masters; because the signification of them must necessarily be restrained within the bounds of gospel doctrine; and, therefore, we cannot conceive that the apostle intended, by the application of these epithets, to justify any practices which are inconsistent with the benevolence enjoined in other parts of the New Testament; for this would, be liable to produce a contrary effect from that which the apostle expressly intended by his injunction, viz: that "the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed."
Thus it appears, I hope, that the principles, on which the doctrine of the servant's submission is founded, are clearly expressed; so that slaveholders can have no right to avail themselves of any of these texts to enforce an absolute submission; for though these several texts clearly justify the slave, yet they cannot justify the master, unless he "can show that the same principles, (or reason of the law) on which they are founded, hold good also on
his side of the question.[1] Can the slaveholders and African
- ↑ This is apparently the case in the other "different relations of life, mentioned in these contexts," as in the relation between husbands and their wives, parents and their children, but is far otherwise in the relation between masters and their servants, (unless free hired servants are to be understood,) and therefore the objection of my learned friend, drawn from thence, cannot he just. He says, "If the connexion of persons in the two former respects be lawful, so that husbands had a right to the subjection of their wives, and wives a right to the love of their husbands; parents had a right to the honour and obedience of their children, and children a right to maintenance and instruction by their parents; unnatural (says he) is it to imagine the connection between master and slaves was looked upon by him as absolutely unlawful, so that the former had no right to rule the latter! Indeed, he very clearly signifies (says he) that the right of dominion remained, when he opposes doing wrong to obeying in all things their masters according to the flesh, &c. as he does. Coloss. iii. 25." "Ό δε αδικων κομιειται δ ηδικησεν."
But my learned friend has entirely misunderstood the purport and intention of my arguments on these several texts relating to obedience and submission. I have not attempted to prove, by these particular expressions of the apostle, that "the connection
