Christian Slavery: Conversion and Race in the Protestant Atlantic World

Religion was fundamental to the development of both slavery and race in the Protestant Atlantic world. For slaveholders, Christianity was a sign of freedom, and most believed that slaves should not be eligible for conversion. Meanwhile, Protestant missionaries arrived in the plantation colonies in the 1670s and were appalled that most slave owners rejected the prospect of slave conversion. Over time, missionaries increasingly used the language of race to support their arguments for slave conversion. Enslaved Christians, meanwhile, developed an alternate vision of Protestantism that linked religious conversion to literacy and freedom.
This lecture discusses the differing motivations of slave owners, missionaries, and enslaved populations since the 17th century in the Protestant Atlantic.
Speaker: Katharine Gerbner is a McKnight Land-Grant Professor and Assistant Professor of History at the University of Minnesota. Her research explores the religious dimensions of race, authority, and freedom in early America and the Atlantic world.
Learn more about Harvard Divinity School and its mission to illuminate, engage, and serve at hds.harvard.edu/.

[@RavenclawFtW3295]

Those who dare to preach that one person is inherently superior to another are sinning against God.

[@taratulk4657]

Absolutely

[@PirateRadioPodcasts]

Q - Does "Christian" slavery also include any mention of the historic role played by JEWS? Moreover, by "Christian slavery", do you mean, in any way, the 1 million plus white Europeans taken into slavery during the time of the ISLAMIC Barbary Coast? thx

[@haraldbredsdorff2699]

This is, as far as I can tell, just made to destroy protestant faith. They do not talk about slavery among orthodox or Catholics. They do not talk about how this was the standard among all faiths, only protestants actually ended slavery. It is basically, the socialists at it again. Attacking protestant, to replace it with Marxism.

[@pattiyaniandpattiyani6479]

Jesus never had a different attitude to different people. He was like to all

[@truthseeker4298]

Yrs he did.

[@KR811]

Except the Samaritans. Can Christians ever stop lying?

[@luisaymerich9675]

@@KR811 So he played the typical Jew of that era and tested the Samaritan woman, so what? He granted her the miracle she requested.

[@JhutaNabi]

@@KR811 Sure-pheonician, not Samaritan. Jesus was waiting for the Samaritan woman at the well. Get your facts straight. And she was trying to pretend to be a Jew (yeah cultural appropriation isn’t new) and Jesus called her on it. This is what happens when western thinking and culture is super-imposed on a middle eastern faith and a middle eastern messiah. Even. His name is westernized, and He is depicted as an effeminate, long blonde haired, blue eyed man.

[@melissamybubbles6139]

Fascinating. I think some of these concepts have echoes in Mormon studies as well. Thanks!

[@majorroberts9552]

Yes that is correct

[@Jeremy-ge6zv]

Watch video 0n 240 hp 1.25 playback speed ☦️

[@Avaloniswest]

The Gospel is clear: "There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28). This universal mankind concept was unique to Christianity. This coupled with "Do to others as you would have them do to you." (Luke 6:31) and "love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked." (Luke 6:35) - changed the world from the brutal slavery driven pagan world of tribalism (do to others what you want to do to them) and allowed the western civilization to develop and evolve into its unparalleled modern form, gradually getting closer to the Gospel mandate.

[@904alexthegreat]

Tell that to the German man that first printed the book and gave you a god and took the world.

[@Avaloniswest]

@@904alexthegreat What? You do understand that the texts of the New Testament go back to the 1st century and that these were preached in churches since those times. The problem was the Catholic Church kept the texts to their monks and clergy who preached from them, but also added tons of unbiblical information to the original text at the word of their pope and Cardinals (that's where you get your saint worship, Mary interceding for people, indulgences, pergatory, and all those "added" ideas to the original texts written by the contemporaries of Christ, this changed the form of belief over the centuries. During that time there were many who pushed to go back to the text message only, but literacy was poor and these folks were often killed by the establishment. It wasn't until Luther and Gutenberg that this changed and the texts got me into the hands of the people....that being said, Jesus and the core of the Gospel was preached from the 1st century onward, just in a perverted form, so not sure what your point is.

[@904alexthegreat]

Blabberdock my point very clear. Printing press was introduced in 1455. Then the slave trade started with the Catholic Church from Portugal to Africa then to Brazil. Jahann Gutenberg is a man from Germany. That’s who gave you the Bible.

[@Avaloniswest]

@@904alexthegreat You may think you are clear, but you are not. You better just come out and say what you mean instead of beating around the bush, otherwise it is a waste of time.

[@904alexthegreat]

Blabberdock psalms 84:11. The only truth in the book

[@paulettemorgan9959]

Protestant Supremacy, eye opening !

[@captainmarvel76927]

The Catholic Church had destroyed slavery and had always officially stood against it. When slavery began again in 1400s the Papalcy wrote a bull of excommunication on those spanish who took the canary islands and islanders. Only in the Protestant rebellion do u have this evil legacy rise once more: 9) The One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church: by name in Scripture chapter/verse is declared in Acts 9:31, "[31] Now the church had peace throughout all Judea, and Galilee, and Samaria; and was edified, walking in fear of the Lord, and was filled with the consolation of the Holy Ghost." Catholic is derived from late Latin (Universa) via the Greek, "Katholikos," meaning universal. Katholikos comes from the Greek adjective, "Katholou meaning "on the whole," "according to the whole," "throughout all" or "in general." Universa means "for/of all nations" as in KJV Mark 11:17 "Is it not written my house shall be called of ALL NATIONS the house of Prayer?" Thus in Acts 9:31: we have Church: EKKLESIA "KATHOLES" Church of the Whole, aka Church Universal or the Universal Church. Our Blessed Lord said he would found "My Church" in Matthew 16, aka one Church. Thus formally, you have One (Matthew 16: singular unit) Holy ("consolation of the Holy Ghost," the soul of Christ's Church) Catholic (Katholes-Unvisersal) Apostolic (One who is sent, going back to the great commission of Christ to his Apostles (Matthew 28:16-20*)) Church (EKKLESIA). The word of the Lord. *"[16] And the eleven disciples went into Galilee, unto the mountain where Jesus had appointed them. [17] And seeing him they adored: but some doubted. [18] And Jesus coming, spoke to them, saying: All power is given to me in heaven and in earth. [19] Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world."

[@haraldbredsdorff2699]

I am sorry? You are pretending that their was no slavery to central or south america? Protestants where the ones who ended slavery, not your popes, who at this time seem to preferer communism rather than Christianity.

[@AndyRhodes1]

I recently wrote an article that includes a section on Quaker history regarding slavery. I quote Katharine Gerbner several times. I would love to hear what you think of it. Here's the section: Another book, historian Katharine Gerbner’s Christian Slavery: Conversion and Race in the Protestant Atlantic World, claims, “It was through the mouths of ministers that the brutal slave laws…were enunciated, year after year.” Anti-slavery writers belonged to a very tiny minority in church history. Their views were not adopted by groups of Christians until the 17th century Quakers. And, yet, as Gerbner notes, there were thousands of Quaker slave owners. Believers often point to the denomination of the Quakers as leaders in the abolition movement. The National Park Service explains, “The 1688 Germantown Quaker Petition against slavery was the first protest against African American slavery made by a religious body in the English colonies.” Consider the timing of this: at the beginning of the Enlightenment and at almost the same historical moment as England’s 1688-89 Glorious Revolution when the philosopher John Locke was writing about natural rights in his Second Treatise of Government. New visions of human rights were ruminating in pockets within Europe and America. PBS notes, “In 1776, Quakers were prohibited from owning slaves, and 14 years later they petitioned the U.S. Congress for the abolition of slavery.” The majority of them were pro-slavery until the mid-1700s, long after Enlightenment humanism had begun to change the ethical views of various intellectuals. Gerbner has noted that the 1688 document was written by Quakers of Dutch and German descent, but not signed by members of this sect from an English background. She clarified this in an interview by stating, “The protest was fascinating, but I quickly became more interested in the fact that it was rejected by the English Quakers in Philadelphia.” As Encyclopedia.com describes the Quaker movement against slavery: “The early history of antislavery in America consisted primarily of the agitation of certain British and American Quakers, but even in this group antislavery sentiments grew slowly because many wealthy Quakers were slave-holders. Only by the mid-1700s, when the Society of Friends faced a severe internal crisis brought on by the effects of the Great Awakening and the Seven Years War, did opposition to slavery increase measurably among Quakers. It was not until the 1780s that the major Quaker meetings could announce that their membership was free of slaveholders.” A similar conclusion can be drawn from a summary given in the interview with Gerbner mentioned above: “Some of the first ‘antislavery’ Quakers, like Morgan Godwyn, actually based their arguments on racist claims, and encouraged Friends to exclude Africans from their households completely. Conversely, slave-owning Quakers sometimes went farther than others in arguing for spiritual equality - but they did so in order to defend slavery. Recognizing the complexities of early Quaker debates on slavery helps to explain why it took a century for Friends to disown slave-owners in their meetings.” She mentions that several Quaker anti-slavery tracts from the late 17th century and early 18th century were in large part motivated by racial discomfort in that they promoted abolition as a way to exclude black people from white Quaker communities. These writings de-emphasize the point of equal human rights for all people and instead focus on the need to separate the races. Social historian J. William Frost spent much of his career dedicated to studying the history of the Quakers (Society of Friends). He remarked: "Friends have long been somewhat puzzled, perhaps even embarrassed, that the two most prominent 17th-century Quakers, George Fox and William Penn, made so slight a contribution to the Quaker-led early antislavery movement….the Penns bought and sold slaves and hired the labour of other slaves…Because Fox never addressed the morality of slavery per se, his writings on slavery could be used by conservative slave-owning Friends in Philadelphia Yearly Meeting in 1701 to silence the abolitionists….At a time when a considerable number of Pennsylvania Quakers questioned the morality of slavery, the conservatives in control of the press saw in Fox’s acceptance of slavery a means of neutralising the nascent anti-slavery movement." The full article is titled, "The Bible Clearly Supports Chattel Slavery Based On Race And Gender". It can be found by searching for "Disagreements I Have With Christianity Andy Rhodes".

[@AndyRhodes1]

Not one verse in the Bible advocates for ending the practice of owning another person. A possible exception can be found in the early chapters of Exodus where the Old Testament God intends to free his people from slavery in Egypt. This does not mean much, given that after being led out of Egypt the Jews were taught by God in great detail (Exodus 21) exactly how to keep Jewish slaves as indentured servants or chattel, depending on the circumstances. What is equally distressing to modern readers is that God gave the Jews explicit instructions in Leviticus 25:44-46 on the procedure for buying foreign slaves and keeping them and their children as chattel property for life. Also in the Torah, there is an example of God telling the Jews that they must keep the survivors of the Promised Land conquests as chattel slaves, especially the women (Deuteronomy 20:10-18, 21:10-11). A section in Isaiah 14:1-2 announces that the Jews are promised a future in which they will enslave all other people groups of the world. They “will possess the nations as male and female slaves in the Lord’s land”. The New Testament continues this trend of approved human subjugation with multiple stories by Jesus about slavery, including where he declares the relationship between God and humankind to be like the connection between earthly masters and slaves. He makes no criticism of slavery. He speaks as if the institution is normal and acceptable, even saying that God and human masters are justified in torturing disobedient slaves (Matthew 18:21-35). The writings of the apostles Paul and Peter include commanding slaves in five different books to obey their masters with reverence, fear, respect, sincerity, and love as if toward Christ, even when the slave owner is harsh. Slaves are to try and please their owners at all times, not just when being observed (Ephesians 6:5-6, Colossians 3:22, Titus 2:9-10, 1 Peter 2:18). The enslaved are directed to work even harder for Christian masters, since they are fellow believers. At the end of one of these instructive sections, Paul says: “Anyone who teaches something different is arrogant and lacks understanding….Their minds are corrupt, and they have turned their backs on the truth.” (1 Timothy 6:1-5a) Christians are “slaves of God”. (Romans 6:16-23) All of the biblical passages mentioned in the last paragraph offer sturdy guardrails to follow when interpreting proclamations of general spiritual freedom such as in Galatians: “There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28 NIV) The message: Be spiritually free, but remain in the physical situation you were in previously.

[@maryboynton2067]

First of All if a Person Doesn't have Love They Are Nothing and so They Really Aren't christian masters, They are worldly folks and in Most situations if a Christian listens to and follow Their advice then They will become more of a Non Believer as Their Masters are. This stuff is Do Messy Their Are Very few that are Teaching Gods Word out of fear, fame and fortune, One Must b Willing to Los Their Lives In Order to be For Real and Ain't hardly Nobody trying to do that, The Example was how Most of the Disciples had to leave Everyone Else except Those that They were commissioned to Minister to for The Cause of Christ, Even Their Lives Manytimes, these people aren't willing to Really die just leave a legacy that Won't last because Only What We Do for Christ Will Last, There's going to be a new heaven and earth, so whatever in the legacy department.

[@jackiechan3509]

Blacks in America are known as people of the Gospel I do not know any Black that calls himself or herself a Christian

[@pierreferguson5257]

Genesis 9:24 So Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger grandson had done to him. 25 Then he said: “Cursed be Canaan; A servant of servants He shall be to his brethren.” 26 And he said: “Blessed be the Lord, The God of Shem, And may Canaan be his servant [Joshua 9]. 27 May God enlarge Japheth, And may he dwell in the tents of Shem; And may Canaan be his servant.” Genesis 10:6 The sons of Ham were Cush [Ethiopia, Sub-Saharan Africa], Mizraim [Egypt, North Africa], Put [Lybia, North Africa], and Canaan [Palestine, Lebanon, parts of western Syria, and parts of western Jordan, West Asia].

[@clarkent61]

Isn't it interesting that Noah took no responsibility for his unfortunate actions? Cursing his own children was his response to his failings in setting a good example? Is it not convenient for those with an ungodly agenda to use the words of this Noah fellow to justify a parochial and unjust premise? This is why Jesus Christ should be the standard.

[@pierreferguson5257]

@@clarkent61 Was there a law at the time for Noah to not drink wine and be drunk in his tent? Noah only cursed his grandson Canaan, NOT anyone else.

[@clarkent61]

@@@pierreferguson5257: Why curse anyone for his own moral failing is the point.

[@pierreferguson5257]

@@clarkent61 Did the living God rebuke and chasten Noah for cursing Canaan after he awoke from his wine and knew what his younger grandson had done to him? Did the living God bless the children of Israel w/ land, etc., from the curse of Canaan?

[@clarkent61]

@@@pierreferguson5257 : I'm sure that the living God must have had some choice words for Noah. The actions of Noah are in complete violation to the witness of Jesus Christ and by the way, Jesus Christ is the living God, right?

[@monicapayne4865]

They made slave laws yet they never discuss BUCK BREAKING

[@clarkent61]

Spiritual slavery and physical slavery... interesting compromise.

[@truthseeker4298]

Evil concoction

[@ivanos_95]

I'm a honest Christian, so I will not act like I'm against slavery, or search for stupid excuses, just to make my religion more attractive for the non-Christians. Sure, treating another man as God and trading slaves for money is immoral, but slavery is the only moral solution for the criminals and the only way to avoid the actual (heaviest) sin that is murder.

[@alphasylpheed3861]

"but slavery is the only moral solution for the criminals and the only way to avoid the actual (heaviest) sin that is murder." That is a lie.

[@TheCissero]

Stop enslaving animals brutality, they deserve inclusion and diversity status.

[@andrewmccall2421]

Speak clear Lisa Rosa...say what you mean

[@ogtwain]

Your mother is an animal too correct?

[@TheCissero]

Your are not god

[@monicapayne4865]

@@TheCissero You are aware GOD didn't create everybody.

[@jpmisterioman]

Poor Girl, she was brainwashed. A shame to see where historiography has reached.

[@MA-gv3wg]

Past is the past. Harvard studies are towards history. Do you understand the "truth" about the past? Can you accept what actually happen? or do you feel threaten and attacked because our ancestors did a heinous crime against humanity? If you are a noble person, no need get angry. Trust me, she is not pro or con. She is just explaining about the past. Respectfully.

[@jpmisterioman]

@@MA-gv3wg a lot of unquestioned presuppositions in your comment. Also a failure in understanding how data is prefabricated. I see you're no better than her. Take care.