bring them all to the Bible, and accept them only 
 wherein they conform to its teachings. Wherein they 
 differ, reject them, though you are thus placed at 
 
variance with the so-called scientific men of your 
 time. Don't think your Professors infallible. Many 
 of the dogmas of the past have been found erroneous, 
 and some of those of the 19th century will be repu- 
 diated in time to come, especially those relating to 
 geology and ethnology. 
 
 In studying the question of Bible Slavery, say to 
 yourself beforehand, " Let God be true though every 
 man be made a liar ;" and determine that a " Thus 
 saith the Lord " shall be final and conclusive, prevail- 
 ing over every apparent argument. Remember that 
 when, in Job's time, the sons of God assembled 
 together, " Satan went up also " with them. He has 
 ever since continued the same practice. He is a 
 subtle logician. He laid his plans to corrupt the 
 primitive church, and succeeded. He has been labor- 
 ing for the subversion of the churches of the Reforma- 
 tion in various ways, ever since the times of Luther and 
 Calvin ; and I verily believe that he is now succeeding, 
 by new tactics, in causing them to apostatize also. 
 
 For four thousand years he had never interfered 
 for the abolition of Slavery. He was no doubt re- 
 strained until these last days, when the faith of God's 
 people is to be sorely tried. As the " God of this 
 world," he was permitted to incite men to show their 
 depravity by an abuse of their rights as masters, as he 
 has led them to abuse every other gift of God ; but 
 toward the close of the 18th century, he adopted the 
 new tactics of which I have spoken, employing as his 
 co-laborers Paine, Voltaire, Hume, Robespierre, &c. 
 
They taught morality as a science very plausibly ! 
 Their text was Human Rights. Satan always employs 
 great talent. It was needed, to subvert the opinion 
 on this subject which the Church and the world had 
 held for ages, and to pervert the word of God to the 
 support of the new doctrine. Quere : Might it not 
 have been an "Angel Rights" theory that he thought 
 was interfered with, which led him and those who fell 
 with him into their open rebellion ?* Tom Paine was 
 the earnest advocate of the new theory. He was a 
 prime mover among infidels, and his real object was 
 to make infidels. He very justly thought that the 
 best way of so doing was to preach Human Rights — 
 knowing that it flattered the ^latural heart, corrupted 
 man's integrity, and militated against God's sover- 
 eignty. Whether taught by the deluded Christian or 
 the God-defying infidel, the effect produced is the 
 same. Now, what has its effect been upon the Church 
 and the world ? 
 
 I will not answer this question fully ; for that 
 would lead me into a political discussion. Let it 
 suffice to look at the Church of which we are mem- 
 bers, which has been, hitherto, the soundest and most 
 conservative body of Christians in the land. In 1787, 
 the first action on the subject of Slavery was had by 
 the Presbyterian Church. Its highest court decided 
 in favor of its members doing " everything in their 
 power, consistent with the rights of civil society, to 
 
 * See Hopkins' " Divine Attributes" (vol. i. eh. 7), for some interesting specu- 
 lations as to the probable cause of the fall of the Angels. 
 
promote the abolition of Slavery." This action was 
 mainly based, not on the teachings of God's word, but 
 on the conviction (!) that "the rights of Jmman nature 
 are too well understood to admit of debate." No 
 debate ensued, no reasons were assigned for the "con- 
 viction " they had arrived at. It was thought to be 
 a self-evident proposition that every man had an 
 inherent right to his liberty ; practically ignoring 
 God's discrimination against a portion of the race in 
 depriving them of this very right. 
 
 This was the first fruit in our Church of this 
 Human Rights stratagem. It was practical infidelity. 
 
 The arguments by which our successful rebellion 
 against the mother countiy had been justified, and the 
 wish to prove that not infidels alone were " philan- 
 thropists," as they loved falsely to call themselves, 
 made the pious, conservative. God-fearing men of 
 those days the ready victims of this captivating but 
 pseudo-philanthropic doctrine. They were thus thrown 
 off their guard and did not see the hand of Satan in it. 
 Our subsequent history, ecclesiastical as well as politi- 
 cal, and the present calamitous state of things in our 
 country show it, however, to my mind, as the necessary 
 sequence of cause and effect. 
 
 In the Assembly of 1818, the subject was again 
 discussed and reported on at length, the report being 
 unanimously adopted. I extract as follows : " We 
 consider the voluntary enslaving of one portion of the 
 human race by another as a gross violation of the 
 most precious and sacred rights of Human Nature," 
 
and "as (hence?) utterly inconsistent with the law of 
 God." Further on: "Still the slave is deprived of 
 his natural right," and again : " It is manifestly the 
 duty of all Christians "to use their honest, earnest, and 
 unwearied endeavors to correct the errors of former 
 times^ and as speedily as possible to efface this Hot on 
 our holy religion, and to obtain the complete abolition 
 of Slavery throughout Christendom, and, if possible, 
 throughout the world." This is the position assumed 
 by the Presbyterian Church on the Slavery question 
 as determined by its General Assembly ! Adopting 
 the natural right theory of Tom Paine, it was easy 
 enough for them at one stroke to sweep away that 
 good, old-fashioned, God-honoring, man-humiliating 
 " doctrine according to godliness," which prevailed in 
 the Church in all previous ages. No wonder, that 
 under such influences they should think those who had 
 gone before them were very erroneous interpreters of 
 God's word, and that it was their duty " to correct 
 the errors of former times." 
 
 This second deliberate action of the Church ex- 
 hibits the more effectual working of the diabolical 
 strategy alluded to. The conscience of the Assembly 
 sustained them in this action, not, as the language em- 
 ployed shows, from the plain letter of Scripture, not 
 from any " thus saith the Lord " on the subject, but by 
 assuming that, as a basis of their reasoning, which is 
 not fact ; that which contravenes the Bible, physical 
 facts, and all human experience. They had been in- 
 structed in this belief before they were old enough to 
 
8 
 
 read. It was taught in the nursery songs and primer 
 books. As a first principle it was a higher law. It 
 was, practically at least, paramount to the Bible, for 
 its teachings had to be explained away when they con- 
 flicted with this fundamental axiom. The reception of 
 this equality doctrine, upon which Tom Paine lectured 
 and wrote for fifty years, led them to conclude that 
 Slavery violated the Golden Rule, and hence was " to- 
 tally irreconcilable with the spirit and principles of the 
 Gospel of Christ," and a "paradox in the moral system," 
 forgetting, or utterly failing to perceive, that that rule 
 was never intended to abolish the relations of master 
 and slave, but to adjust them according to the standard 
 of the Christian religion. 
 
 This Equality and Human Rights theory being false, 
 all the conclusions they have drawn from it are false 
 likewise. If it succeeds in overthrowing Slavery, it 
 will illustrate itself practically in such a way as to con- 
 vince all Christendom what its true character is. It 
 would then lead to Agrarianism, and practical Social- 
 ism and Fourierism. I could, if I would, write much 
 in proof of this position, and show also, as already in- 
 timated, that the relation of master and slave does not 
 violate the Golden Rule, which was first given by Moses 
 (Lev. xix, 18) in connection with his laws pertaining 
 to Slavery, but I must keep myself within the bounds 
 of a letter. 
 
 This Human Rights doctrine having been accepted, 
 under the circumstances which I have stated, was, 
 naturally enough, embodied in the treatises which were 
 
subsequently written on moral science, and has been 
 taught in our colleges and theological seminaries. 
 Hence, almost every liberally educated man in our 
 country has been trained in these two beliefs, the one 
 the consequent of the other — Human Rights and Anti- 
 Slavery. Alas ! how few independent thinkers are to 
 be found among them ! They reason eloquently and 
 earnestly, never seeming to question the soundness of 
 their premises, regarding them as self-evident. 
 
 These men, whose name is legion, are now the 
 formers of public opinion. They are our governors, 
 legislators, judges, presidents, and directors of our 
 colleges and seminaries, ministers, editors, lawyers, 
 doctors, &c. The ol tioXXoI follow these leaders. The 
 result wrought out by the reception nearly a century 
 since of one erroneous principle into the moral science 
 of the land is, to ray view, a world in arms against the 
 sovereign decrees of God Almighty — a union of hearts 
 and hands between Atheists, Deists, Sceptics, Fourier- 
 ites, Robert Dale Owenites, Unitarians, Universalists, 
 et id genus omne on the one hand, and the churches of 
 Christ on the other. Sad picture ! "A person is not 
 only hiown by the company he keeps ; but he is 
 morally made by it." " What part hath he that be- 
 lieveth with an infidel ? " If we do not get rid of this 
 Anti-Slavery imposture, which is rank treason against 
 the moral government of God, the most seductive and 
 dangerous form of idolatry, we shall become, to a 
 moral certainty, a nation of infidels. 
 
 Let me illustrate, by a case in point, the practical 
 
10 
 
 effect of this false principle upon the better class of 
 our citizens : A short time since I was discussing the 
 Slavery question with a merchant of refinement and 
 education, brought up in one of the wealthier of the 
 Reformed Dutch settlements near our city, when, ou 
 hearing my defence of the institution as a part of the 
 plan of God's moral government, he exclaimed : " if 
 that is the doctrine of the Bible, I would as soon 
 fight God Almighty as Jeff. Davis ! " This is the 
 legitimate, the necessary effect of this pernicious error. 
 The members of our churches, especially those of the 
 Congregational and New School Presbyterian, will be 
 ready by and by to say likewise, for the elementary 
 part of the work has been done. Tell them of their 
 danger now, and they would be shocked, and each 
 would cry out : "Is thy servant a dog, that he should 
 do this thing?" 
 
 Most of the educated men at the South are graduates 
 of our colleges. They toere Anti-Slavery too ; and under 
 their teaching the whole Southern people were, until, 
 driven by the persecuting passion of Northern men 
 and legislatures, they were compelled to examine the 
 subject de novo for themselves. They would have re- 
 mained Anti-Slavery for ever, from the force of their 
 early training, but for our malignant persecution. We 
 have made them Pro-Slavery ; and, against our inten- 
 tion, helped on the cause of Truth. 
 
 But I proceed now to give you what I deem the 
 Bible view of Slavery. I believe — 
 
 1st. That in the beginning God created Adam, with 
 
11 
 
 whom he covenanted, as the federal head of all men, 
 and that all the existing races are his descendants, 
 
 2nd. That all mankind did constitute a single race 
 or species down to Noah's time. 
 
 3rd. That there has since been a supernatural inter- 
 position, by which a portion of the race were made 
 negroes, specifically distinct from and subject to their 
 white brethren. 
 
 4th. And finally, that to deny the claim of the 
 owner to the services of his slave, or even to omit to 
 advocate it when assailed, is to stand charged, by the 
 words of Jesus Christ himself through his servant Paul 
 (1 Tim. vi, 1, 3), with the crime of blasphemy. 
 
 Of these four propositions, the first two need no 
 proof. They will not be disputed by Christians. The 
 third seems to me beyond doubt, for the following 
 reasons. I look upon God as a great moral governor,' 
 upon man as his rebellious subject, as having been 
 represented in, and as having fallen with his first father 
 Adam. I see the mercy of God withholding the exe- 
 cution of the penalty, and allowing him a dispensation 
 of grace. I then see that mercy trifled with, and the 
 wickedness of the world bringing down a destruction 
 of the race, save eight souls. With these circumstances 
 borne in mind, for they have a bearing on what follows, 
 let us come to the reading of the 9th chapter of Gene- 
 sis. We are there informed of Ham and Canaan's 
 sin. When, in addition, we hear the curse of per- 
 petual slavery pronounced by God's prophet on the 
 children of Canaan, and then find them occupying 
 
12 
 
 Ethiopia, "the land of Ham" (Ps. cv, 23), with mar- 
 vellous changes in their physical and mental constitu- 
 tion, and God himself subsequently avouching the 
 authorship of the Ethiopian skin (Jer. xiii, 23), I 
 think I am warranted in the conclusion that the change 
 produced was God's miraculous performance, by way 
 of preparation for, and adaptation to, the practical exe- 
 cution of Noah's curse. The change did not come by 
 chance. It was not the result of natural causes. It 
 could not have had any other author than God the 
 Creator. It exhibits as great power as did the origi- 
 nal creation of man. It was a new creation in fact. 
 To deny that it was God's act is to deny his omnipo- 
 tence. No power could effect any radical, constitu- 
 tional change in God's creature without being equal 
 to God himself If it did exist it might operate to 
 change other parts of God's creation, and continue to 
 do so through eternity. The absurdity is apparent of 
 charging it to any other than the Creator of the Uni- 
 verse. The physiological differences between the white 
 man and the negro, with striking internal as well as 
 external proof thereof, alone, without any Scripture 
 bearing on the case, would make it obvious that none 
 but an Almighty power could be made responsible 
 therefor. Noah was, to those who lived before the 
 flood as well as to those after it, a prophet. The proph- 
 ets spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. 
 Standing as the second head of the race, and acting 
 as God's medium of communication with man, his 
 "words were divinely inspired, and his proclamation, 
 
13 
 
 " Cursed be Canaan ; a servant of servants shall he be 
 unto his brethren," partook as much of the legislative 
 and judicial character as did the words of Moses on 
 many similar occasions. As it was God's curse, and 
 hence could not have been merely formal, it implies 
 the actual infliction of the woe denounced, with such 
 organic changes as a merciful being would see to be 
 necessary to make the creature contented and happy 
 in his new relation ; and this we find in the negro. 
 
 When the great God utters a curse, some visible 
 manifestation following is naturally looked for. The 
 serpent was cursed, and a learned commentator says : 
 " There has been a general belief, both among the an- 
 cient Jews and early Christians, that the serpent, before 
 the fall, was not only gentle and innocuous, but in form 
 and appearance among the most beautiful of creatures." 
 Whatever transformation took place was a consequence 
 of the curse. The ground was cursed, and is now 
 sterile and brings forth briers and thorns. Here, too, 
 the believer sees cause and effect. When the Saviour 
 cursed the fig tree, a visible effect was seen when it 
 withered away. These were all supernatural interven- 
 tions, accompanied by external manifestations. If it 
 be admitted that Noah was God's prophet, then the 
 circumstances of this case are analogous to those, and 
 the same inference is forced upon us, viz. : that it 
 was a supernatural interposition by which one portion 
 of the race were made negroes. I see nothing strange 
 in it; on the contrary, I think adequate cause is as- 
 signed. Can the negro be accounted for in any other 
 
14 
 
 way without denying the Bible ? Hold then to this 
 theory, which is, at all events, honoring to God, till a 
 better one is presented. 
 
 Nature instructs us that without Divine interfer- 
 ence there could and would have been but one com- 
 plexion, and that like the first parents. Nature is con- 
 sistent with herself. Like begets like. The complex- 
 ion of Adam and Eve was white. From " the three 
 sons of Noah was the whole earth overspread " (Gen. 
 ix, 19), and since they had a common parentage, ail 
 men are descended from one pair. That negroes are, 
 however, specifically distinct from the white race, is 
 not only patent to our senses, but is proven by physi- 
 ology — by the color, hair, figure, brain, &c. A respect- 
 able author says, " The entire bodily structure of the 
 negro, down to the minutest atom of elementary mat- 
 ter, differs just as widely as the color of the skin or 
 other external qualities from those of the white man." 
 If the sciences of anatomy and physiology present 
 such facts, what ignorance is shown in the popular im- 
 pression that the difference between the white and 
 black man is merely one of color ! 
 
 It has been the commonly received opinion of all 
 ages that the negroes are the descendants of Canaan. 
 Our knowledge of history prior to the Grecian Empire 
 is very imperfect, too much so to prove or disprove 
 this point with certainty. The traditional belief of all 
 ages and peoples on this subject is, in view of the cir- 
 cumstances, sufficient to satisfy my own mind ; but I 
 quote for your benefit from Dr. Rees' Cyclopaedia, un- 
 
15 
 
 der the head of " Canaanites " : "Joshua extirpated 
 great numbers, and obliged the rest to fly, some into 
 Africa and others into Greece. Procopius says they 
 first retreated into Egypt, but advanced into Africa, 
 where they built many cities, and spread themselves 
 over those vast regions which reach to the Sti-aits, 
 preserving their old language with little alteration. 
 In the time of Athanasius, the Africans still said they 
 were descended from the Canaanites, and when asked 
 their origin, they answered ' Canaani.' '' 
 
 If you think with me that the Divine Lawgiver 
 spoke by the mouth of Noah, and that the black skin 
 and woolly head, &c., are the miraculous attestations or 
 rather consequences thereof, you will naturally infer 
 that the change must have affected the organism of the 
 creature so as to fit him for his new and altered condi- 
 tion. This is necessary, since this law of adaptation is 
 found in all God's works. All His works .are perfect. 
 But, aside from Scripture and physiology, history 
 shows the negroes to be incapable of self-government. 
 It shows that they are not, never have been, and I 
 may add, never can be, the equals of white men. 
 They are imitative beings ; when men, possessing the 
 mental powers and capacities of white children. His- 
 tory and statistics prove that they are happier, more 
 moral, religious, and multiply faster in slavery than in 
 freedom. Negro Slavery was legislated into existence 
 by a Divine decree, and by the same authority it is to 
 continue " for ever and ever," It is, therefore, the 
 normal condition of the negro. This view is supported 
 
16 
 
 by physiology and history. If this be so, then opposi- 
 tion to it is hostility to the manifest will of God. It 
 asserts man's right to rule himself. In so far as self is 
 enthroned, God is dethroned. This desire of indepen- 
 dence flows from the " secret atheism" in the heart of 
 every unrenewed man. Hear old Dr. Charnock : 
 " The great controversy between God and man hath 
 been whether He or they shall be God ; whether His 
 reason or theirs, His will or theirs, shall be the guiding 
 principle." 
 
 The reason of this malediction upon the line of 
 Canaan's descendants, is one which every human being 
 should inquire into with deepest reverence and awe, to 
 see wdiat God would teach man by it. This, the essen- 
 tial point, is the one which has been almost, if not en- 
 tirely, overlooked. Like the handwriting on the wall, 
 it should be considered. The nations of the earth 
 ought to inquire into the meaning of this providence 
 with national fastings, and every minister should see 
 in it, as a part of his vocation, the duty of teaching 
 men God's sovereignty. His hatred of sin. His deter- 
 mination to punish it, and should improve it to incul- 
 cate humility, and to warn a sinful race to prepare for 
 the awful reckoning of the Judgment day. 
 
 The objection made that negro slavery is too terri- 
 ble a punishment for the cause assigned, cannot be an 
 objection to Christians who accept the total depravity 
 of the race as a result of Eve's eating the forbidden 
 fruit. Infidels may cavil at this, but not believers who 
 are taught by the Spirit to see the " deep things of 
 
17 
 
 God." To the question why God should not pun- 
 ish any act of disobedience to his law in an equally 
 fearful manner, it might be answered that our first pa- 
 rents and Noah's family stood in a peculiar relation to 
 the race. In Noah's case a whole world had been de- 
 stroyed for wickedness, and he and his three sons had 
 been saved in the most miraculous manner, and yet 
 one of his sons deliberately makes a mock at his ftith- 
 er, though knowing that he was a prophet of God and 
 had been saved from destruction for his great piety. 
 The son had also been saved when a world was de- 
 stroyed, and that not because of his own, but of his 
 father's righteousness ; and yet he finds it in his heart 
 to set light by this God-honored father and to endeavor 
 to hold him up to the contempt of his brethren. 
 When we consider that the relation of children to pa- 
 rents is typical of the relation the whole human family 
 bear to a common father, we are not surprised at the 
 explicit declarations made in God's word that we 
 should honor our parents, or at the punishments de- 
 nounced against those who would despise parental au- 
 thority. Neither can we wonder that this act of dis- 
 obedience to God, following so soon after a display 
 of God's hatred of sin in the destruction of a world, 
 should bring down upon the guilty actors, who had 
 just received so signal a mark of divine favor, a curse, 
 which should descend to the latest generations. 
 
 My fourth proposition is proven, as it seems to me, 
 from 1 Tim. vi, 1. Paul, the aged apostle, writing to 
 the young bishop Timothy, enjoins it upon him as one 
 2 
 
18 
 
 of "these things (to) teach and exhort" (v. 2), to 
 preach "Let as many slaves as are under the yoke 
 count their own masters worthy of all honor." This 
 is Pro-Slavery doctrine. And this doctrine must be 
 preached " lest the name of God and his doctrine be 
 blasphemed.''^ "These things teach" is the command. 
 The omission to do what he was enjoined would have 
 been sin — the sin of blasphemy, at least constructively ; 
 while preaching the contrary doctrine would have 
 been real blasphemy, because it " consents not to 
 wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to god- 
 liness " (v. 3). How do you suppose Timothy preach- 
 ed on this subject with the apostle's letter before him ? 
 God forbid, my dear son, that you should ever advo- 
 cate the Anti-Slavery sentiment. No matter who are 
 its friends, hate it, oppose it, fight it, for the honor of 
 God's name and doctrine. If you do not you will be 
 guilty of the sin of blasphemy. What more dreadful 
 position can a poor sinner stand in at the great and 
 terrible day than that of a blasphemer ? Be loyal then 
 to the teachings of God's word. It is disloyal to try 
 to get away from their obvious meaning. 
 
 When you look at the Scriptural passages bearing 
 on slavery, you will nowhere find it or the slave trade 
 denounced; nor would I dare to condemn either. 
 The abuses of both I would remedy as far as practi- 
 cable. But the relation of master and slave is honor- 
 able, and the slave trade, mercifully carried on, is 
 righteous in God's sight. Solomon considered the 
 
19 
 
 slave trade right, for he was engaged in it. Noah 
 gave Shera and Japheth the rigid to slaves, enumera- 
 ted among his blessings (Gen. ix, 26, 27). Jehovah 
 blessed Abraham with the gift of men slaves and 
 women slaves (Gen. xxiv, 35). Noah's curse was re- 
 cognized by Moses at Lev. xxv, 45, and the twelve 
 tribes were allowed by God to have and to hold 
 property in man ! The property principle was sanc- 
 tioned in that the slave was regarded as the owner's 
 money (Ex. xxi, 21) ; and tJie separation of husband 
 and ivife^ parent and child was directly ordered in 
 obedience to this property principle (Ex. xxi, 4). 
 How distressing that in the view of such Bible facts^ 
 good men can persuade themselves into the belief 
 that slavery is wrong on the ground that the Bible 
 cannot sanction slavery, and therefore does not ; or, 
 that it is inconsistent with what they call the general 
 principles of Scripture, and therefore the Pro-Slavery 
 teachings are to be explained away ! 
 
 While holding that the normal condition of the 
 negro is slavery, I am equally certain that the normal 
 status of that portion of the race which were blessed in 
 their progenitors remains what it was at the creation, 
 viz., that of ruler. God gave Adam dominion (Gen. 
 i, 28) "over every living thing." When the curse 
 fell there was implied an alienation, but only from 
 those affected by it, of this previously granted right. 
 It was never intended that the enslavement of the 
 descendants of those who were blessed should be 
 permanent, as it never has been. The depravity of 
 
20 
 
 mankind made it necessary and merciful because it 
 has kept the nations incessantly at war, and prisoners 
 were either put to death or sold into slavery. It was 
 allowed for this reason and as a means of national 
 chastisement by the great Ruler, but no portion of the 
 white race have ever remained for any great length of 
 time in slavery. 
 
 The passages of Scripture relating to the treatment 
 of servants of the Hebrew race have confused and 
 misled a good many superficial readers. Hebrews 
 only were freed at the Jubilee. Other white slaves 
 were not, much less the negroes. Hebrews were not 
 to be sold as bondmen, but to a temporary and kind- 
 lier service, never exceeding seven years. They could 
 not be treated as bond-servants might justly be. 
 Why this discrimination in their favor if the Human 
 Rights theory of our day be a sound one ? Passages 
 from the 5th of Nehemiah, 58th of Isaiah, and 34th of 
 Jeremiah have been so often misapplied by Anti- 
 Slavery enthusiasts that the public have ignorantly 
 come, at last, to believe that they are proofs denunci- 
 atory of the system ; but the context of these passages 
 will show this to be untrue. The Bible nowhere 
 condemns that which it sanctions; neither is God 
 liable, like man, to change. In the chapters alluded 
 to, the commands to " let the oppressed go free " (Isai. 
 Iviii, 6), "proclaim liberty," and "that every man 
 should let his man servant and every man his maid 
 servant, being an Hebrew or Hebrewess, go free " (Jer. 
 xxxiv, 8, 9), were alone applicable to Jewish men and 
 
21 
 
 women, and under peculiar circumstances. The rich 
 Jews were holding in servitude their Hebrew brethren 
 after the expiration of the seven years lease, which 
 was in disregard of God's law, and for which they 
 were justly punished. They were simply commanded 
 to free the slaves the law had made free. It was 
 called an oppression by the prophet because, in the 
 particular case, it was an illegal holding. It was 
 lawful to hold all other than Hebrew slaves "for 
 ever," not only beyond the seven years, but beyond 
 the Jubilee. Their enslavement was legal, by divine 
 law; and it is nowhere in Scripture called an op- 
 pression. To admit that slavery is an evil or an 
 oppression is to put it out of your power to combat 
 the abolitionists. Consistency will, after a while, lead 
 you to go with them. To do so is virtually to deny 
 the Bible, and to reproach and calumniate its Holy 
 Author. 
 
 The authority of God as delegated to masters is 
 honored when they are honored, and despised when 
 they are despised. To denounce the lawful exercise of 
 this God-granted power, or to take it away by human 
 enactments, is to resist the authority of God, and im- 
 pliedly to say — " Stand by : we are holier than thou." 
 
 Another misapplied text is that of Deut. xxiii, 15, 
 viz. : " Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the ser- 
 vant which is escaped from his master unto thee." 
 Clark, who was an English abolitionist, comments cor- 
 rectly on this verse, referring it to " a servant who 
 left an idolatrous master that he might join himself to 
 God and his people. In any other case it would have 
 
22 
 
 been an injustice to have harbored the runaway." 
 Apply it, however, as the Anti-Slavery people do, and 
 Paul violated this very law when he sent Onesimus 
 back to Philemon. What, too, under that view, shall 
 be said of the conduct of the angel (Gen. xvi, 13, 
 shows him to have been Jehovah) in the case of 
 Hao'ar ? He addressed her as Sarai's maid, but " to 
 remind her that she was the property of another," and 
 to say, " Return to thy mistress, and submit thyself 
 under her hand." 
 
 Still another misquoted text is that of Ex. xxi, 16. 
 It is, however, explained by Moses himself at Deut. 
 xxiv, 7, to be a law against stealing and selling these 
 privileged Hebrews: "If a man be found stealing 
 any of his brethren of the children of Israel and 
 maketh merchandise of him," &c. As the buying and 
 sellino- of men was lawful, it was necessary to guard 
 against such an abuse as the stealing and selling. This 
 the eighth commandment forbade ; yet God saw fit to 
 make a special law, with the death penalty attached, 
 for the peculiar benefit of this favored people. 
 
 Some, in order to get rid of certain of the Old 
 Testament passages justifying slavery, say the Hebrew 
 word eved does not mean slave. This is as poor a shift 
 as they could make. It does mean it. No one who 
 reads Hebrew will deny it, if he is candid and sane. 
 You have a proof of this being its meaning at Ex. xii, 
 44, 45. There eved and sachir are antithetically placed ; 
 eved denoting the servant bought with money, while 
 sachir, derived from sachar, to hire for wages, means 
 hired servant. These are the Hebrew nouns properly 
 
23 
 
 describing these two conditions of servitude. See, too, 
 at this place, a most beautiful recognition of and sanction 
 to the relation, in that the slave must be circumcised 
 and must eat of the Passover equally with the members 
 of the family, while the hired servant was forbidden. 
 
 A -good deal of what I have written, you may 
 notice, goes to show that God did not regard the 
 Human Rights and Equality doctrine of our day as 
 entitled to any respect. Then it must be a bad, a 
 devilish doctrine, shall I say ? Yes ; I do say it. Ex- 
 perience shows us it deifies the creature, and arrays 
 him in hostility to the Creator. See how God ignores 
 the doctrine at Ex. xix, 5. There he proposed to the 
 Jews, through Moses, to make them a peculiar treasure, 
 above all people^ if they would only keep covenant with 
 Him; and he justifies himself in making the offer by 
 saying, "for all the earth is mine;" asserting His right 
 to do with mankind as He will — to love one people 
 and hate another, elevate and cast down at His plea- 
 sure. He " hath mercy on whom He will have mercy, 
 and whom He will He hardeneth." This doctrine is 
 not very gratifying to the natural man, for " the carnal 
 mind is enmity against God." It will not, cannot re- 
 ceive the truth in the love of it. Try every funda- 
 mental proposition in morals by this test, given to me 
 by your venerable grandfather when I was a youth, 
 viz. : "Does it honor God and abase man?" If you 
 can answer it affirmatively accept it ; but if not, reject 
 it. In the latter case there will be a fallacy in it, 
 though you may not see it. The human heart loves 
 that philosophy that exalts the creature. Hence it is 
 
24 
 
 that the Anti- Slavery heresy will continue fashionable 
 down to the day of the Lord's appearing. " When 
 He Cometh, shall He find faith on the earth ? I tell 
 you, nay." 
 
 As in the family of the first head of the race there 
 was a Cain, so in that of the second head we find a 
 Ham. May they not, in view of the curse resting on 
 them in this life, be regarded as Old Testament types 
 of that lost portion of our race represented in the 
 New Testament under the figures of the " Tares" and 
 "Goats" in their respective parables, who are doomed 
 to be cursed in the world to come — bond slaves to 
 Satan for ever and ever ? 
 
 The Civil War, in which we are now plunged, I 
 regard as God's punishment upon the country for the 
 blasphemy involved in our Anti-Slavery utterances and 
 legislations. Knowing that we of the North have 
 been vastly greater sinners in this respect than the 
 Southern people, I am fearful that the time to come 
 will bring us sorer punishments than they are now 
 suffering. The period denoted by the " distress of 
 nations " is at hand, and as God is preparing by his 
 Providence to pour out his hot displeasure upon the 
 nations, I think I hear him saying to them as to Israel, 
 when reproving them for their sins, by Amos (ix, 7) 
 " Are ye not as children of the Ethiopians unto me ?" 
 
 That no man may spoil you through philosophy 
 and vain deceit after the tradition of men, after the 
 rudiments of the world, and not after Christ, is the 
 prayer of Your affectionate 
 
 FATHER. 
 
LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 
 
 012 027 488 
 
 /