Knoxville, June 23d, 1856.

A SERMON ON SLAVERY.

Delivered by the undersigned in Temperance Hall in Knoxville, on Sabbath, 8th of June, 1856, to a large and attentive audience, composed of citizens and strangers--some from the North and some from the South--occupying one hour and a quarter in the delivery. It is published as it was delivered, without an omission or an alteration. Respectfully, &c.,

W. G. BROWNLOW.

TEXT.--"Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of G.o.d and his doctrine be not blasphemed."--1 Tim. vi. 1.

Whoever reflects upon the nature of man, will find him to be almost entirely the creature of circ.u.mstances: his habits and sentiments are, in a great measure, the growth of advent.i.tious circ.u.mstances and causes; hence the endless variety and condition of our species. That race of men in our country known as Abolitionists, Free-soilers, or Black Republicans, look upon any deviation from the constant round in which _they_ have been spinning out the thread of their existence as a departure from nature's great system; and, from a known principle of our nature, the first impulse of these fanatics is to condemn. It is thus that the man born and matured in a free State looks upon slavery as unnatural and horrible, and in violation of every law of justice or humanity! And it is not uncommon to hear bigots of this character, in their churches at the North, imploring the Divine wrath to shower down the consuming fires of heaven on that great Sodom and Gomorrah of the New World, all that section of country south of Mason and Dixon's line, where this unjust practice prevails.

When an unprejudiced and candid mind examines into the past condition of our race, and learns the fact which history develops, as the inquirer will, that a majority of mankind were _slaves_, he will be driven to the melancholy reflection, that the world, when first peopled by G.o.d himself, was not a world of freemen, but of _slaves_!

Slavery was really established and sanctioned by Divine authority among even G.o.d's chosen people, the favored children of Israel. Abraham, the founder of this interesting nation, and the chosen servant of the Most High, was the owner of more slaves than any cotton-planter in South Carolina or Mississippi. That magnificent shrine, the gorgeous temple of Solomon, commenced and completed under the pious promptings of religion and ancient Free-Masonry, was reared alone by the hands of slaves!

Egypt's venerable and enduring pyramids were reared by the hands of slaves! Involuntary servitude, reduced to a science, existed in ancient a.s.syria and Babylon. The ten tribes of Israel were carried off to a.s.syria by Shalmanezer, and the two strong tribes of Judah were subsequently carried in triumph by Nebuchadnezzar to end their days in Babylon as slaves, and to labor to adorn the city. Ancient Phoenicia and Carthage were literally overrun with slavery, because the slave population outnumbered the free and the owners of slaves! The Greeks and Trojans, at the siege of Troy, were attended with large numbers of their slaves. Athens, and Sparta, and Thebes--indeed, the whole Grecian and Roman worlds--had more slaves than freemen. And in those ages which succeeded the extinction of the Roman empire in the West, slaves were the most numerous cla.s.s. Even in the days of civilization and Christian light which revolutionized governments, laboring serfs and abject slaves were distributed throughout Eastern Europe, and a portion of Western Asia--conclusively showing that slavery existed over these boundless regions. In China, the worst forms of slavery have existed since its earliest history. And when we turn to Africa, we find slavery, in all its most horrid forms, existing throughout its whole extent, the slaves outnumbering the freemen at least three to one. Looking, then, to the whole world, we may with confidence a.s.sert, that slavery in its worst forms subdues by far the largest portion of the human race!

Now, the inquiry is, how has slavery risen and thus spread over our whole earth? We answer, by the _laws of war_, _the state of property_, _the feebleness of governments_, the thirst for _bargain and sale_, the _increase of crime_, and last, but not least, _by and with the consent and approbation of Deity_!

These remarks may suffice by way of an introduction, and they will serve to indicate the course we intend to pursue, if the announcement of the text has not already done that. _Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor_, &c. The word here rendered _servants_ means SLAVES, converted to the Christian faith; and the word rendered _yoke_ signifies the _state of slavery_ in which Christ and the apostles found the world involved when the Christian Church was first organized. By the word rendered _masters_ we are to understand the heathen masters of those Christianized slaves. Even these, in such circ.u.mstances, and under such domination, are commanded to treat their masters with all honor and respect, that the name of G.o.d, by which they were called, and the doctrine of G.o.d, to wit, Christianity, which they had professed, might not be blasphemed, might not be evil spoken of in consequence of their improper conduct. Civil rights are never abolished by any communication from G.o.d's Spirit; and those fiery bigots at the North who propose to abolish the inst.i.tution of slavery in this country are not following the dictates of G.o.d's Spirit or law. The civil state in which a man was before his conversion, is not altered by that conversion; nor does the grace of G.o.d absolve him from any claims which the State, his neighbor, or lawful owner may have had on him. All these outward things continue unaltered: hence, if a man be under the sentence of death for murder, and G.o.d see fit to convert him, he is not released from suffering the extreme penalty of the law!

The Church of Christ, when originally const.i.tuted, claimed no right, _as an ecclesiastical organization_, to interfere in any way with the civil government. This was the principle upon which the Church was founded, as announced by its immortal Head. When Christ was doomed by a cruel Roman law to its most ignominious condemnation, he did not so much as resist it, because _it was law_, nor did he complain of it as oppressive.

"Then Pilate entered into the judgment-hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?...

Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now is my kingdom not from hence.... To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth."--John xviii. 33-37.

When Christ came into the world on the business of his mission, he found the Jewish people subject to the dominion of the Roman kingdom; and in no instance did he counsel the Jews to rebellion, or incite them to throw off the Roman yoke, as do the vagabond philanthropists of the North in reference to the existing laws of the United States upon the subject of slavery. Christ was, by lineal descent, "THE KING OF THE JEWS," but he did not a.s.sert his temporal power, but actually refused to be crowned in that right.

Under the Roman law, human liberty was held by no more certain tenure than the whim of the sovereign power, protected by no definite const.i.tution. Slavery const.i.tuted the most powerful and essential element of the government, and that slavery was of the most cruel character, and gave to the master absolute discretion over the lives of the slaves. Notwithstanding all this, Christ did not make war upon the existing government, nor denounce the rulers for conferring such powers, although he looked upon cruel legislation in the light in which the character of his mission required. And although the _Church itself_ was not what it should have been, in no instance did Christ ever denounce _that_. The only denunciations the Saviour ever uttered, were those against the doctors and lawyers, ministers and expounders of the Jewish code of ecclesiastical law.

But allow us to present the case of the Apostle Paul, as proof more palpable and overwhelming, on this very point. He had been falsely accused, cruelly imprisoned, and tyrannically arraigned; and that, too, before a licentious governor, an unjust and dissipated ruler, and an unprincipled infidel. The Roman law in force at the time arrested the freedom of speech, denied the rights of conscience, and even forbade the free expression of opinion in all matters conflicting with the provisions of the laws of the Roman government. In his defence before Felix, Paul never so much as speaks of Roman law, though well acquainted with it, but "he reasoned of _righteousness_, and _temperance_, and the _judgment to come_." Here was a suitable occasion to condemn the regulations and to question the authority of the villainous statutes of Rome; but instead of this, Paul plead his rights _under_ the unjust regulations of the law. He charged Felix with _official_ delinquency, with _personal_ crime, and, as a _man_, he held him up to public scorn, and threatened him with the vengeance of G.o.d! He appealed _to the law_, and justified himself _by the law_. He claimed the rights of a "_Roman citizen_"--demanded the protection due to a Roman citizen--and he scorned to find fault with the law, cruel and unjust as he knew it to be. And the consequence was, that the licentious infidel who ruled, "_trembled_."

The views we have here presented are not at all new, but have been uniformly acted upon by evangelical Christians, in all ages of the world. Since the days of St. Paul and Simon Peter, no reformer has appeared who was more violent than that good and great man, MARTIN LUTHER. JOHN CALVIN possessed a revolutionary spirit--he fought every thing he believed to be wrong--he was unyielding in his disposition, and unmitigated in his severity. Yet neither of these great men ever made war upon the existing laws of their respective countries. JOHN WESLEY was the great reformer of the past century--he reformed the whole ecclesiastical machinery of the modern Church of Christ; and his doctrines, and manner of conducting revivals, are leading elements of American Christianity. But Mr. Wesley never made war upon the English government, under which he lived and died. On the other hand, it is a matter of serious complaint among sectarians not friendly to the spread of Methodism, that Wesley wrote elaborately against the war of the Revolution. He was devoted to law and order, and he deemed it a religious duty to oppose all resistance to existing laws. In his troubles at Savannah, Georgia, like Paul before the licentious governor, he appealed _to the law_, and sought by every means in his power to be tried _under_ the law, asking only the privilege of being heard in his own defence! And it was, in all the instances we have mentioned, "_that the name of G.o.d and his doctrine be not blasphemed_,"

to quote the expressive language of the text, that existing laws have been adhered to by the propagators of gospel truth.

The essential principles of the great moral law delivered to Moses by G.o.d himself, are set forth in what is called the tenth commandment, in the 20th chapter of Exodus: "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his _man-servant_, nor his _maid servant_, nor his ox, nor his a.s.s, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's." Now, the only true interpretation of this portion of the Word of G.o.d is, that the species of property mentioned are _lawful_, and that all men are forbid to disturb others in the lawful enjoyment of their property. "Man-servants and maid-servants" are distinctly _consecrated as property_, and guaranteed to man for his exclusive benefit--proof irresistible that slavery was thus ordained by G.o.d himself. We have seen learned dissertations from the pens of Abolitionists, saying, that the term "servant," and not "slave," is used here. To this we reply, that both the Hebrew and Greek words translated "servant," mean also "slave," and are more frequently used in this sense than in the former. Besides, the Hebrew Scriptures teach us, that G.o.d especially authorized his peculiar people to _purchase_ "BONDMEN FOR EVER;" and if to be in _bondage for ever_ does not const.i.tute _slavery_, we yield the point.

The visionary notions of piety and philanthropy entertained by many men at the North, lead them to resist the _Fugitive Slave Law_ of this government, and even to _violate the tenth commandment_, by stealing our "men-servants and maid-servants," and running them into what they call free territory. Nay, the _villainous piety_ of some leads them to contribute _Sharpe's Rifles_ and _Holy Bibles_, to send the _uncirc.u.mcised Philistines_ of New England into Kansas and Nebraska, to shoot down the Christian owners of slaves, and then to perform religious ceremonies over their dead bodies! Clergymen lay aside their Bibles at the North, and females, as in the case of that model beauty, _Harriet Beecher Stowe_, uns.e.x themselves to carry on this horrid and slanderous warfare against slaveholders of the South! And English travellers, steeped to the nose and chin in prejudices against this government and our inst.i.tutions, have written books upon the subject. The Halls, Hamiltons, Trollopes, and Miss Martineaus, _et ed omne genus_, all have misrepresented us! These English writers all denounce slavery, and eulogize _Democracy_; as if an Englishman could be a Democrat, in the modern, vulgar sense of the term, and be a consistent man!

But we do not propose, in this brief discourse, to enter into any defence of the African slave trade. Although the evils of it are greatly exaggerated, its evils and cruelties, its barbarities, are not justified by the most ultra slaveholders of this age. The vile traffic was abolished by the United States, even before the British Parliament prohibited it. All the powers in the world have subsequently prohibited this trade--some of the more influential and powerful of them declaring it _piracy_, and covering the African seas with armed vessels to prevent it!

This trade, which seems so shocking to the feelings of mankind, dates its origin as far back as the year 1442. Antony Gonzales, a Portuguese mariner, while exploring the coast of Africa, was the first to steal some _Moors_, and was subsequently forced by Prince Henry of Portugal to carry them back to Africa. In the year 1502, the Spaniards began to steal negroes, and employ them in the mines of Hispaniola, Cuba, and Jamaica. In 1517, the Emperor Charles V. granted a _patent_ to certain privileged persons, _to steal exclusively_ a supply of 4,000 negroes annually, for these islands!

African slaves were first imported into America in 1620, a century after their introduction into the West Indies. The first cargo, of twenty Africans, by a Dutch vessel, was brought up the James River, into Virginia, and sold out as slaves. England then being the most commercial of European nations, engrossed the trade; and from 1680 to 1780, there were imported into the British Possessions alone, TWO MILLIONS OF SLAVES--making an average annual importation of more than 20,000! And the annual importation into America has transcended 50,000! The States of this Union, north of Mason and Dixon's Line, commonly called the New England States, were never, to any great extent, _slaveholding_; their virtuous and pious minds were chiefly exercised in _slave-stealing_ and _slave-selling_! To Old England our New England States owe their knowledge of the art of slave-stealing; and to New England these Southern States are wholly indebted for their slaves. They stole the African from his native land, and sold him into bondage for the sake of gain. They kept but few of their captives among themselves, because it was not profitable to use negro labor in the cold and sterile regions of New England. And when they enacted laws in the New England States abolishing slavery, they brought their negroes into the South and sold them before their laws could go into operation! This is the true history of slavery in New England. They stole and sold property which it was not profitable to keep, and for which they now refuse all warranty. And what few American ships are in the trade now, at the peril of piracy, are New England ships.

The pious and religious portion of New England Abolitionists, we take it, are the better portion, and in these we have no sort of confidence.

Take, for example, the case of that great man, and powerful pulpit orator, STEPHEN OLIN, who came into Georgia, and was introduced into the ministry by BISHOP ANDREW and his friends, and by this means married a lady owning a number of slaves. He sold them all for the money, pocketed the money, and returned to his congenial North; and when BISHOP ANDREW was arraigned before the General Conference of 1844, because he had married a widow lady owning a few slaves, this man OLIN appeared on the floor, and spoke and voted against the Bishop! Dr. Olin had washed his hands of the sin of slavery--had his money out at interest--and he was ready to plead for the rights of the poor African! May we not exclaim, "Lord, what is man?"

We are acquainted with many of the leading Abolitionists of the North connected with the Methodist Church; and although we suppose they are about as good as the Abolitionists of other denominations we have no confidence in them. The most of them would enter their fine churches on the Sabbath, preach for hours against the sin of slavery, shed their tears over the oppressions of the "servile progeny of Ham," in these Southern States; and on the next day, in a purely business transaction, behind a counter, or in the settlement of an account, cheat a Southern slave out of the _pewter_ that ornaments the head of his cane!

There is much in the political papers of the country calculated, if not intended, to fan a flame of intense warfare upon the subject of slavery, which can result in no possible good to any one. Those politicians who are exciting the whole country, and fanning society into a livid consuming flame, particularly at the North, have no sympathies for the black man, and care nothing for his comfort. They only seek their own glory. This political disquiet and commotion is giving birth to new and loftier schemes of agitation and disunion, among the vile Abolitionists of the country, and to bold and hazardous enterprises in the States and Territories. And many of our Southern altars smoke with the vile incense of Abolitionism. We have scores of Abolitionists in the South, in disguise--designing men--some filling our pulpits--some occupying high positions in our colleges--some editing political and religious papers--some selling goods--and some following one calling and some another, who, though among us, are not of us, Southern men may rest a.s.sured!

We endorse, without reserve, that much-abused sentiment of a distinguished South Carolina statesmen, now no more, that "slavery is the corner-stone of our republican edifice;" while we repudiate, as ridiculously absurd, that much-lauded, but nowhere-accredited dogma of MR. JEFFERSON, that "all men are born equal." G.o.d never intended to make the _butcher_ a judge, nor the _baker_ a president, but to protect them according to their claims as butcher and baker. Pope has beautifully expressed this sentiment, where he has said:

"Order is heaven's first law, and this confessed, _Some are_, and _must be_, greater than the rest."

We have gone among the free negroes at the North--we have visited their miserable dwellings in Philadelphia, New York, Boston, and other points; and, in every instance, we have found them more miserable and dest.i.tute, as a whole, than the slave population of the South. In our Southern States, where negroes have been set at liberty, in nine cases out of ten their conditions have been made worse; while the most wretched, indolent, immoral, and dishonest cla.s.s of persons to be found in the Southern States, are _free persons of color_.

The freedom of negroes in even the Northern States, is, in all respects, only an empty name. The citizen negro does not vote, and takes good care not to do so. The law does not interdict him this privilege, but if he attempt to avail himself of the privilege, he is apprehensive of "apostolic blows and kicks," which the pious Abolitionists will administer to him. All the social advantages, all the respectable employments, all the honors, and even the pleasures of life, are denied the free negroes of the North, by citizens full of sympathy for the down-trodden African! The negro cannot get into an omnibus, cannot enter a bar-room frequented by whites, nor a church, nor a theatre; nor can he enter the cabin of a steamboat, in one of the Northern rivers or lakes, or enter a first cla.s.s pa.s.senger car on one of their railroads. They are not suffered to enter a stage-coach with whites, but are forced upon the deck, whether it shall rain or shine--whether it be hot or cold.

Industry is closed to them, and they are forced to live as _servants_ in hotels, or adopt the professions of barber, or boot-black, or open oysters in saloons, or sell villainous liquors to the lower cla.s.ses of German and Irish emigrants, who throng our large cities and towns. The negroes even have their _own streets_, and their own low-down kennels; they have their hospitals, their churches, their cars, upon which are written in large letters, "FOR COLORED PEOPLE!" Finally, they are forced to have their own _grave-yards_--the _yellow_ remains of Northern Abolitionists, and pious white men, refusing to mingle with the bleeching bones of the dead negro! While, in the South, they crowd the galleries and back seats in our churches, travel in our pa.s.senger cars, and even _loan their money_ to our white men at interest! Such is an outline of the contrast between free negroes at the North, and slaves at the South.

Let us turn again to the Holy Scriptures, and see whether or not they sustain or condemn the inst.i.tution of slavery. The opposers of slavery profess to be governed alone by the teachings of the Bible, in their war upon this inst.i.tution. It is vain to look to Christ or any of his apostles to justify the blasphemous perversions of the word of G.o.d, continually paraded before the world by these graceless agitators.

Although slavery in its most revolting forms was everywhere visible around them, no visionary notions of piety or schemes of philanthropy ever tempted either Christ or one of his apostles to gainsay the LAW, even to mitigate the cruel severity of the slavery system then existing.

On the contrary, finding slavery _established by law_, as well as an _inevitable and necessary consequence_, growing out of the condition of human society, their efforts were to sustain the inst.i.tution. Hence, St.

Paul actually apprehended a "_fugitive slave_," and sent him back to his lawful owner and earthly master!

Having already appealed to the authority of the Old Testament Scriptures, we turn to that of the New, where we learn that slavery existed in the earliest days of the Christian Church, and that both _masters_ and _slaves_ were members of the same Christian congregations.

Slavery was an inst.i.tution of the State in the Roman Empire, as it is in the Southern States of this confederacy, and the apostles did not feel at liberty to denounce it, if, indeed, they felt the least opposition to it--a thing we deny.

But, before we appeal to the irresistible authority of the New Testament, we will submit a few only of a great many pa.s.sages from the Old Testament--not having quoted as extensively as may have been deemed necessary:

"And he said, I _am_ Abraham's servant."--GEN. xxiv. 34.

"And there was of the house of Saul a _servant_, whose name was Ziba; and when they had called him unto David, the king said unto him, Art thou Ziba? And he said, _Thy servant is he_."--2 SAM. ix. 2.

"Then the king called to Ziba, Saul's _servant_, and said unto him, I have given unto thy _master's_ son all that pertained to Saul, and to all his house."--Verse 9th.

"Thou, therefore, and thy sons, and thy _servants_, shall till the land for him, and thou shalt bring in _the fruits_, that thy _master's_ son may have food to eat, &c. Now Ziba had fifteen sons and TWENTY SERVANTS."--Verse 10th.

"I got me _servants_ and maidens, and had _servants born in my house_; also, I had great possessions of great and small cattle, above all that were in Jerusalem before me."--ECCLES.

ii. 7.

"And he said, Hagar, Sarai's maid, whence camest thou? And she said, I flee from the face of my _mistress_ Sarai."--GEN. xvi.

8.

"And the Angel of the Lord said unto her, _Return to thy mistress_, and submit thyself to her hands."--Verse 9th.

The only comments we have to offer upon these pa.s.sages are, first, one individual acknowledges himself the owner of twenty slaves! Another was raising slaves, and having them born in his house!! And last, but not least, the angel of G.o.d ordered the fugitive slave to return to her lawful owner!! High authority, this, for apprehending runaway slaves!

In reference to bad servants, we read in Prov. xxix. 19:

"A servant will not be corrected by _words_; for though he understand, he will not answer."

The Scriptures look to the correction of servants, and really enjoin it, as they do in the case of children. We esteem it the duty of Christian masters to feed and clothe well, and in cases of disobedience to _whip well_.