• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Different approaches to ending slavery in 1850/60s America.

5 point Gillinist

Active Member
I've recently noticed a trend of John Brown veneration. People speak of him as a hero, yet I suspect it has more to do with his political violence and murder of people that he disagreed with, rather than any actual moral stance.
Nevertheless it got me to thinking about the matter of the abolition of slavery, and other matters that we, as Christians seek to end, abortion for instance.
I've read both accounts of John Brown, and Robert E. Lee. Both were professing Christians. In regards to the abolition of slavery, both were in favor of it's end, both wanted it ended, but the two had very opposite means.
John Brown (who is often touted as a hero in my state - I find this view disgusting) was a fanatic, who murdered pro-slavery men in front of their families, kidnapped a boy (though he was later released), and shot a freed slave at Harper's ferry who was just trying to do his job. Though he used the bible as justification, his goal clearly had little to do with ending slavery for the sake of loving one's neighbor, or even for the sake of the Imago Dei. But, as was his intent for seizing a government armory, to use his theatrics to make a spectacle of himself in a federal trial, in order to drawn attention to abolition.
Robert E. Lee, however, seems to have approached the matter with both love for neighbor, taking into account that men are made in the image of God, and in a sincere belief in the power and sovereignty of God. He regularly prayed that God would end slavery, he freed the slaves that he inherited from his wife's family's estate, and also, with regard to Heyward Shepherd (the freed slave who was murdered by Brown's gang) when questioned by Brown's wife as to why he was turned over to the town for justice;
"Can you tell me please, sir, who ordered you to give my husband up to the Virginia people when he was surrendered to you on the Arsenal grounds?" She knew it had been Brown's plan to be taken in custody by the United States Government and use his trial in Federal Court as a public platform to rail against slavery.
As Mrs. Brown said this, General Lee settled in the saddle, gathering the reins in his hand, and faced her. In the shadowy light under the depot shed, noting the paleness of her face and her watery eyes, he spoke to her, "Ma'am, I placed Mr. Brown in the custody of the United States Marshall, as my orders required. Thereafter the civil authorities directed the sheriff of the county to take custody." Then, tipping his hat to her, he leaned back slightly in the saddle and turned his horse away.
Mrs. Brown called out to him in a vehement voice, "But why would the national government give him up to Virginia?"
Lee reined in and half turned his horse, looking down at her. They looked at each other saying nothing. Then he shook his head and said in a low voice, "Your husband murdered the baggageman outside the gates."
Mrs. Brown stepped forward, her face flushing, her fists clenched. "But that man was no citizen of Virginia."
"No," General Lee said as he began moving away, "but he was a man."
What are your guy's thoughts on the matter? Brown's legacy certainly has had an impact on political extremists today - his use of violence is a source of inspiration to them.
But I view Lee's as the Christian response to the matter to be far more in line with how we as Christians are to combat modern evils, as well as the temptation to answer violence with violence.
 

DaveXR650

Well-Known Member
If you are interested in this from first hand accounts I recommend "Fugitive Slave Law. The Religious Duty of Obedience to Law: a Sermon by Ichabod Spencer". I had it on my Kindle. They remove it after a while but I see it is still available - for free. Similar to what you are talking about, in the 1850's some Presbyterian ministers had sort of a running debate via sermons regarding how a Christian should respond to the Fugitive Slave Law, which demanded that even in free boarder states runaway slaves must be turned over to authorities or people would face huge fines and so on. I believe, if I remember right, Ichabod believed that you had to obey the law even though he was against slavery. Others though preached that it was perfectly alright to "overlook" runaway slaves, or actively assist them and hide them from authorities, and others said it was perfectly acceptable to resist the authorities, with violence if necessary. Ichabod predicted in the 1850's that this would end in blood.
 
Top