Slavery, Emancipation and the Southern Church: A Study of the Narratives of Frederick Douglass, Harriet Jacob, and Sojourner Truth

Much has been said about slavery and it may seem pretentious to try to produce

research that is entirely new. My aim, therefore, is not so much to innovate as to partake

of the ongoing debate about what some have called “the Peculiar Institution.” My

discussion will focus on the role played by the Church and some so-called Christians of

southern states in the enslavement and emancipation of the Negro in America, an issue

Frederic Douglass, Harriet Jacob, and Sojourner Truth address in their respective

narratives.

In fact, there is no dearth of information on the role of the Church in keeping the

slaves in total submission to their masters. Examples abound in all three narratives to

support this claim. However, it is important to realize that even though specific

denominations within the Church helped keep the slaves in bondage, which they should

apologize for if they have not done so, they also worked to mend, to an extent, the

damage caused to the Negro.

The medium whereby the slaves became aware of their Christian masters’

wrongdoings was education. Education was an eye-opener. It allowed the blind slaves to

see and learn, and thereby, to detect the discrepancies between what they had learned at

church and the events of their daily lives. Such was the case of Harriet Jacobs. As Myrlie

Evers-William states in her introduction to Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, “…By

having the knowledge of the letters, she was able to read the disciplines set out in the

Bible, the same book that shaped the moral fiber of the Christian slave owners. How

could slavery be justified, when God’s Word admonished, ‘Love thy neighbor as

1

thyself’…this paradox wreaked havoc with Harriet’s soul…” (Jacobs, viii)1. Indeed, a

sensible person could but be shocked and grow restless and inquisitive over such a

momentous discovery. The master should love his slave as he loves himself since the

Bible teaches love of one’s neighbor. Unfortunately, he does not and his failure to

demonstrate genuine love for the slave lends itself to two possible interpretations: either

the master is not truly Christian, in which case he should not use the Bible to justify his

deeds or the slaves are not his “neighbors” in the sense that they are less than human and,

therefore, unfit to be considered true neighbors. Let assume, at least for the time being,

that the master were fully Christian. That would leave us with the assumption that the

slave was less than human. Given the dehumanizing nature of the slave’s ordeal, reaching

this conclusion would not be an exaggeration.

The slave was stripped of his dignity, deprived of his rights and his manhood.

Thus, he was nothing but less than human. Little wonder, then, the the slave father was

expected to teach his children submissiveness instead of dignity. Harriet Jacobs

remembers an instance when both her father and master wanted one of her brothers to

complete a task. The brother chose to comply with the master’s command, which aroused

his father’s wrath. Even as a slave, Jacobs’ father still believed in teaching his children

dignity in defiance to the master’s rules. He was convinced that his child’s obedience to

him, the father, should take precedence over obedience to the master. Obviously, the

slave master saw this attitude of one of his properties as mere arrogance. According to

Jacobs, “…they though he [her father] had spoiled his children by teaching them to feel

that they were human beings. This was blasphemous doctrine for a slave to teach;

presumptuous in him and dangerous to the master” (Jacobs, 7). Indeed, any display of

1 Jacobs, Harriet. Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl. New York: Signet, 2000.

2

intelligence; any attempt to show the slightest sign of dignity on the part of a slave was

viewed by the master as dangerous because of the risk of insurrection. Thus, the master

missed no occasion to remind the slave of his so-called divine role as the master. In fact,

the master was satisfied with the belief that “God created the Africans to be slaves”

(Jacobs, 47). Thus, through individuals like Doctor Flint, who were presumably models

of the good Christian, slaves were kept in total submission to their owners. However,

what gave the slaves the conviction that their position of inferiority to the master was the

latter’s divine right was the institutionalization of the whole alienation process by the

Southern Church. Here, I will turn to a sermon delivered by Reverend Pike to his slave

congregation.

Thought it would have been interesting to quote the entire sermon, I will refrain

from doing so for reasons of space. I shall therefore quote the most significant excerpts

thereof. The sermon starts with the words “Hearken, ye servants” (Jacobs, 75)! These

words give solemnity to the occasion. They are reminiscent of preachers of Biblical

times, and thus they establish the authority of the speaker. The reverend then goes on to

say what follows, no doubt punctuating his words for more effect on the audience: “Give

strict heed unto my words” (Jacobs, 75). Here, the reverend obviously assumes the

position of a prophet. The audience must heed his words, not partially by selecting what

they wish to accept, but the speech in its entirety. And that must be done without fail. It is

as if something ominous were dangling over the heads of the unheeding, threatening to

strike if they did not “heed” the reverend’s words. Having thus put the listeners in the

right frame of mind for the occasion, the reverend charges at his congregation in the

following words: “You are rebellious sinners. Your hearts are filled with all manner of

3

evil. ‘Tis the devil who tempts you. God is angry with you, and will surely punish you, if

you don’t forsake your wicked ways” (Jacobs, 75). He lashes out at his listeners, charging

them with being at the mercy of Satan. By calling the slaves “rebellious sinners,” he

seems to be referring to those among them who are defiant and disrespectful in the eyes

of the master. God, he pretends, will punish those. In order to avoid God’s wrath, the

“rebellious slave” must do one thing: “Obey [his] old master and [his] young master—

[his] old mistress and [his] young mistress. If [he] disobey [his] earthly master, [he]

offend[s] [his] heavenly Master. [The slave] must obey God’s commandments” (Jacobs,

76). Here, the origin of the slave master’s authority is made even more conspicuous; his

authority comes directly from God and as such, it must not be met with defiance but total

and unflinching submission. In other words, the slaves who disrespect their masters are

not Christians because they are not following God’s commandments. The repetitive use

of “God sees you” and “God will punish you” gives even more force to the sermon and

the slave, that is, the simple-minded one, the illiterate (who, alas, represents the majority)

feels doomed to eternal damnation and can do nothing else than comply. We can clearly

see one of the techniques the Church used to sow fear in the souls of the slaves for the

sole purpose of keeping them subjected to the master. Indeed, hiding the truth form the

slave was paramount, and that is why he was denied access to proper education. Harriet

Jacobs’ account shows that the Church played a pivotal role in furthering illiteracy

among the slaves.

In fact, Jacobs gives the example of Uncle Fred who could absorb everything he

was taught like a sponge. Yet, “the law forbids it, and the Church withholds it” (Jacobs,

81). The Church sends missionaries to the “dark corners” of the world but forgets the

4

dark corners at home. Jacobs’ response is clear on that issue: America needs to clean its

own backyard before turning to those of the so-called dark corners. She says,

I am glad that missionaries go out to the dark corners of the earth; but I ask them not to overlook the dark corners at home. Talk to American slaveholders as you talk to the savages of Africa… Tell them that all men are brethren, and that man has no right to shut out the light of knowledge from his brother. Tell them they are answerable to God for sealing up the Fountain of Life from the souls that are thirsty for it (Jacobs, 81).

With these words, Jacobs is clearly giving the slaveholders and the Church a taste

of their own medicine. They threaten the disobedient slave with eternal damnation; she

tells them they are in greater danger of Devine punishment for barring people from the

“light of knowledge,” which is their God-given right. A form of reverse psychology is at

work here. But how did Harriet Jacobs put together the argument for this rebuttal? The

answer lies in Myrlie Evers’s introduction to Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl:

education. It is also education that will broaden the mind of young Frederick Douglass

and open the eyes to his master’s wrongdoings.

Even though the young Douglass is unusually inquisitive, he will become even

more so as he “learns the letters.” As his mind becomes more and more restless, he starts

to become more rebellious and his overall attitude toward his masters—defiance and

challenge of their authority—becomes more conspicuous. One instance of defiance

happens when he stands up to Mr. Covey. Obviously, Douglass is fed up with the

frequent beatings this professional slave breaker inflicts upon him. How can Mr. Covey

not understand that the young man is suffering from sunstroke and keeps beating him for

faking to be sick? Why can Covey not tolerate his being sick? Yet the Bible says, “Love

thy neighbor like thyself.” Mr. Covey is a Christian who, apparently, has been

5

recommended to Douglass’ former master, Mr. Auld, with whom Covey attended the

same Methodist church. Faced with his masters’ treacherous conduct, Douglass lashes

out at these individuals, as well as the institution in which they hold membership:

I assert most unhesitatingly, that the religion of the south is a mere covering for the most horrid crimes, --a justifier of the most appalling barbarity, --a sanctifier of the most hateful frauds, --and a dark shelter under which the darkest, foulest, grossest, and most infernal deeds of slaveholders find the strongest protection. Were I to be again reduced to the chains of slavery, next to the enslavement, I should regard being the slave of a religious master the greatest calamity that could befall me (Douglass, 46)2

As stated in these lines, Douglass unequivocally condemns the slave system in

general, but more specifically, the Church, which, at this point, seems to be the instigator

of all the atrocities he talks about. Slave masters are usually bad, but the worse among

them are none other than the ones who boast an affinity with some kind of church.

Examples supporting this claim are numerous. In fact, Douglass portrays two

ministers, a Mr. Weeden and a Mr. Hopkins, as men with the inclination to beat their

slaves for no apparent reason other than to please themselves. The first of these

“gentlemen” deems it necessary to constantly remind the slaves of their condition and

their position vis-à-vis their master. Behaving according to the master’s instructions is

useless and cannot spare a slave a beating. Under this Christian master, you are beaten

when the master deems it appropriate. In fact, “His maxim was, ‘Behave well or behave

ill, it is the duty of a master occasionally to whip a slave to remind him of his master’s

authority.’ Such was his theory, and such his practice (Douglass, 46).

2 Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. New York: Dover, 1995.

6

Mr. Hopkins practices something akin to what Mr. Weeden does. Moved by the

desire to discourage the slightest thought of or attempt to escape, and to quell any

potential rebelliousness, this master always manages to find faults with his slaves or, in

the absence of faults, to “beat them in advance of deserving it,” and he actually beats one

person as a way to begin the week (Douglass, 46). Thus, individually, the instances are

numerous in which so-called Christian masters inflict upon their slaves the most

inhumane and undeserved treatment imaginable. However, the worst part is when

individuals get together into groups to act in the name of the Church, and that is exactly

what will happen when Douglass starts a Sabbath school to teach his fellow slaves to read

the Word of God.

The school has barely been in session when a number of clergymen get wind that

Douglass is teaching some slaves to read the Bible. Subsequently, a group of people,

whom Douglass recognized later as Wright Fairbanks and Garrison West, together with

many others, attacks the small group of students and disbands the class. This act of

vandalism is condoned not only by the Church, as is justified by the presence of these

prominent members of the Methodist Church but also by the law. In Young Frederick

Douglass3, Preston Dickson provides more information on the perpetrators of the attack

against the Sabbath school: “One was Garretson West, a huge, hulking oysterman

considered a saint by some and a simpleton by others. Completely illiterate, West was the

perfect choice to head a school-smashing posse. Another was Wrighton Fairbanks, like

West, an exhorter (sort of religious cheerleader) at Sardis Chapel. Giving the raid a cloak

of legality was Constable Thomas Graham, the Aulds’ next-door neighbor” (Preston,

116).

3 Dickson, Preston. The Young Frederick Douglass. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1980.

7

Because of this event, Douglass makes up his mind concerning the Church, or to

be precise, the Southern Church. His frustration and disgust are commensurate with the

rank of the clergymen mention above. According to Preston, “That [the event] ended the

school, and with it the last shred of Frederick’s respect for Methodism as practiced by

Southern slaveholders. These men were the pillars of the Church, and yet they had used

whips and sticks to prevent children from learning to read the Word of God. He will

never again have anything but contempt for such hypocrisy” (Preston, 116).

Hypocrite though these men—and beyond their individual selves, their church—

are, they have a number of good reasons for acting the way they do. Jacobs says, “If a

man goes to the communion table, and pays money into the treasury of the church, no

matter if it be the price of blood, he is called religious” (Jacobs, 82). Thus, among other

reasons, the need for money impels the Church to support the Peculiar Institution.

However, even though financial reasons may have been an important consideration for

the church’s support of the system, they are not the only determining factor.

Another reason the proponents of slavery give is that it is their duty to civilize the

Negro. They view the black race as a race of primitive people incapable of any kind of

progress and totally devoid of the ability to learn and improve. The only successful

Negroes are those who are under the pang of slavery. Some people like John Bell

Robinson, a staunch advocate of slavery, contend that no real Christian in their right mind

would think about giving them freedom in this country. In fact, Bell continues,

The Negro race is not fit for self-government. They are incapable, in this country and all others, to manage a government as a republic, or even partly so…but when we come to look at the whole black race, here and elsewhere, we shall see that slavery has not degraded the African but greatly elevated him in the scale of civilization and

8

domestic and social relations of this life; while on the other hand, freedom has, as a general thing, degraded and heathenized the African race in parts of the world (Robinson, 140).4

Obviously, Mr. Robinson does not know anything about the cultures of the

ancient Egyptians who happened to be black nor does he know that black Egypt was once

the world center for learning, and that a number of Greek philosophers who left an

indelible imprint on the western mode of thinking studied in Egypt at some point in their

academic careers. The example of Ancient Egypt, together with the rich history of

Timbuktu and the Empire of Mali are but a few examples of the ability of the Negro to

govern himself. Also, Robinson talks about the elevation of the African through slavery.

How could slavery elevate the Negro when he is not even supposed to learn to read and is

barred from getting a proper education? Robinson’s claims with regard to the Negro is

attributable, according to him, not only to his sense of ethics; his role in the “civilization”

of the Negro is divine. He contends that the creator did not create the black race to be

“rulers” and “leaders.” Black people were created inferior and they can do nothing except

under the ruthless slave laws. The American Constitution and Declaration of

Independence do not apply to them. One needs, he continues, to look to the South to see

that the slaves there are happier than people in any part of the world. He states that

…the southern slaves are the happiest class of people I have ever seen in all my travels in North or South America or the West Indies, and I believe they are the happiest people on the face of the globe, except where abolitionists have disturbed their peace, and twenty times more civil, respectful, happy, and well behaved than any colony or state of free Negroes I have ever seen (Robinson, 150).

4 Robinson, John Bell. Pictures of Slavery and Antislavery. Miami: Mnemosyn, 1969.

9

Here it appears paradoxical that, according to Robinson, slaves are happier where

they are the most oppressed! He seems to be taking the revelry the slaves were forced

into around Christmas and probably other Christian celebrations as conveying joy among

the southern slaves. Or is he alluding to the slave songs, which, apparently happy, convey

an immeasurable amount of pain and sorrow? In any event, it seems that Mr. Robinson

misread the Negro’s attitude in the South. His divine justification of slavery speaks to the

sometimes tacit and sometimes overt attitude of the Church in dealing with this issue.

Yet, in a way, the “same” Church that helps keep the Negro in bondage, in an

unprecedented about-face, will play an important role in breaking the shackles of slavery.

Before going any further, it is important to notice that Douglass cautions us about

what he means when he refers to the Church, and for the purpose of this paper, especially

for what follows, the word should be understood as he intends it. Douglass defines the

word as follows in the appendix to his narrative: “What I have said respecting and against

religion, I mean strictly to apply to the slaveholding religion of this land, and with no

possible reference to Christianity proper; for, between the Christianity of this land, and

the Christianity of Christ, I recognize the widest possible difference” (Douglass, 72). The

“slaveholding religion” of the South helped enslave and keep the Negro in bondage. I

will now turn to the “Christianity of Christ” for my discussion of the role of the Church

in breaking the chains of bondage.

As Lewis Tappan and the Garrisonians have said, “…there is no power out of the

Church that could maintain Slavery, if the Church attacked it earnestly” (Wyatt-Brown,

316).5 In fact, once the Church decides to come out of its passivity to take action and

5 Wyatt, Brown Bertran. Lewis Tappan and the Evangelist War Against Slavery. New York: Antheneum, 1969.

10

completely eradicate slavery, the American plague, nothing can actually stand in its way.

The battle is waged both by individual Christians, as well as by organization, but I will

focus on the role of Christian organizations, as their fight is more conspicuous than that

of individual slave masters.

One of the very first formal conferences to discuss slavery was help in the mid-

1800’s in Glasgow, Scotland. The purpose of the conference was to lay bare and

denounce the practice of slavery and the support of prominent church leaders for the

proponents of the system. After heated debates and testimonies about the atrocities of the

system, (it is important to point out that Frederick Douglass took part in the proceedings

and received more credit than anybody else for his contribution to the cause), it was

resolved that the time had come to awake “the moral and religious sentiment of the

people against the holding of human beings in bondage” (Gregory, 31).6 The phrase

“awake the moral and religious sentiment of the people” is essential because laws may be

enacted to correct and make amends for an evil practice, but if the people for whom such

laws are enacted do not understand the importance of abandoning the wrong deeds, in

other words if they are not convinced as to the benefits of ridding themselves of their

unethical habits, the said laws will have been enacted in vain. That is why the religious

men who assembled in Glasgow gave precedence to that aspect, thus contributing to

trigger an anti-slavery sentiment not only among the people, but also, and more

importantly, among religious communities and organizations.

The Quakers, among other religious organizations, issued a petition to President

John Quincy Adams, which was reported in the December 1831 Baltimore American:

6 Gregory, James M. Frederick Douglass the Orator. Chicago: Afro-Am Press, 1969.

11

We believe slavery and the slave trade, in human species, is a great national and moral evil; we therefore ask your body to take the subject into serious consideration, and pass such law or laws as will entirely abolish slavery and the slave trade in the District of Columbia, over which Congress has exclusive jurisdiction” (Preston, 101).

The Quakers’ intent was obvious. They appeared ready, as they had usually been

for the most part, to wage the battle for righteousness. Still, however they were of the

fairness of their endeavor, they deemed it necessary to have the law, not only the divine,

but also the human, on their side. The calls of both those who held the Glasgow

conference and the Quakers were hearkened and various Christian organizations

germinated between 1831 and 1861 to carry the “torch of emancipation.” These

organizations included most of the de=nominations we know today: the Methodists, the

Quakers, the Wesleyans, etc. One important organization among them was the New

Missionary Society of Charles T, Torrey.

Torrey’ idea was one of civil disobedience. He understood that slave laws existed.

However, he was ready to work with volunteers who would be ready to break such laws

and teach slaves to read and write, distribute tracts and Bibles so that they would

eventually experience the urge to break free from their fetters. These volunteers would be

called “abolitionist missionaries.” By definition, an abolitionist missionary is “an

individual of either northern or southern birth who, under the auspices of a northern

abolitionist organization, worked in the South to build ant-slavery churches and spread

anti-slavery sentiment” (Harrold, 86).7 Thus, the mission was to gradually supersede the

southern slaveholding Church, which thus far had been the accomplice of the slave trade

7 Harrold, Stanley. The Abolitionist and the South 1831-1861. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1995.

12

and slavery. Among the abolistionist missionaries, some advocated a swift change in the

condition of the Negro. However, they all agreed with Lewis Tappan that

Among the slaves and slaveholders, the Gospel, as it came from its divine founder, is to be preached without concealment or compromise…whether human enactments authorize or forbid it…to preach a free, an evangelical, an antislavery Gospel…that had no complicity with caste, polygamy, or slaveholding; that would fearlessly and perseveringly…proclaim freedom, peace, temperance, holiness, the equality of man before the law, and impartial love of God (Harrold, 93).

Here again, the rue Gospel has to be taught whether the law authorizes it or not.

The missionaries must act boldly in defiance of the law because their cause is noble and

holy, and because black or white or otherwise, God has an equal share of love for all. To

think otherwise is to break divine law, which is above human laws.

This moral argument was echoed by the American Unitarians who, after a three-

day meeting in 1845, decided to write and circulate a “Unitarian Protest Against

Slavery,” the essentials of which were that they believed slaveholding to be in direct

opposition to the law and will of God, and entirely incompatible with the precepts and

spirit of Christianity (Tange, 98).8 Thus, it can be said that action was being taken by

individuals, as well as organizations, to correct atrocities committed in the name of the

Southern Church. Yet both Harriet Jacobs and Frederick Douglass give scant

consideration to that aspect of the issue. Both Jacobs and Douglass vehemently condemn

the Church for its role in keeping their race in bondage. The former sees fit to make a

distinction between the Southern “slaveholding Church” and the “Church of Christ” only

in an appendix to the Narrative. As for the latter, she mentions only the good deeds of

8 Stange, Douglas Charles. British Unitarians against American Slavery 1833-65. Ontario: Associated University Press, 1984.

13

individual Christians like Reverend Pike whose wife frees her slaves once she knows she

is going to die. However, Jacobs doesn’t talk about any form of battle waged by an

organization. Yet we know that Douglass and Jacobs received a good Christian

education, the former from his mistress Sophia, and that he had some affinities not only

with individual Christians but also with at least one Christian organization as shown by

his presence at the Glasgow conference where he testified, and the latter from her

grandmother.

In contrast to these two staunch freedom fighters, Sojourner Truth focuses more

on her achievements as a messenger of God. She strongly believes that God has given her

a mission: that of helping her enslaved brothers and sisters to recover their freedom.

Thus, through her “Underground Railroad,” she would lead some 300 former slaves to

freedom. Along the way, the slaves conducted by Truth would benefit from the help of

other people, white or black, who believed in the total emancipation of the Negro. Even

in difficult times, Truth’s faith in God was unflinching. As her narrator says, “…this

perfect trust, based on the rock of Deity was a soul-protecting fortress, which, raising her

above the battlements of fear, and freeing her from machinations of the enemy, impelled

her onward in the struggle, till the foe was vanquished, and the victory gained”(Truth,

39). It is important to remember that Truth did not act single-handedly. She was back up

by the Methodist Church, which she attended for some time before ultimately joining the

Zion’s Church, which was “composed entirely of colored people” (Truth, 45). Truth’s

connections to the Methodist Church give credence to the claim that the Church helped

enfranchise the Negro. She was acting as an individual but also as a member of a certain

church, of a community that believed in freedom.

14

On hindsight, it can be said that the role of the Church in the issue of slavery was

twofold: it helped enslave and later, emancipate the Negro. That role is all the more

important as the Church carries moral authority in many societies, including the

American. Having given its support to the slaveholder and the slave trade, those who

were involved justified their actions with divine law. However, such a justification was

doomed from the beginning because it was based on a distortion of the true Gospel of the

Lord. Once the true Church, no doubt realizing the gravely erroneous use its Southern

sister was making of the Bible, decided to step up to the plate and use its moral authority

to conquer and change the hearts of the slave masters and traders, all barriers to its

success crumbled and divine justice was reestablished. Indeed, as Theodore Parker said in

his comments on the work of abolitionists in The Antislavery Crusade in America, “On

our side are truth, justice, and eternal right. Yes, on our side is religion, the religion of

Christ; on our side are the hopes of mankind, and the great power of God” (Parker, 188).

With the involvement of the Church on the side of justice, the Negro was freed from the

fetters that had kept him shackled for centuries to face yet another plague: racial

discrimination.

15

Works Cited

Primary Sources

Douglass, Frederick. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass. New York: Dover, 1995.

Jacobs, Harriet. Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl. New York: Signet, 2000.

Truth, Sojourner. Narrative of Sojourner Truth. New York: Dover, 1997.

Secondary Sources

Gregory, James M. Frederick Douglass the Orator. Chicago: Afro-Am Press, 1969.

Harrold, Stanley. The Abolitionist and the South 1831-1861. Lexington: The UniversityPress of Kentucky, 1995.

Parker, Theodore. The Antislavery Crusade in America. New York: Arno Press, 1969.

Preston, Dickson J. Young Frederick Douglass. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1980.

Robinson, John Bell. Pictures of Slavery and Antislavery. Miami: Mnemosyn, 1969.

Stange, Douglas Charles. British Unitarians and the South 1831-65. Ontario: AssociatedUniversity Presses, 1984.

Wyatt, Brown Bertan. Lewis Tappan and the Evangelist War against Slavery. New York: Antheneum, 1969.

16