REJECTED OF MEN:
THE CHANGIEG REUGIOUS VIEWS
OF WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON
AND FREDERLCK DDUGLASS

Thesis for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHSGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
WSLUAM LLOYD VAR DEBURG

1973

  
 
  

a...
“BETTY-.2

Michig “ans ‘
U1 n‘fets‘ Y fr:

TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT TTTTT TTTTTTTTTTTTTT

31293 01730 9521

 

 

ABSTRACT

REJECTED OF MEN: THE CHANGING RELIGIOUS VIEWS OF
WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON AND FREDERICK DOUGLASS

By
William Lloyd Van Deburg

During the ante-bellun period of American history, a group
of reformers known as the Garrisonian abolitionists sought to ef-
fect a moral revolution in the minds and lives of the nation‘s citi-
zenry. In their caapaign to eradicate the national sin of slavery,
as they termed it, the Garrisonians censured the actions of all
those who would not bear unqualified testimony against the evils of
the southern labor system. By so doing, they alienated a large seg-
ment of the nation's clergy.

Two of the major participants in the antislavery struggle,
William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick Douglass, were so greatly in-
fluenced by their involvement in the crusade against slavery that
their religious beliefs changed significantly over the decades. The
refusal of the majority of the nation's "orthodox" churchmen to Join
the abolitionists in denouncing slavery led Garrison to reexamine
the eminently orthodox beliefs of his youth while causing him to turn
to the nation's more liberal religionists for aid and religious in-
struction. Scorned by white churchmen both as a black Christian and
as a Garrisonian abolitionist,(Douglass found it impossible to re-
spect the religious profession of Christians whose characters were
tarnished by anti-Negro prejudice? Eventually_this feeling contri-
QBEQG-1IportantlywtoehisgreJectionlof,the_"wonder-working‘power"of

téglghgiatiapef 90d-

William Lloyd Van Deburg

Using manuscript materials, contemporary newspapers, and the
published works of the two abolitionists, this study traces the re-
ligious evolution of Garrison and Douglass from the orthodoxy of
youth to the religious liberalism of later life. While no attempt is
made to forward the idea that a single, overriding factor or event
can explain all of the changes which were effected in their theologi-
cal beliefs, it is suggested that to be "rejected of men"-—to be
scorned and rebuked by the very segments of society from which they
had hoped to receive aid and comfort-~was definitely a traumatic ex-
perience for both men. The experience of rejection not only made
the abolitionists wary of all pronouncements emanating from these
quarters, but also served to increase their receptivity to ideas and
concepts forwarded by men whose religious beliefs were markedly dif-
ferent from those to which they had adhered in their earlier years.
.323,!€19§§$22fi3§23££9999”¢1°3°d.Off certain avenues of belief and
openedmnpiothesawwhichwmaymnevenmhave been seriously considered had
the, reissues experience ~ net. .occurredo

In addition to tracing the changing religious views of the
two men, this study also speaks of the complex relationship which ex-
isted between Garrison and Douglass and suggests that their rejection
experiences were not wholly unique. To be "rejected of men," in any
age, tends to make an individual consider the possibility of breaking

old ties and of abandoning long-accepted beliefs.

REJECTED OF MEN: THE CHANGING RELIGIOUS VIEWS OF

WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON AND FREDERICK DOUGLASS

By

William Lloyd Van Deburg

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of History
1973

Copyright by
William Lloyd Van Deburg

197 3

ii

He is despised and rejected of men; a man of
sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid

as it were our faces from him; he was despised,
and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne

our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did
esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

--Isaiah 53:3-h

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

During the course of my investigation into the lives of
William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick Douglass I have received
assistance from many persons. I wish to acknowledge a deep sense
of gratitude to Professors Frederick D. Williams and Peter Levine.
Both have given unselfishly of their time and editorial skills in
making useful suggestions and in offering constructive criticism
of my work. Indeed, I must thank the entire history faculty of
Michigan State University for making my doctoral studies both ex-
citing and challenging. The generous financial aid provided by
the department has enabled me to complete my course of study with-
out experiencing the acute monetary "pinch" felt by many less for-
tunate graduate students.

In the preparation of this dissertation I have also had
the aid and cooperation of the following people: Mr. Walter W.
Burinski, Ms. Halon Norrman, and Ms. Jayne Sagataw, Michigan State
University Library; Dr. Mary-Elizabeth Murdock, Smith College
Library: Hr. James Lawton, Boston Public Library: Mr. John J.
HcDonough, Library of Congress: Hr. Abner M. Bradley, Frederick
Douglass Home; Mr. Charles G. Bennett, Bennington Museum.

The personnel of the following libraries have also con-
tributed greatly to easing the burden of archival research: Enoch
Pratt Free Library; Historical Society of Pennsylvania Library;

Houghton Library, Harvard University: Massachusetts Historical
iv

Society Library; Newburyport Public Library; New York Public
Library; Ohio Historical Society Library; Ohio State University
Library; State of Michigan Library; University of Michigan Library;
University of Minnesota Library; University of Pennsylvania Library;
Western Michigan University Library; Yale University Library.

To each of those who have helped me in preparing this dis-
sertation, including my long-suffering, but ever-cheerful wife,
Alice, I offer my sincere thanks. I hope that the following study
will make them feel that their efforts and concern have not been

expended in vain.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter

I 0 INTRODUCTION 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O 1
BOOK ONE

II. FANNY GARRISON'S BOY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

III. A SLAVEHOLDING RELIGION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
BOOK TWO

IV. ORTHODOXY-HETERODOXY s e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 8“

v. RELIGION OF A FREE LAND O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 136
BOOK THREE

VI. FREEDOM OF INQUIRY e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 166

VII 0 CONFRONTATION O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 193
BOOK FOUR

VIII. STUDENT OF INFIDELITY e e e e . e . . e . . . . . . . e 220

IX. REJECTION OF THE CHRISTIANS' GOD . . . . . . . . . . . . 24“
BOOK FIVE
x. ‘ SPIRITUALIST.S HEAVEN O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 270

XI. AN EXPRESSION OF GRATITUDE . . . . . . e . . . . . . . e 295

BPIWU: O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 332

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSA! s e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 34}

vi

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Whoever may hereafter collect my writings
together, in order to form some estimate of
my character, will, I trust, be able to tes-
tify, that I was no respecter of persons, but
was uniform in my condemnation of corrupt
principles, however high the source from which
they emanated.
--William Lloyd Garrison
January 31, 1835
During the ante-bellum period of American history, a group
of reformers known as the Garrisonian abolitionists sought to ef-
fect a moral revolution in the minds and lives of the nation's
citizenry. Even though they realized that the institution of Negro
slavery was deeply embedded in the collective American conscience--
so deeply instilled in fact, that the normal workings of that con-
science seemed at times to be nearly inoperative in regard to it--
the Garrisonians were determined to lead the nation to repentance.
In their campaign to eradicate the national sin of slavery, as they
termed it, the reformers evidenced little "respect of persons"--
censuring the actions of all those who would not bear unqualified
testimony against the evils of the southern labor system. By so
doing, they not only alienated those members of the clergy who
sought to avoid the sort of tumult which the abolitionists were cre-
ating, but also challenged the moral leadership of that influential

body as a whole.

2

This study contends that two of the major participants in
the antislavery struggle, William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick
Douglass, were so greatly influenced by their involvement in the
crusade against slavery that their religious beliefs changed signif-
icantly over the decades. The refusal of the majority of the na-
tion's "orthodox" churchmen to join the abolitionists in denouncing
slavery led Garrison to reexamine the eminently orthodox beliefs of
his youth while causing him to turn to the nation's more liberal re-
ligionists for aid and religious instruction. Scorned by white re-
ligionists both as a black Christian and as a Garrisonian aboli-
tionist, Douglass found it impossible to respect the religious pro-
fession of Christians whose characters were tarnished by anti-
Negro prejudice. Eventually this feeling contributed importantly
to his rejection of the "wonder-working power" of the Christians'
God.

Douglass and Garrison were not alone in championing the
antislavery cause against clerical opposition, and it is therefore
quite likely that other abolitionists experienced similar modifica-
tions of religious belief. It is also apparent that a gradual
transformation of religious thought from the trusting conservatism
and orthodoxy of youth to the more reflective, liberal faith of
adulthood is a widespread phenomena which can by no means he attri-
buted solely to the contact which one has had with an unpopular re-
form movement. Certainly it is to be lamented that a true appre-
ciation of the religious evolution through which men like Douglass
and Garrison have passed is all too often made impossible by the

tendency of twentieth-century historians, writing for a largely

3
secular audience, either to neglect wholly or to treat in a cursory

manner the problem of religious change. Although undoubtedly aware
that the beliefs which an individual treasures as a child or as a
young adult are not necessarily those to which he adheres in adult-
hood or in old age, scholars often attempt to deal with personal re-
ligious faith in a rather haphazard and unproductive manner. By
citing only certain major events in the development of a historical
figure's religious character or by merely giving a brief overview
of his beliefs, biographers frequently fail to inform their readers
that religious thought, like political, social, or economic thought,
is an ever-changing, multifaceted quantity.

While much progress has been made in this respect by
Garrison's most recent biographers, there still remains no single
work which deals exclusively with the Boston editor's changing re-
ligious views. The religious beliefs of Frederick Douglass have
been even more drastically slighted. When one considers the impor-
tance of understanding both the nature of the personal ties which
existed between these two key figures in the abolitionist movement,
and the relationship of the Garrisonians to organized religion, it
becomes apparent that a study dealing solely with the religious
life of the two reformers is long overdue.

To be "rejected of men"--to be scorned and rebuked by the
very segments of society from which they had hoped to receive aid
and comfort-owas definitely a traumatic experience for both
Douglass and Garrison. The experience of rejection not only made
the abolitionists wary of all pronouncements emanating from these
quarters, but also served to increase their receptivity to ideas

and concepts forwarded by men whose theological beliefs were

Va.

ilk.

I!

-h

a
markedly different from those to which they had adhered in their

earlier years.

Before examining the religious views of the two abolition-
ists in detail,certain intellectual and social movements of the era
must be outlined. Without an understanding of the prevailing reli-
gious climate, a great deal of insight into their changing beliefs
would be lost.

a e e e

"No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a
piece of the continent, a part of the main." By the year 1800,
these words from John Donne's Devotions had acquired a far richer
meaning than his seventeenth-century world could have imagined.
Across the Atlantic a new nation was involved in the fundamental
process of growth from a status akin to childhood, wherein cultural
cues were taken directly from the mother country, to a condition of
budding adolescence. The youthful society of early nineteenth-
century America had already begun to be more circumspect in accept-
ing imported systems of belief and structures of institutional or-
ganization. Within the new Republic, men of ideas greatly influ-
enced national events and were, in turn, strongly affected by the
culture in which they lived. As with all men born into this so—
ciety, William Lloyd Garrison and Frederick Douglass were subjected
to social forces that would color their personalities and beliefs
in later years.

(Dnder its new constitution, the United States was a secular
state, but one which did not give an exaggerated preference to se-
cularism.) Embued with the prevailing belief that free, uncoerced

consent was the proper basis for all human organizations, the

5

framers of the Constitution were in agreement with denominational
leaders who desired to propagate their views unobstructed by legal
statute. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention, them-
selves sufficiently representative of the various American denomina-
tions, assured later generations that no religious test would be
required as a qualification for "any Office or public Trust under
the United States." freedom_of religious practice and the prohibi-
tion of church astablishment.were set forth in the First Amendment
to Fh2M99P§§$tuti°n° President Washington did not express a novel
sentiment when he paid homage to "the Invisible Hand which conducts
the affairs of men" in his first Inaugural Address. He was merely
drawing upon the religious foundations previously evidenced in
Article VI of the Constitution, in Article III of the Northwest
Ordinance, and in the Declaration of Independence.1

The tone of early state constitutions was similar to that
of the federal Constitution with the exception that the "no reli-
gious test" doctrine did not prevent governors or state legisla-
tures from disqualifying prospective appointees to state service
because of their religious beliefs. The makers of the revolution-
ary constitutions, while promising freedom of religion, did not ex-
pect the states to be totally neutral in such matters. They usu-

ally took it for granted that there was a consensus of opinion in

lwilher o. Katz, Religion and American Constitutions

(Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 196%), p. 22; Anson'
Phelps Stokes, Church and State in the United States, I (New York:
Harper & Brothers. 19567? 513-517; Sidney E. Head, Th Lixgly
Ex eriment: The Sha in 2; Christianity is America New York:

per & Row, 19635, p. 61; Edward Frank Humphrey, Nationalism and
BOliéion in America, 1224-1282 (New York: Russell & Russell, 1965),
PP. 53-H53; Roy F. Nichols, Religion and American nggggggy
alton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press, 1959), p. 37.

6
support of Protestant Christianity. Only Rhode Island and Virginia

conceded full and perfect religious freedom. In the constitutions
of several states, Roman Catholics and Jews were disfranchised or
excluded from public office. Acknowledgement of God's existence
and belief in a.intursistatsnofwrewards and punishments were pres
requisitasmtomthswrightmo{mguffrage in others. As Merrill Jensen
has noted, "the steps in the direction of religious freedom and the
complete separation of church and state were thus halting, but the
direction was sure and the purpose was clear."2

The years after 1776 were ones of transition and change in
which old and new answers to vital questions existed side by side.
Eighteenth-century patterns of belief, formed largely from English
models, persisted, but were coming under attack. The presence of
an ever increasing variety of racial and religious elements within
the new nation gradually accustomed Americans to the possibility of
living on at least tolerable terms with men of differing faiths.
.IER.DQDnlntibelief that the right to pursue liberty and happiness
included-the,..risht.._t9...horsh12.111 09?.‘99'nvay made it still more
@égisultstoinnsnru religious uniformity within this heteroge-

negusmpopulation.3

 

2Thomas Cuming Hall, The Reli ious Back round of American
Culture (Boston: Little, Brown-and Company, 930 , p.-183; Herbert
Wright, "Religious Liberty Under the Constitution of the United
States," Vir inia L2! Review, XXVII (l9h0), 77-78; Evarts B. Greene,
Reli ion and the State: The Makin and Testin of an American
Tradition-TItEEEa: Great-SEaI BooksT_I959 , p. 3-;.§anford E. Cobb,
25: Rise of Reli ious Libert in America (New York: Macmillan Com-
pany, 19027, p. E57; hump rey,‘NatIonalism and Reli ion, pp. #90-
“99: Merrill Jensen, The New Nation: A His??? of the United States
During thglgonfederation,—I78I:I73§ (NZw York: Alfred A. Knopf,

e P0 I“

 

 

3Russel Blaine Nye, Th Cultural £113 Q; t e New Nation (New
York: harper Torchbooks, 1933;, pp. , ; Greene, Religion and the

State, D. 65s .-

7
As the various denominations struggled to break their Old

World ties and to perfect new plans of church organization, major
efforts toward a revitalization of American religious life, as had
occurred in the 1740's, were necessarily delayed. This postpone-
ment had serious consequences for the nation's churches. By 1783
it was the unanimous testimony of the clergy that a rising tide of
iniquity was sweeping the land, causing people to indulge in
hitherto unknown vices and to neglect a proper cultivation of
piety. Various causes for the decline in public virtue were read-
ily apparent. Churches had been destroyed and congregations di-
vided during the war for independence. The breaking of church-
state bonds had encouraged the growth of numerous sects while post-
war inflation made the financial support of both old and new groups
a difficult matter. Other factors much less visible to the contem-
porary layman figured significantly in what came to be known as
"the decline of Puritanism." Calvinism had long been confronted by
opposing systems of belief in both the New World and in Europe, but
after 1750 internal dissension combined with a number of particu—
larly virulent heresies to make it lose its grip on American
society.“

The essential nature of these changes in Puritanism first
became evident during the middle years of the preceding century.
After the death of John Winthrop in l6h9, New England intellectual

development consisted of a virtually continuous series of crises

 

ItWilliam Warren Sweet, Religion $3 the Development 25

American Culture, 1262-l8h0 (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons,
19525, p. 53; Nye, Cultural Life, pp. ZOh-ZOS; J. Franklin
Jameson, 223 American Revolution Considered as 3 Social Movement
(Princeton: Princeton University Press, 19237, pp. 91-93.

9‘ ‘ ,
no

We,

‘2
no .

‘.‘

T.“

. y ‘
q, A
.- '. ‘
\:l .
2“ 5
':-;
\‘: = A
\ ‘1'
--'- .\
‘| j...
. 9,-
,t._ _
‘\:': .':
‘I: \‘_ m
‘ 1
I . ‘
-|‘\
v‘:“]
r'~
\“

8
and failures, of contradictory attempts to reach back to the faith

of an earlier day and forward toward certain revisions that would
more easily facilitate adjustments to the rapidly changing patterns
of American life. The harmful consequences of the Half-Way Covenant,
the growing sense of Puritan "tribalism," and the "heretical" be-
liefs held by clerics such as Boston's Jonathan Mayhew were not
eradicated by the spiritual force of the Great Awakening. In fact,
this revivalistic movement which swept the nation during the third
through sixth decades of the eighteenth century, creating in the
early l7hO's, had its own telling effects upon Calvinist orthodoxy.
Even JanaihanwEdwamds, who did more than any other man of his day
to make American Calvinism appear both beautiful and viable, left a
mark of change rather thanrreaction on New England theology. De-
spite his belief in the revival as a movement inspired by God to
combat the excesses of rationalism and Arminianism, Edwards' philo-
sophy of mystical idealism and his appeal to emotionalism departed
from both the practice and the theology of the Puritan fathers.
W11h_hisaassistance,mthe Great Awakening resulted in a_restatement
opralyinismyinwter s that gave the individual greater responsibil-
ityrfgruggrkingflggthhis”own salvation, yet without asserting that
magwgggldmbehsavedwbyvhisqown.act orflbe redeemed without experienc-

ins thsntrsnefsraisslsrase”and,power_of the Holy Spirit.5

 

5Loren Baritz, City On A Hill: A Histor of Ideas and Myths
in America (New York: 3355 WIlEy'EEH Sons, 19635.-;. :7; FFEHk Hugh
FBster, A Genetic Histor 25 the New England Theology (New York:
Russell E Russell, 19635, p. :3? Max Savelle, Seeds 2; Liberty: 233
Genesis of the American Mind (Seattle: University of Washington
Press, 196577-pp. 58, 31-32, 47-53, 66, 69; Edmund S. Morgan, 22:
Puritan Famil : Reli ion 223 Domestic Relations in Seventeenth-
Centur _53 England ew York: Harper Torchbooks, 19665, pp. 161-
I36; Charles Grandison Finney, Lectures 22 Revivals g; Reli ion, ed.
by William G. McLaughlin (Cambridge: Belknap Press, 19655, p. xiii.

 

9

Edwards gave American religion a new and powerful impetus
which continued to be felt for decades, but a weakening of this
thrust began almost immediately after he had completed his work.
Theological debates among Edwards‘ successors became increasingly
abstruse as their discussions revolved around ever more minute dis-
tinctions, definitions, and shades of meaning. As Vernon Parrington
has noted, "theological fame in Massachusetts came to be measured
by the skill with which the logician made out to stand on both
sides of the fence at the same time."6

Thahpowprxof Puritan theology had always rested upon its
ability toixonkncsrtain.ideas_about the nature and operation of man
.ggd the universe into a coherent and plausible system. Since Puri-
tanism was not only a religious creed, but also a total organiza-
tion of human emotional and intellectual life, any dislocation of
the key elements in the synthesis it had achieved would inevitably
produce fatal consequences. While Calvinist theology was gradually
degenerating into a succession of formulations which produced quib-
bling among the clergy and skepticism within the laity, an impor-
tant balance was tipped which helped bring about the internal col-
lapse of Puritanism. As drawn by theologian Joseph Bellamy and
poet Michael Wigglesworth, the Calvinist God became the "Absolute
Monarch of the Universe," an infant-damning judge of a far more

rigid and less complex character than shown by the delicately

 

6

Joseph Haroutunian, Piety Versus Moralism: The Passingo of
the New England Theology (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 19327?
p. _xxii, Herbert Wallace Schneider, The Puritan Mind (Ann Arbor:
Ann Arbor Paperbacks, 1958), p. 221; Sidney Earl Mead, Nathaniel
Willigm Taylor, W286-l8fi A Connecticut Liberal (Chicago: Uni-
versity of Chicago Press, 19E25, pp. 95-96; Vernon Louis Parrington,
Main Currents in American Thou ht, Vol. I: 222 Colonial Mind (New
York: Harvest Books, l95h5, p. 316.

10

balanced picture of earlier years. Consequently, many Americans
decided that this portrait, along with the Calvinist belief in pre-
destination and hell's cruel punishments,needlessly made God a fig-
ure of evil and labeled man a morally helpless puppet.7
As Calvinism lost its dynamism, an increasing number of peo-
ple turned their thoughts away from other-worldly pursuits and be-
came preoccupied with life in the ever expanding mercantile society.
Under the sheltering wing of secular influences and modernizing ten-
dencies, the way was opened for the flowering of the more liberal
ideas that had long been filtering in from across the Atlantic. .By.
w£§99hth§llinsaof battle between liberal and conservative theology
were clearlygdrawn. Liberal Calvinists, many of them holding aca-
demic or clerical positions in the Boston-Cambridge area, were
strongly influenced by the humanized deity described by Mayhew and
Charles Chauncy. The deity of the liberals was not a God of wrath,
but a benevolent purveyor of mercy, compassion and love. In con-
trast to the orthodox Calvinist belief in salvation by God's grace,
the liberals asserted that the essential powers of spiritual re-
generation merely lay dormant in human nature, needing only to be
awakened and emancipated. Tacitly accepting the doctrine that man
was not as depraved, nor God as exalted as had previously been be-

lieved, many Congregational ministers at the turn of the century

 

7Perry Miller and Thomas H. Johnson, eds., The Puritans
(New York: American Book Company, 1938), p. A; Clarence H. Faust,
"The Decline of Puritanism," in Transitions in American Literar
Histor , ed. by Harry Hayden Clark (Durham: .5uke University Press,
19555, pp. 3, 11, 1k, 16, 2h~25g Finney, Lectures, p. xiii:
Schneider, Puritan Mind, pp. 232-233.

11

were, for all practical purposes, unitarian in their convictions.

The revision of orthodox Calvinist assumptions was not, how-
ever, wholly the product of inroads made by unitarian tenets.
Jonathan Edwards' departure from the practices of the Puritan fa-
thers was carried on by his pupil and friend, Samuel Hopkins.
"Hopkinsianism," as his beliefs came to be called, held that the
atoning power of Christ‘s death was not limited to an elect, but was
available to all men. "Disinterested benevolence," a concern for
the greatest good and happiness of all, became the center of his
theology as well as his key to the realization of important ethical
values.9

Also sharing in the movement away from strict Calvinism was
Timothy Dwight, Edwards' grandson and president of Yale University.
Rallying Christians to the defense of the Biblical faith, Dwight
continually assailed the forces of infidelity and liberal religion.
While calling for a return to the steady society of his forefathers,
he extolled a theology which was a common sense combination of per-
sonal responsibility and dependence upon God. Under Dwight's leader-

ship, old lines of cleavage in doctrine and practice began to fade

in importance. Fine theological points were overlooked in the battle

 

8Nye, Cultural Life, pp. 205-208, 222- -223, Clinton Rossiter,
The First American Revolution: The American Colonies on the Eve Lf
Independence (New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1936), p.-69;—
Savelle, Seeds Lf Libert , pp. 32-33; G. Adolf Koch, Republican
Religion: The American Revolution ££2_ the Cult Lf Reason (Gloucester:
Peter Smith, 19355, PP. 295-295.

9Sweet, American Culture, pp. 198-199, 235; Merle Curti,
The Growth 25 American Thought (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1951),
P- 77.

12

against Satanic foes.lo

After Dwight, Nathaniel W. Taylor, Professor of Didactic
Theology at Yale, continued to push New England theology toward
Arminianism. ‘Xigtnallymrepudiating the orthodox doctrine of pre-
destination. @aylcgfi,..declaredhthat man, as a free and thinking crea-
tn£24_:§2_!hellxmeenahle of accepting goodness and rejecting wicked-
.5359. This trend of thought, continued by Lyman Beecher and Charles
Grandison Finney, approached the Methodist position that anyone who
willed to do so could choose to be holy rather than sinful while
minimizing the Calvinistic emphasis on the independent workings of
the Holy Spirit in the conversion process.11

A primary cause of the "irreligion" so laboriously lamented
by moderate and conservative Calvinistsiduring the last two decades
of the eighteenth century was held to be the growth of deism, an
imported religio-philosophical movement rooted in the Enlighten-
ment’s faith in reason and science. Both unitarian and deist doc-
trine held that God was a benevolent and just Deity, that_ihemaig
of religinniwasnthe levers: God and the practice.of the good life,
aniliksiwlasnsmlasma_hnmble. philanthropic being inferior to_and
distinfiimtxhnlhhcnGreatpr. Mayhew, Chauncy, and other advocates of
early unitarianism cannot, however, be placed in the deist camp be-

cause, despite their essential rationalism, they retained a belief

 

10Head, Nathaniel William Ta lor, pp. #7-“9; Bernard
Weisberger, The: Gathered at the River: The Story 25 the Great
Revivalists 22$ Their Impact Ufion Reli ion in America TBSston:
fiittle, Brown and Company, 195 , p. 3; Charles E. Cunningham,

Timothy Dwi ht, 1252-1812: g Biography (New York: Macmillan Com-
pany, 19 2 , pp. 327-32 .

11Whitney B. Cross, 23; Burned-Over District: Th3 Social
gag Intellectual History 2; Enthusiastic Religion in Western £33
York, 1866-1820 (New York: Harper Torchbooks, 19637, p. 27;
Schneider, Puritan Mind, p. 236; Nye, Cultural Life, p. 226.

13
in many of the more seemingly irrational elements of revealed
Christianity. Radical deism, on the other hand, held that religious
ideas should be tested by scientific methods, completely ruling out
any belief in revelation. Some of the more extreme American deists
even regarded organized churches as dangerous to human freedom.
datinglflppiests,hpriestcraft_and mystery-mongering," deists asserted

thatmthsabasis 9f true religion was personal rather than institur

,EEQRBLLADQWEBquQIQ“soncerncdewith.reason than with faith. Popular-

ized and defended by the pens of Thomas Paine and Ethan Allen, deism
seemed to be sweeping forward so rapidly that Christian America
would soon be engulfed in a sea of infidelic oblivion.12
Since, initially, the forces of Congregationalism could not
seem to pull themselves away from their own internal doctrinal
squabbles long enough to meet and repel the deistic challenge, it
was left to the Hethodists, Baptists and Presbyterians to lead the
most militant opposition to deism. Nevertheless, Calvinist and
Arminian alike seemed to sense that they were struggling for the
exclusive right to speak for the same faith whereas the deists were

dangerous aliens in their Christian society. During the 1790's,

days of fasting, humiliation, and prayer were proclaimed, commencement

 

12Nye, Cultural Life, pp. 208-211; Peter Gay, ed., Qgigg:
Ag Anthology (Princeton: D. Van Nostrand, 1968), p. 1}; Herbert H.
Morais, Deism $5 Eighteenth Centur America (New York: Russell &
Russell, 1930), pp. 120-121, 15 , 177-173; Savelle, Seeds 2; Libert ,
pp.#0, “2-43; Sweet, American Culture, pp. 91-92. As a student at
Yale during the mid-1790's, Lyman Beecher witnessed the rising tide
of deism. He later wrote: "The college church was almost extinct.
Most of the students were skeptical, and rowdies were plenty. Wine
and liquors were kept in many rooms; intemperance, profanity, gam—
bling, and licentiousness were common.... That was the day of the
infidelity of the Tom Paine school...most of the class before me
were infidels, and called each other Voltaire, Rousseau, D'Alembert,
etc., etc." Lyman Beecher, Autobiography, Corres ondence, Etc., 22
Iqman Beecher, D. D., ed. by Charles Beecher, I New York: Harper &

BrOtherB’ 1831+). Eje

1%
speakers condemned the "gross and monstrous" deistic philosophy, and
countless sermons asserted the superiority of Biblical revelation as
a guide to living.13

Actually, as Perry Miller has noted, deism was an "exotic
plant" which never struck roots in the American environment. The
deists claimed more followers than they actually had while clerics
tended to exaggerate deism's threat to revealed religion. Largely
confined to a small minority of intellectual leaders, deism had a
limited appeal to the common man. Its philosophical rationalism
could not compete with the emotions released during the early years
of the nineteenth century when the Second Great Awakening revitalized
American Protestantism.1“

The revivalism that so markedly affected deism and orthodox
Calvinism became a dominant factor in American social and intellec-
tual life during the sixty years preceding the Civil War. nnderLthe
91diiwgimmacin§$£i§9§l9“‘1”? Predestinei “the! t.9 be
lefimfigflBglxaticnwnrmdamned to eternal.punishment. The appeals of
the revivalist were expressed in the vocabulary of a contrasting
Arminianism.l“Salvationwwaslnotwreseryedufor_anmelect, but was
avai1ab1a-to,all_ahn_reReassedmsfmjmeir Bins, threvath‘emeelyea on
99g;§_nezny_and_aggeptgdfiChris;was their personal Savior. Much of

the dynamic power of early nineteenth-century revivals can be

 

13Koch, Republican Religion, pp. 2h7, 275-278; Gay, Deism,
p. 11; Morais, Eighteenth Centurz, pp. 159-161.

1“Perry Miller, "From the Covenant to the Revival," in 223
Shaping pf American Religion, ed. by James Ward Smith and A. Leland
Jamison, I (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1961), 353;
Nye, Cultural Life, pp. 213-215; John Allen Krout and Dixon Ryan Fox,

The Completion pg Inde endence, lZQO-lSfiO (New York: Macmillan
Company, 19 , pp. 1 5-1 7; Koch, Republican Religion, p. 298.

15

accounted for by the fact that they were addressed to those already
more or less within the churches and because they were able to oper-
ate within a society where a general consent to the principles of
Protestant Christianity was already taken for granted. Productive
of what Ralph Gabriel has termed "Romantic Christianity," revivalism
emphasized the emotional rather than the rational elements in
American Protestantism.15

There had been indications as early as 1790 that the evan-
gelism of the 17h0's might once again become an important factor in
American religious life. The movement for a renewed emphasis upon
vital religion appeared simultaneously in various parts of the coun-
try and within different denominations. Almost imperceptibly, peo-
ple began to take a greater interest in religious affairs. New
churches were established and new members enrolled. Within the
Eastern colleges, the Awakening was carried on by an educated leader-
ship which welcomed the upsurge in religious interest as a weapon
against deism. In the West, however, conditions were far different.
With little in the way of an organized ministry to keep theological
order, the emotional elements of revivalism as proclaimed by itiner-
ant evangelists exerted a powerful appeal to the frontier settlers.

Nearly 1,000 camp meetings were held prior to 1820, each offering

—_

15Perry Miller, The Lif 2; m Mipd n m, m m
Revolution to the Civil ar New York: Harcourt, Brace and World,
, pp. 5:7t-10, In; Nichols, American Democrac , p. 58; Josef L.
Altholz, The Churches in the Nineteenth Centur (Indianapolis:
BObbs-Merrill, 1967), Bi.’§3-2u; Charles C. Cole, Jr., The Social
Ideas of the Northern Evangelists, 1826-1860 (New York:-_Columbia
h versity-Press, 195“), p. 7; Ralph Henry Gabriel, The Course of
AIsrican Democratic Thou ht (New York: Ronald PressT—1956), p.-3h.
R:. a so REIEE'HT-Gasrief, "Evangelical Religion and Popular
lanticism in Early Nineteenth-Centur America " Church History
XIX (March, 1950), 3h-h7. y ’ '

16
the free gift of salvation to all in attendance. In 1801, an esti-
mated 10,000 to 20,000 people took part in the Cane Ridge, Kentucky,
revival. It was in the South, however, that the revivals consis-
tently drew the largest crowds. Gradually growing more conserva-

tive in its theology under the influence of its slave system, the

South moved away from the broader, pggemtolerantmgersionmgf Chris- .4lmfih.

EggpipyfijhapmigmhgguheLdflduging_much of_the eighteenth century,to
whatwgpggggmfixgmhgfiesalleéhflanmevangelized neo-Calvinist orthodoxy."l6
There was little doubt that the Second Great Awakening fur-
thered the steady advance of theology toward Arminianism and stimu-
lated the religious life of the nation as a whole. What was not so
apparent to contemporaries was the effect that it had on American
social structure. The Awakening gave both meaning and direction to
people suffering in various degrees from the social strains encoun-

tered in a youthful country that was progressing rapidly into new

geographical, economic, and political areas. Despite the revival's

 

16Cole, Social Ideas, pp. 73- 7h; Catharine C. Cleveland,

TE: Great Revival in the West, 1292-1805 (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1916),* p. 5:; Alice Felt Tyler, Freedgm's ngmgn :
Phases 2; American Social History pp 1860 (Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 195;), p. 33; Weisberger, They Gathergd 31 5h;
River, p. 50; William Warren Sweet, The Stor Lf Religions ;_
America (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1950 , pp. 525- 326; Sweet,
American Culture, pp. 1h6-lh8; W. J. Cash, Th Min 9 of the Sons;
(New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1962), pp. 78- 2; Nye, Cultgra; Lif g,
Inn 216-218, 232-25h. See also Charles A. Johnson, 2p; Fpontig;
___p Meeting: Reli ion's Harvest Time (Dallas: Southern Methodist
University Press, 1955 . Gardiner Spring witnessed the revival as
listudent at Yale in 1805. Later, as pastor of the Brick Church in
N"York City, he wrote: "From the year 1800 down to the year 1825,
there was an uninterrupted series of these celestial visitations
BPreading over different parts of the land. During the whole of
thOse twenty-five years there was not a month in which we could not
POint to some village, some city, some seminary of learning, and
‘33, 'Behold what God hath wroughtl'" William Speer, 2p; Great
R¢;iva1 2;_ 1800 (Philadelphia: Presbyterian Board of Publication,

2 9 P0 570

l7

divisive effects on several of the denominations, it had an impor-
tant nationalizing influence which helped to create a more fully
integrated society. This process was not an exclusive one, but was
complementary to the nationally creative forces of economic inter-
action and political involvement.17

To a great extent, the revival also laid the foundations for
the various humanitarian reform movements of the pro-Civil War years.
While the intense fervor of the Awakening did not continue unabated
throughout the entire period, the revival set forces into motion
that would long influence American life. Converts increased rapidly
as the concept and purpose of the minister changed from pastor to
soul-winner under the evangelical influence. Many of these new
Christians soon felt the call to the ministry which, in turn, cre-
ated a demand for new colleges. Between 1780 and 1850, forty new
institutions of higher education were established, of which only
eleven were state-operated. These same years saw the rise of the
home missionary movement and its natural extension, the benevolent
society. Connected with the missionary societies were evangelical
periodicals founded for the dual purpose of reporting the success-
ful work of the missionaries and defending the faith. Between 1815
and 1826 many Presbyterians and Congregationalists, aided by a
smaller number of Methodists, Baptists, and Episcopalians seeking
to supply the religious needs of the country, united to form five

Great interdenominational societies. Held together by the idea of

——_

17William G. McLaughlin, Jr., Modern Revivalism: Charles
Qaandiaon Finngy £2 Billy Graham (New York: Ronald Press, 19595.
i° 9; Donald G. Mathews, "The Second Great Awakening as an Organ-
(Zing Process, 1780-1830: An Hypothesis," American Quarterly, XXI
spring. 1969). 27. 39-ho. '""""

If!

(I;

18

benevolence, an infinite concern for the souls and needs of others,
as the highest Christian virtue, they worked outside regular church
organisations to promote what they considered to be the fundamentals
of evangelical Protestantism.18

The benevolence and reform movements of the era had a direct
and vital relationship to revivalism's emphasis on the inestimable
worth of each individual soul. Singe_allwmortalmsoulsmwere,equal <?““rm
1g_ghg_§13hi_of_flod,aflhristians.were obliged to see to it §h§tiE§9
ugdgrprivilgg§d4.thswoutcast,aand.the downtrodden had a chance to
lizgwggffihliliycsain this world as well as in the next. The fusion
of these beliefs with a number of other concepts contributed to the
development of the yibrant and compelling doctrine of the free indi-
vidual, which heldA'mLQankindmwasmoving away from theflnecessity
of QEEEEQQAMIQQEEQEEEmRX manfmade laws as it moved toward individual
ibe u on 82$£;929Fr91-19

The Puritans had looked upon society as an aggregate of free-
standing individuals, Joined in a compact for God's purposes. This
trend of thought was significantly reinforced by the arrival in

America of the Quakers and the various pietist sects who were even

 

18

Charles Roy Keller, 222 Second Great Awakening i5 Connec-
ticut (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1952), p. 235: Cleveland,
UrTa't Revival, pp. 156-159; William Warren Sweet, Revivalism i3 America
D(1New York: Abgngdon Press, 1941+). PP. 1&8-1h9; Cross, Burned-Over

strict, p. 2 ; Tyler, Freedom's Ferment, pp. 31-52; Morais,

EIghteenth Centur ,pp. 175-175; Clifford S. Griffin, "Religious

enevo ence as ocial Control, 1815-1860," Mississippi Valley

Historical Review, XLIV (December, 1957), 425-h26; Clifford S.

r n, heir Brothers' Keeper : Moral Stewardship i3 233 United
states, 1800-1865 (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 19605,
PP. xii, 25, 56. See also Charles I. Foster, 53 Errand g; Mercy:
The Evangelical United Front, 1290-1857 (Chapel Hill: University of

°rth Carolina Press, 1960), pp. 121-178.

19Sweet, Revivalism, p. 152; Gabriel, American Democratic
Thou ht, ppe 19g 3 e

I: .

'1
“W

3:: 4

I'.
A D

19

more rigorously individualistic than the Calvinists. During the
later years of settlement, the proponents of Enlightenment philo-
sophy posited a liberation of mankind from the restraints of tradi-
tion, dogma, and authority. Enlightened man had confidence in his
ability to find rational solutions to his problems and to gain know-
ledge and control over himself and his universe. The early
(hineteenth-century frontiea was also an important component in the
.indixléksléQfimfflrmnlatinn. ”The-Boattered,populationlmthe simplicity
Qf_sgciety‘_gpd"§hgwgelative weakness of institutions on the fron-
tiermgfmggttlement encouraged men to be both self-reliant and indi-
.!idualistic. Nevertheless, without Evangelical Protestantism‘s be-
lief in the freedom of the will, the doctrine of the free individual
would not have had the same dynamism or appeal.20

American individualism was not, however, a cult of solitude
but a collective individualism. In both the religious and secular
spheres it was participatory and cooperative, seldom evidencing
strong tendencies toward withdrawal or isolation. During this
period, both evangelical churchmen and laymen agreed that government
and religion were similarly rooted in the individual. While admir-
ing the virtues of simplicity, directness and common sense, neither
group had much patience with dogma or tradition. Citizens of the
young republic tended to think of the individual not as a wholly

Separate figure, but as one of many.21

¥

20Russel B. Nye, This Almost £52223 £22215: EEEEIE $3 the
Eistory of American Ideas (East Lansing: Michigan State University
P
press, 15365é pp. 209-211: Gabriel, American Democratic Thou ht,
F: 21-22, 5 .

s ZlNye, Almost Chosen, p. 208; Nye, Cultural Life, p. 221:
°Ylour Martin Lipset, The First New Nation: The United States ig

Eietorical and Comparative Perspective (New York: Basic Books, 1963),

20

The early years of the new century were important ones for
the individual members of several Protestant denominations as well
as for society as a whole. Presbyterians and Congregationalists
attempted to meet the challenge of the frontier by a Plan of Union.
Adopted in 1801, the Plan provided for the establishment of union
congregations in communities where members of the two communions
were found living side by side. These churches would then be per-
mitted to call either a Presbyterian or a Congregational pastor.
Although it was not intended that either denomination should absorb
the other, the practical effect was an assimilation of Congrega-
tional churches into Presbyterianism. From the standpoint of deal-
ing with the spiritual needs of the frontier, Congregationalists
were handicapped by their loose form of church polity and by a
leadership that tended to think in sectional rather than national
terms. Presbyterians were greatly affected by those aspects of the
Second Great Awakening that tended toward divisiveness. Troubled
by the intrusion of Unitarian, Universalist, and Methodist doctrines
into their own church, "Old School" Presbyterians fought for a

strict adherence to the Calvinistic tenets of the Westminster

 

pp. 165-16“. See also T. Scott Miyakawa, Protestants and Pioneers:
Individualism 22$ Conformity 32 the American Frontier (Chicago:
fihiversity of Chicago Press, 196:7: Perry Miller has described the
hay in which Charles Finney's evangelism fit this pattern of thought:
"By his oratory and his example, he brought the communities together
and yet placed upon individuals responsibility for their own
actions.... It would be false to say that in the second of his in!
Junctions he was advocating what modern economic theory terms 'in-
dividualism.' With that he was not concerned. He was, rather,
dOnonstrating a method by which all might participate in the mystery
0‘ communion, even to self-abasement before the eyes of the fellow-
‘hip. Yet each person, out of his own resources and courage, might
triumph because he achieved the progress to the anxious seat for
and by himself." Miller, Life 2; Egg Mind, pp. 5k-55.

21

Confession. "New School" men, composed largely of Presbyterian-
ized Congregationalists, were willing to accept liberalized modifi-
cations of some of Calvinism's more rigid rules. The antipathy be-
tween the two groups, further aggravated by schismatic movements
and by the effects of the Plan of Union, culminated in a series of
heresy trials. In 1857 the Plan was abrOgated and the New School
Presbyterian Church seceded from the General Assembly to form a
separate body.22

During the period 1800-1850, Baptists and Methodists in-
creased their membership dramatically. Unimpeded by bulky ecclesi-
astical machinery or complicated doctrine, the Baptists tripled
their numbers within thirty years. Between 1800 and 1805, 115
churches and 10,000 members were added to the church in Kentucky
alone. By the 1820's the settled portion of the West was covered
with a network of Baptist Associations. (As defenders of the
Arminian principles of free grade and individual responsibility,
Methodists were insatiable opponents of the Calvinistic tenets of
limited grace and predestination.) Aided by a theology that was
hospitable to the central ideas of revivalism, Methodist circuit
riders spread their message into every corner of the young nation.
By 18h4, Just sixty years after the Methodist Episcopal Church was
organized, the Methodists had grown to be the largest Protestant
religious body in America. Even in New England, their total member-

ship was second only to the Congregationalists.23

‘1

22Sweet, American Culture, pp. 99-102, 206-209; Sweet,

W. P- 142: Nye, 22.1.2132}. Life, pp. 218-219, 227—230.

23Nye, Cultural Life, p. 219; Sweet, American Culture,
PP. 110-111, llE-115, 119, 225; Sweet, Revivalism, p. 129; Cleveland,

Eyeat Revival, p. 151; Weisberger, They Gathered a; £53 Elzsgt

22

The Protestant Episcopal Church was not well equipped for
frontier missionary endeavor. Tied to their parishes, lacking in
popularity with the masses, and fearing the emotions released by
the Second Great Awakening, Episcopal ministers made little progress
in frontier regions. Episcopalians frowned on lay preachers and
held their educational standards for the clergy at a level which
made the rapid recruitment of ministerial candidates almost impos-
sible. Until the close of the War of 1812, the denomination was in
no position to be assertive or aggressive, even if there had been a
forward-looking tendency on the part of its leaders. During the
post-revolutionary years it was difficult to convince Americans
that the Episcopal Church was anything other than an English insti-
tution.2u

American Quakers faced a number of problems during the open-
ing years of the nineteenth century. There was a growing difference
between city Quakers and those who resided in rural districts.
Evangelicalism appealed to many city Quakers because it emphasized.
the necessity of personal religious experience, but in some quarters
the evangelical doctrines were seen as a rejection of the fundamental
principle of the Inner Light. .Byflphe end of the 1820's_this differ-

ens-ta.2.£_22.ieigan.el,9ns..yiet‘hiwhat J'?$.,-§°..99 as... a. growing .,8Pirit 01'

h

rm. h2-h5. See also William Warren Sweet, Reli ion on the American
Frontier, Vol. I: The Baptists, 1785-1850, A Co IlectioH-Ef Source
HEIEFIEIs (New York: "Henry-HSIt and Company, 1951), pp. 18-57_333
am arren Sweet, Religion on the American Frontier, Vol. IV:
The Methodists, 1785-1850, A Collection of Source Materials
hicago: University of Chicago Press, 19h65, pp. 51- -70.
auNye, Cultural Life, p. 229, Sweet, American Culture,
PP. 10h-110; See also William Wilson Manross, The E isco a1 Church
Ln the United States, 1800-18uo: A Study in Church Life (New York:
columbia University Press, 1958), pp. 57-68:

 

 

p‘
'1

23
worldligess among the citx_d!§llcra..resulted in_a serious schism

withinmthsafiogimilmflfnfiriends.25

As Perry Miller has noted, the emergence of Unitarianism out
of Calvinism was "a very gradual, almost an imperceptible, process."
Until the last years of the eighteenth century there was no clear
line of demarcation between orthodox and liberal within Congrega-
tionalism. Despite a tacit acceptance of liberal doctrine by many
Congregational churchmen, King's Chapel in Boston was New England's
only professedly Unitarian church at the beginning of the new cen-
tury. In 1805, however, William Ellery Channing was ordained and
installed as minister of Boston's Federal Street Church. Within a
few years he became the primary spokesman for the Unitarian move-
ment.26

Universalism paralleled Unitarian development in New England,
but tended to draw its converts from the rural and working classes
rather than from the more educated sectors of society. By 1805, the
son of a Baptist farmer-preacher, Hosea Ballou, had become the recog-
nized leader of American Universalism. Rejecting the theories of
total depravity, endless punishment in hell, the Trinity, and the
miracles, Ballou gave the Universalists their first consistent and
complete philosophy. The_flnixersal£§ts,werevin.fundamenta1 agree-

rflggimliihnnnitarianismxmholding that God was too good to damn man,

 

ZSSweet, American Culture, pp. 229-232. See also Robert H.
Doherty, 2E3 Hicksite Separation: A §ociologica1 Analysis of
Religious Schism i2 Early Nineteenth Century America ew Brunswick:
Rutgers University Press, 1967).

26Perry Miller, "Jonathan Edwards to Emerson," N2! England
Quarterly, XIII (December, 1940), 605-606, 612; Sweet, American
Culture, p. 192; George N. Stephenson, The Puritan Heritage (New York:
Macmillan Company, 1952), p. 115.

2%
while the Unitarians insisted that man was too good to be damned.27
The fact that Black Americans were seldom welcomed as equal
participants in the nation's churches helps to account for the
founding of independent Negro churches during the first decades of
the nineteenth century. Although the great majority of Black
churchgoers were Baptists or Methodists, Negroes could be found in
almost all of the denominations. At least two independent congre-
gations were established in the South before the end of the Revolu-
tionary War, but real development did not begin until 1787. Some
of the new churches employed white ministers, but the trend toward
racially separate bodies was well under way by 1800. Many churches
were established by Black Christians who desired to conduct reli-
gious services according to their own particular needs. The mem-
bers of these churches found both spiritual comfort and an increased
opportunity for social and political expression within the new in-
stitutions. Although it further separated the races, the Negro
church proved to be the most dynamic social institution in the ante-
bellum Black community}8

Early Negro churchmen such as Richard Allen, first bishop

of the nationally-organised African Methodist Episcopal Church,

 

27Sweet, American Culture, pp. 196-198; Nye, Cultural Life,
p. 227. See also Daniel Walker Howe, The Unitarian Conscience:
Harvard Moral Philoso h , 1850-1861 (Cambridge: Harvard University
Press, 1970).

28

Leon F. Litwack, North of Slavery: The Negro in the Free
States, 1790-1860 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1931),
pp. 187-188, 193-196; Winthrop D. Jordan, White Over Black:
American Attitudes Toward the Negro, 1550-1812 (Chapel Hill:
m vers t“""TN'—'t’y o or h'C"—Iaro ifii‘Proaa, 1968), pp. A22, 425; John H.
Cromwell, "The Earlier Churches and Preachers" in The Negro Church,
ed. by W. E. Burghardt DuBois (Atlanta: Atlanta University Press,
1905), p. 50; Ruby F. Johnston, The Development of Negro Religion
(New York: Philosophical Libraryt-l95u), pp. 11:12.

 

 

25

preached a message of patience and moderation. godww9u1d_eyentually an“;
liberate the chattel, but until then, slaves had to be obedient and
trustuin the Almighty. Free Blacks had to refrain from manifesting
any ill will toward their former masters. Nevertheless, before the
end of the 1820's, Negro ministers had begun to condemn the slave
institution as "the scourge of heaven, and the curse of the earth."
Despite this tendency toward a more aggressive spirit, Black church-
men failed to agree on the proper social and political role of
their institutions. Some ignored the vital issues of the day and
concentrated on proclaiming the hope of a less bitter existence in
the next world.29

Despite the diversity of American religious profession and
practice, the centrifugal tendencies evidenced in several of the
denominations, and the rude shocks made by eighteenth-century ra-
tionalism and "infidelity" on others, the young nation remained
predominately a religious-minded land with an emotional, moralistic,
pietistic spirit that would color its social, political, and econo-
mic beliefs for many generations. As the French traveler Alexis de
Tocqueville noted in 1851, "America is still the place where the
Christian religion has kept the greatest real power over men's

souls."30

 

29Benjamin E. Mays, The Negro's God as Reflected in His
Literature (New York: Atheneum, l9 9 9 PP. 33-55, K2; Litwack,
North 2; Slaver , pp. 189-190.

30Nye, Cultural Life, p. 219; Alexis de Tocqueville,
Democracy in America, ed. by J. P. Mayer and Max Lerner, trans. by
George Lawrence (New York: Harper & Row, 1966), p. 268.

BOOK ONE

CHAPTER II

FANNY GARRISON'S BOY

"0 that my mother were living!" is often
the exclamation of my heart. Alas! she
cannot come to me. But why do I say "alas!"
Would I, even if I could, call her away from
the Joys and glories of a better world, to
this transient, polluted, dying state of
existence? Oh, no! Rest in heaven, dear
mother! I would go to thee, but not have
thee come to me.... Thy dutiful, penitent,
affectionate child hopes to spend with thee
a blissful eternity!
--William Lloyd Garrison
June 21, 185k
Many of the more radical and individualistic aspects of the
religious upheavals of the l7HO's and 1750's were preserved and
carried into the later years of the century by the New England
Baptists, a sect to which William Lloyd Garrison's mother was con-
verted while living with her parents in Nova Scotia during the last
years of the eighteenth century. Francis Maria Lloyd‘s decision to
abandon Anglicanism for the soul-searching rigors of the Baptists
greatly angered her iron-willed father, eventually causing him to
turn her out of his home. His strident opposition tended to strength-
en rather than to diminish her newly acquired convictions. In 1798
Fanny married Abijah Garrison, a sea-faring man whose irregular ha-
bits she hoped to cure by exposing him to the regenerating powers
of religion. Abijah was somewhat frightened by his wife's staunch

righteousness and piety. Her ways were certainly not those to which

27

28

he had been accustomed. A life of church-going and prayer meetings
depressed him. It was not long before their home life became a bat-
tle of wills. While Fanny worked to convert the maverick seaman to
Baptist ways, Abijah turned for comfort to waterfront cronies and
drink. As he grew increasingly unmanageable, Fanny clung ever
closer to the promises of her religion. She was always happiest
when she could forget her worldly problems and, with her mind
"engaged in religion," contemplate her heavenly reward. In later
years, recalling the "rude blast of misfortunes" which followed her
marriage, she asserted that had it not been for an overruling
Providence, she would have rapidly descended into a state of abject
depression. "I was taught to see that all my dreams of happiness
in this life were chimerical," she wrote, "the efforts we make here
are all of them imbecility in themselves and illusive, but religion
is perennial. It fortifies the mind to support trouble, elevates
the affections of the heart, and its perpetuity has no end."1

In the spring of 1805 the troubled couple moved from Gran-

ville, Nova Scotia to Newburyport, Massachusetts. It was here, in

 

1John L. Thomas, Th3 Liberator: William Lloyd Garrison

(Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1965), pp. 11-15, 19; George M.
Fredrickson, ed., William Lloyd Garrison (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-
Hall, Inc., 1968), pp. E-S; Mary Hewitt, "Memoir of William Lloyd
Garrison," People‘s Journal, II (September 12, 18h6), 1h2; Frances
Maria Garrison to Maria Elizabeth Garrison, May 2%, 1820, in Wendell
Phillips Garrison and Francis Jackson Garrison, William Lloyd
Garrison, 1805-1822: 223 Star 2; gig Life Told by His Children, I
New York: Century 60., 1 S , 39. While working in Lynn, Massa-
chusetts in 1814 Fanny wrote: "0 that I could once more be re-
stored to my friends again and have Just enough to supply my real
Wants--with my tender ofspring around me the Company of my Dear
Christian Freinds--And my mind engaged in Religion--happy thought
although Visionary at present...." Frances Maria Garrison to
William Lloyd Garrison, September 11, 181k, in Walter McIntosh
Merrill, ed., Behold Mg Once More: The Confessions 2; James Holley
Garrison (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin Company, 1955), p. 10.

29

early December, that William Lloyd Garrison was born. The Garrison
family, which by this time also included a daughter, Caroline Eliza,
and a son, James Holley, shared a small frame house with David
Farnham, a captain in the coastal trade, and his wife, Martha. Both
being ardent religionists, Fanny and Martha soon came to be the best
of friends. Constant in their attendance at the services of the
local Baptist church and occasionally hosting evening meetings in
their own parlor, the two women seemed determined to have their
children grow up in an atmosphere of dedication and service to the
Lord.2

If the adversity which Fanny met when she renounced
Anglicanism served to strengthen her belief in the correctness of
her faith, then undoubtedly the trials and tribulations faced by
the Newburyport Baptists also caused her to adhere more closely than
ever to the Baptist communion. A veritable island in a sea of
Congregational and Presbyterian churches, the Baptist Church of
Christ was formed in the face of obstacles which would have discour-
aged less hearty religionists. When a young licentiate minister
named Joshua Chase preached the first sermon to the Newburyport
Baptist Society on Sunday July 22, 180%, he was not only declaring
war against the forces of sin and godlessness, but was also launch-
ing an attack upon the settled habits and opinions of a community
which had experienced little prior contact with people of his reli-
gious persuasion. While the first baptismal service was held in

October 1804, it was not until May 2, 1805 that a fellowship of

 

2Abijah Garrison to Robert and Mary Angus, April h, 1805, in
Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 17-18; Thomas, Liberator, pp. 15, 18;
Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 20, 2%, 27.

50

some 20 members was officially organized as the Baptist Church of
Christ in Newbury and Newburyport. Initially the meetings were
held in a schoolhouse on Marlborough Street and at several other 10-
cations around town, but by the fall of 1808 the Newburyport
Baptists could boast of a newly constructed $16,000 brick meeting-
house. Unfortunately, a fire destroyed the church building in 1811,
forcing them to meet in the city court house until they could afford
to build a new house of worship the following year.3

Fanny went to this resolute body of believers for spiritual
comfort when, shortly after the birth of Maria Elizabeth in July,
1808, Abijah Garrison left Newburyport--never to return to it or
to his family again.“ The solace which she found there encouraged
her to strive harder than ever to inculcate in her children a deep
reverence for the things of God. She also found that, among her
Baptist friends, there were those who would willingly help her in
her hour of need. The struggle for existence could indeed become

a severe and bitter experience for a fatherless family of four unless

they received some outside assistance. Such aid was received from

 

3E. Vale Smith, History e; Newburyport: From EQe Earliest
Settlement 2; egg Country 3e £22 Present Time (Newburyport, 185:),
pp. 511-515; John J. Currier, Histor e; Newburyport, Mass., 126A-
1202, I (Newburyport, 1906), 287-289.

“Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 2#. At the time, Abijah
was out of work due to the harmfuI effects which Jefferson's
Embargo had on Massachusetts' shipping. Without a job, and appar-
ently disinclined to find one, he spent much of his time drinking
rum with his cronies. In the early summer of 1808, the death of
Caroline, the Garrison's eight-year-old daughter, brought further
depression into the household. Even the birth of another daughter
a few weeks later did little to assuage Fanny‘s grief. When, in
a sudden fit of temper, she disrupted one of Abijah's social even-
ings at home by breaking the liquor bottles and forcibly ejecting
his companions, her husband walked out and never returned. See
Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 24-26; Thomas, Liberator, p. 19.

31

Martha Farnham, who assured Fanny that as long as the Farnhams had
a roof over their heads, the Garrisons were welcome to share it.
In later years, a deacon of the church named Ezekiel Bartlett played
a similar role, caring for William while Fanny worked as a house-
keeper in Lynn. Therefore, whether under the care of Fanny, "Aunt"
Martha Farnham, or Deacon Bartlett, young William, or Lloyd as his
mother always called him, was assured of being raised in an atmos-
phere filled with reverence toward God. Although poor in material
goods, young Garrison suffered from no shortage of religious in-
structors.5

Fanny, however, remained the primary influence on the devel-
opment of Lloyd's religious character. Almost puritanical in her
abhorrence of sin and in her stern and uncompromising moral convic-
tion, she sought to mold his religious beliefs in the image of her
own. By sending him each week to the Baptist church and by leaving
him in the care of devout Christians in her absence, she tried to
ensure that the worldly pleasures which had been so dear to her hus-
band would not entrap her son. Her efforts were not in vain. As

companion, teacher, and protector, Fanny succeeded in leaving an

indelible mark on the boy's mind.6

 

SGarrison and Garrison, Life, I, 26-27; Hewitt, "Memoir,"
p. 142.

6Thomas, Liberator, pp. 20-21; Archibald H. Grimké, "Bio-
graphical Oration," Alexander's Ma azine, I (January, 1906), 17.
John Thomas has noted that one of Garrison's earliest memories was
that of his mother bent in prayer with her "Dear Christian Friends"
in the parlor. In 185k, Garrison wrote: "I had a mother once, who
cared for me with such a passionate regard, who loved me so intensely,
that no language can describe the yearnings of her soul--no instru-
ment measure the circumference of her maternal spirit.... Her mind
was of the first order--c1ear, vigorous, creative, and lustrous,
and sanctified by an ever-glowing piety. How often did she watch
over me--weep over me--and pray over me! (I hope, not in vain.) She

52
As Lloyd grew older he joined the choir of the Baptist church

and occasionally acted as chorister. Blessed with a rich voice, he
enjoyed vocal music and even enrolled in a singing school to improve
upon his natural talent. In later life, many of the hymns which he
sang were associated in his memory with the circumstances under
which he first learned them or with the fact that they were favor-
ites of his mother. As an adult, he continued to sing these songs
of his youth each Sunday morning. Accompanying himself on the
piano, he would make the strains of the old hymns ring throughout
the house--rousing those members of the family who were still lin-
gering in their beds.7

During his youthful years, Lloyd was rather indifferently
exposed to formal education. Deacon Bartlett, who sawed wood,
sharpened saws, made lasts, and even sold apples from a little

stand by his front door in order to eke out a meager living,

 

has been dead almost eleven years; but my grief at her loss is as
fresh and poignant now, as it was at that period." Oliver Johnson
has written that Lloyd inherited his mother's intuitive reverence
for God, her fine moral and spiritual sensitivity, and her abhor-
rence of oppression in all of its forms. With brother James, Fanny
had much less success. Thomas, Liberator, p. 21; Garrison to Helen
E. Benson, June 21, 1854 in Walter M. Merrill, ed., Tee Letters 23
William Lloyd Garrison, I (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press, 1971), 568-569; Oliver Johnson, William Llo d
Garrison 393 gig Times (Boston: B. B. Russell & Co., 1880 , p. 2“.
See also Merrill, Behold Me Once More.

7Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 29-30; Fanny Garrison
Villard, William Lloyd Garrison ee N n-Resistance (New York:
National Press Printing Co., Inc., 192:), pp. 8-9. In 1879,
Garrison's son, Francis, wrote: "There were many of the old hymns
which Father enjoyed for their grand movement, as well as for the
associations which they always awakened of his early days, when his
mother sang them, but he would frequently say apologetically as he
commenced to sing them, 'Of course I don't accept the theology of
the words, but we won't mind that!'" Francis Jackson Garrison to
Elizabeth Pease Nichol, June 15, 1879, Houghton Library, Harvard
University. See also Garrison and Garrison, Life, IV, 515.

33
attempted to provide young Garrison with a grammar school education,
but, after a three month trial, found that he needed Lloyd's assis-
tance in helping to ease the family's burden of poverty. Following
the War of 1812, Fanny attempted to place Lloyd in a suitable trade,
but the youngster did not seem to be cut out for cabinetmaking,
shoemaking, or clerking. Not until 1818, when he was apprenticed
to Ephraim W. Allen, editor of the Newburyport Herald, did he find
a job which held his interest. Prior to this time, the bulk of his
reading material had consisted of the sermons and religious tracts
which had been available to him at Bartlett's. While boarding with
Ithe Allen family, he broadened the scope of his experience by read-
ing constantly and indiscriminately. In addition to contemporary
political tracts, he read the works of Shakespeare, Pope, and Byron
as well as the Waverly novels and the poetry of Mrs. Felicia
Hemans.

During his seven year apprenticeship at the Herald, Lloyd
found himself surrounded by several upright Christian men. Their
example encouraged him to remain strong in the faith. Allen him-
self was a regular churchgoer, but did not become attached to any
particular denomination until he joined the Second Congregational
Church in 1852. More closely tied to the Church was Garrison's
closest friend, William Gross Crocker, an ardent Baptist and later
a missionary to Liberia. The man most highly esteemed by the young
apprentice however, was Tobias Miller. Working at the Herald to
earn his tuition at Andover Seminary, Miller already exhibited many

of the traits which would later make him a successful city

 

8Ibid., pp. 28, 56, 42; Thomas, Liberator, pp. 25, 27.

3h

missionary in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. According to Garrison, he
had "wonderful self-command, patience, cheerfulness, urbanity, and
philosophic composure, far beyond his years." In his daily walk
and conversation he was a pattern of uprightness. As true to his
highest convictions of duty "as the needle to the pole," no one was
ever "more inflexible in pursuit of the right" and yet "more yield-
ing in the matter of accomodation where no principle was involved"
than Toby Miller. Late in life, the former apprentice noted that
Miller's "beautiful spirit and fine example had a great influence
upon my mind; and I rather feel grateful to him and shall ever cher-
ish his memory with deep feeling."9

By associating with companions of such high moral charac-
ter, Lloyd was merely heeding the advice which filled the letters
sent to him by his mother.10 In a letter of August, 1817, she
wrote, "Your good behavior will more than compensate for all my
trouble; only let me hear that you are steady and go not in the way

of bad company, and my heart will be lifted up to God for you, that

you may be kept from the snares and temptation of this evil world."

 

9Smith, History 2; Newbur ort, p. 260; Speech at Boston,
October 1“, 1878, in Dail Evening Traveller, October 15, 1878;
Thomas, Liberator, p. 2 ; Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, #1, 55;
Garrison to Frank W. Miller, April 50, 1870 in Garrison and Garrison,
Life, I, #1. Russel Nye has written that Miller and Garrison en-
gaged in "long, involved theological discussions" as they worked
in Allen's shop. At age 16 Garrison seriously considered giving
his life to missionary work. Russel B. Nye, William Lloyd Garrison
egg the Humanitarian Reformers (Boston: Little, Brown and Company,
195577'pJ‘T67"""‘

101m their biography, the Garrison brothers wrote of Fanny:
"She attended church three times on Sunday, although she had to
walk nearly two miles each time; and before the end of her first
year in Baltimore she had established a women's prayer-meeting,
which met every Saturday afternoon, and had the satisfaction of see-
ing it well attended." Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 52.

35

Fanny had always been deeply concerned for her son's spiritual wel-
fare, constantly urging him toward higher realms of spiritual per-
fection. As early as the summer of 181% she had warned him, "Don't
go to the water for should you be drowned your soul must go to god
to be judged. O my dear child should you be called away unprepared
how dredful would be the thought...and don‘t let my ears here that
Loyd has done wrong for god sees all your way and knows all your
thoughts." Admonitions of this character continued to flow from
Fanny's pen as long as she lived. "O that I may meet you at the
right of the Father receiving that blessed sentence which shall be
pronoun'd on all the redeem'd of the Lord...," she wrote in
February, 1821. "Remember your Creator in the days of your Youth
for there is a blessed promise to them that seek the Lord when they
are young." In April she urged Lloyd to "seek that friend that
sticketh closer than a brother...." If he would only look to Jesus
his young soul would enjoy "that grace and faith which works by
love and [purifies] the heart."11

Nothing short of the news that he had experienced the joys
of eternal salvation seemed to be able to satisfy her. "ETJell me
in your nextllletterj whether your mind has ever been seriously im-
press'd about the Salvation of your immortal soul...," she wrote,
"Should I hear that news--and you realize it in your own sou1--it
would soothe my dying pillow...." Not even the success which Lloyd

had in penning articles for the Herald changed the tone of his

 

11Frances Maria Garrison to William Lloyd Garrison,
August 29, 1817, in Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 55; Frances
Maria Garrison to William Lloyd Garrison, July 18, 181“, February 5,
1821, April 7, 1821, November 28, 1821, Garrison Family Papers,
Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College.

36

mother's letters. When he told her that by engaging in this sort
of literary endeavor his leisure time had been usefully and wisely
employed, she merely replied that, had he been searching the Scrip-
tures and praying for the guidance of the Holy Spirit to lead his
mind into "the path of holiness," his time would have been even more
wisely spent--and his "advance to the heavenly world more rapid."12

To all outward appearances, Lloyd was a dutiful follower of
his mother's advice. By teaching him to believe that virtue was
its own reward and that piety was the final test of character, Fanny
had bequeathed to her son a deep concern with both spiritual and
physical purity. Her constant urgings to "shun every appearance of
evil" were strictly obeyed. By the time that he completed his
apprenticeship in December 1825, he was known in Newburyport as a
steady, responsible young man, a devout Baptist, and a conservative
in manners, dress, and politics. Lloyd attended worship services
regularly and sang in the choir. While he never became a member of
the little Baptist church, he delighted in weighty sermons, studied
the Bible, and pondered the doctrine of plenary inspiration. Al-

though he had not himself been baptized, he held that immersion was

 

1aFrances Maria Garrison to William Lloyd Garrison,
December 50, 1822, Garrison Family Papers, Sophia Smith Collection,
Smith College; Frances Maria Garrison to William Lloyd Garrison,
June 5, 1825, in Walter M. Merrill, "Prologue to Reform--Garrison's
Early Career," Essex Institute Historical Collections, XCII (April,
1956), 151-158; Garrison to Frances Maria Garrison, May 26, 1825,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library. In February, 1821 Garrison's
sister, Maria, also urged him to seek the Lord. "0 my dear brother,"
she wrote, "be a good boy go to Jesus he will strengthen you go to
him with a poor and contrite heart and as the publican did say god
be merciful to me a sinner and he will not despise you. He says in
his prescious word (the bible) come unto me all that are heavy la-
den and I will give you rest then go to the foot of the cross and
cry Lord save or I perish I warn I intreat you to go and you never
will repent of it." Maria Elizabeth Garrison to William Lloyd
Garrison, February 5, 1821, Garrison Family Papers, Sophia Smith
Collection, Smith College.

37

the only acceptable form of baptism. A strict Sabbatarian, Garrison
also believed that the clerical order and the organized church were
divinely instituted. Having become familiar with the Bible at an
early age, he could repeat scores of scripture verses from memory.1
One of Garrison's anonymous pieces for the Herald was a reli-
giously symbolic story about a shipwreck which one historian has re-
ferred to as a "thinly disguised drama of salvation." After he left
Allen's paper to take over the operation of friend Isaac Knapp's
Eeeey Courant, which he renamed TQe {gee Peeee, Garrison continued
to evidence his piety in print. Following the death of Thomas
Jefferson in July, 1826, the young editor wrote that, although he
had always disapproved of the ex-President's political ideas, be
admired his great talents. Now that Jefferson was dead, Garrison
suggested that Americans remember his virtues and forget his faults.
As for himself, the ardent Federalist found it increasingly difficult

to forget the Virginian's faults when paper after paper continued

 

13Frances Maria Garrison to William Lloyd Garrison,
March 24, 1825, in Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, #9; Nye, Humani-
tarian Reformers, p. 11; Thomas, Liberator, pp. 28-29; Garrison and
Garrison, Life, I, 56; Liberator, November 9, 1849. Garrison never
became a church member and was never baptized. He did, however,
feel that he was following "the path of holiness." In l8kl he de-
clared: "I believe in an indwelling Christ, and in his righteous-
ness alone; ...I glory in nothing here below, save in Christ and
him crucified; ...I profess to have passed from death unto life,
and know by happy experience that there is no condemnation to them
who are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after
the spirit." Garrison to Elizabeth Pease, March 1, 18A1, in
Wendell Phillips Garrison and Francis Jackson Garrison, William Lloyd
Garrison, 1802-1822: Tee Stor of Hie Life Told 2y Hie Children,
III (New York: Century 00., l 89), 5. See also Silvan S. Tomkins,
"The Psychology of Commitment: The Constructive Role of Violence
and Suffering for the Individual and for His Society" in TQe
Antislavery Van uard: Ne! Essays 22 the Abolitionists, ed. by
Martin Duberman (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1965),
p. 281; Thomas, Liberator, pp. 229, 252; Liberator, August 26, 18h2.

 

38

to eulogize him. He was especially annoyed by Allen's eulogy in the
Hegeig. Condemning it as rhapsodical, impious, and offensive,
Garrison could not but wonder how a paper which twenty years ago had
viewed the leader of the Democratic-Republicans as "the Great Lama
of Infidelity--as the giant who would carry away the gates of
Christianity, and open the floodgates of vice" could so prostitute
itself as to publish a glowing tribute to the man. To Garrison's
mind, Jefferson's religious sentiments were "notorious." They were
indefinite, unsound, and "inculcated a loose morality."11+

When the {gee Peeee failed in September, 1826, Garrison
journeyed to Boston. There, after a period of adjustment to life
in the metropolis, he found inexpensive lodgings with Rev. William
Collier, a Baptist city missionary who published a struggling tem-
perance journal called the National Peelanthropist. Collier's
Federal Street boardinghouse served as a haven for missionaries,
visiting clergymen, itinerant evangelists, and Christian reformers
of all types. His paper extolled the virtues of Bible societies,
home missions, and Sabbath observance while denouncing the evils
of drink, gambling, prostitution, and theatergoing. Shortly after
arriving at Collier's,Garrison was hired to work as a typesetter
on the paper. On January #, 1828 he was entrusted with the editor-

ship of the Philanthropist.15

 

luNewburyport Herald, May 51, 1822; Thomas, Liberator,

pp. 5h-55; Walter M. MerrIII, Against Wind eee Tide: 5 Bio ra h
ef‘Wm. Lloyd Garrison (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1965),
}h I6? Newburyport Free Press, July 20, 1826. In the columns of the
£222 Press Garrison also denounced the sins of Sabbath-breaking,
free thought, dueling, prostitution, theater-going, and tippling.

Thomas, Liberator, p. 1+9.

6 15Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 79-80; Thomas, Liberator,
Po 1e

 

39

Under his direction the tipplers of the world were denounced
with a vengeance. To dramatize the dangers of alcohol, Garrison re-
printed lurid tales of spontaneous combustion, stories of starving
families victimized by the drunkard's curse, and reams of temperance
verse. He filled the columns of his paper with as many tragic exam-
ples of the evils of liquor as he could find. He told about the
woman who had broken her husband's rum jug only to be brutally
beaten with the jagged pieces. He recounted the tale of the drunk-
ard who was seen late at night stumbling down a dark country road
and whose body was found several days later at the foot of a cliff.
He gave an account of a brandy-drinking contest which ended with
the senseless meandering through the night of two of the participants
and the death of the third. In addition to printing items of this
type, Garrison's paper carried articles urging the dismissal of
drinkers from their jobs, the prohibition of liquor on ships, and
the abolition of certain social customs--such as the offering of
the social glass to visitors and the treating of soldiers to a
round of drinks.16

Liquor was not the only thing proscribed in the pages of the
National Philanthropist. The young editor also launched attacks on
immorality, war, tobacco, Sabbath mail deliveries, lotteries, and
"religious infidelity." He condemned the "indelicate" offerings of
Mrs. Knight at the Federal Street Theater as well as the "bill of

licentiousness" offered the public by an Italian dance troupe at

16Merrill, Wind and Tide, p. 19; Thomas, Liberator, p. 67.

In l8h6, Mary Howitt wrote that it was while he was at the Philan-
thropist, "a paper devoted to the subject of total abstinence, and
the first paper in the world which was the advocate of this cause,"
that Garrison "became himself, from principle, a tee-totaller."
Hewitt , "Memoir, " p. 1‘6 .

 

 

#0

the Tremont. He denounced the immorality shown so graphically in
the lives and works of Tom Moore and Lord Byron. The appalling
sight of "profligate coxcombs and dissipated dandies" enjoying a
Sunday stroll moved him to demand a more rigid enforcement of the
blue laws. In the lumbering Sunday mail coaches he could see only
"skepticism and depravity" stalking the land. With such numerous
and widespread evils to eradicate, he could not help wondering how
some Christians could spend their time engaged in doctrinal disputes
"while infidelity is seeking to subvert the purity of our institu-
tions and the permanency of our liberties."17

While in Boston, Garrison's personal behavior was as upright
as that which he urged upon others. Although he occasionally at-
tended worship services at Rev. Howard Malcom's Federal Street Bap-
tist Church, his favorite preacher was Lyman Beecher. Attracted to
Hanover Street Church in part because of its pastor's position on
the temperance question, but still more because of Beecher's great
oratorical powers, Garrison enjoyed listening to the evangelical
reformer fulminate against Catholics, Unitarians, and assorted
theological liberals. Perhaps becoming curious to hear some of the
preaching which Beecher so stridently condemned, the young editor
also went to hear William Ellery Channing and John Pierpont speak.
As might be expected, he came away with a feeling of sadness that

the two Unitarian divines were so unsound in their theological

 

17Nye, Humanitariee Reformers, p. 15; Thomas, Liberator,
p. 68; Merrill, Wind egg Tide, pp. 20-21. In April, 1828 Garrison
wrote: "It is impossible to estimate the depravity and wickedness
of those who, at the present day, reject the gospel of Jesus Christ,
when the proofs of its divine origin have been accumulating for
eighteen centuries till the mass of evidence exceeds computation...."
5::ional Philanthropist, April 18, 1828; Garrison and Garrison,
__._Q! It 0

41

views and had wandered so far from the true faith.18

In 1829 Garrison wrote an article on the differences between
Beecher and Channing. After a brief examination of their contrast-
ing literary styles, he concluded that "the mind of Channing is un-
commonly fertile and chaste, but lacks robustness and vigor, the
mind of Beecher is not less creative, and its profundity more than
counterbalances the absence of refinement." As a divine, neither
Channing, nor any other preacher could equal Lyman Beecher. His
"overwhelming superiority" could not be attributed to an eloquent
voice or a commanding physical presence, but was the result of his
ability to speak the truth--truth "delivered in childlike simplicity
and affection." His style of reasoning was "lucid almost beyond
example." In his exposition of the doctrines of the Holy Bible
there was nothing that was "dark, or doubtful, or repulsive." The
decrees of God, His justice and mercy, and the "reasonableness" of
His requirements were all explained in a manner that was both
"harmonious and rational." Beecher gave such a "blaze of evidence"
in support of his assertions that the plan of redemption, though
"stupendous as heaven," was easily "understood and appreciated" by
all of his listeners.19

By the time that the young editor from Newburyport moved
from Boston to Bennington, Vermont in the late summer of 1828, he

had added an antislavery plank to his personal reform platform.

While at the Philanthropist he had been converted to gradual aboli-

 

tionism by the Quaker editor of the Genius 2; Universal Emancipation,

 

18Johnson, Garrison and His Times, p. “A; Nye, Humanitarian
Reformers, p. 15: Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 78.

Disease}. 2: 22.2 Lissa. January 30. 1829.

£2:

4
I

m t '

#2

Benjamin Lundy. He had also served on a committee to gather signa-
tures for antislavery petitions to Congress and had even criticized
Reverend Malcom for claiming that slavery was too delicate a subject
to be meddled with by the people of the North. In the first issue
of the Bennington Journal ef £22 21222 Garrison wrote that both he
and his new paper were devoted to the suppression of intemperance
and its associated vices, the "perpetuity of national peace," and
the "gradual emancipation of every slave in the republic." Subse-
quent issues of his paper showed that the twenty-three-year-old
editor's devotion to reform was indeed growing stronger even while
he expanded his interest to encompass new areas of concern.20

Two weeks after his arrival in Bennington, Garrison printed
a notice of a meeting to be held for the purpose of preparing a
petition to Congress demanding the abolition of slavery in the
District of Columbia. Without waiting for the approval of the meet-
ing, he composed a petition and mailed it to every postmaster in
the state, requesting that the documents be returned with as many
signatures as possible before the middle of December. Late in

January, 1829, Garrison's petitions, bearing the names of some 2,500

 

20Garrison to editor of the Boston Courier, August 12, 1828
in Merrill, Letters, I, 66-68; Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 97-98;
Journal 2; egg Times, October 5, 1828. In 1851 Garrison noted:
"My attention was first called to the subject of slavery in the year
1827. So completely was the slave population lost sight of here at
the North, that, in the days of my boyhood, I scarcely knew that a
slave was to be found on the American soil. As it respects the free
colored population, I was educated in the spirit of prejudice against
them as deeply, perhaps, as any other child in the Commonwealth. I
well recollect how strongly repugnant to my feelings was their very
presence." Speech at Boston, January 2%, 1851, in Liberator,
January 51, 1851. For a more extensive discussion of Garrison's
meeting with Benjamin Lundy and the influence which the Quaker edi-
tor had on him see Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 87-95; Thomas,
Liberator, pp. 7h-85.

ts

Vermont residents and praying that Congress would remove the cancer
of slavery from "the vitals of the republic," were placed before the
House Committee for the District of Columbia.21

About this same time, Garrison launched a violent attack
against three New England congressmen, James W. Ripley of Maine,
Jonathan Harvey of New Hampshire, and Rollin C. Mallary of Vermont
for opposing a resolution which instructed the Committee for the
District of Columbia to consider the feasibility of abolishing the
slave trade in the nation's capital. "Oh shame! Where is thy
blush?" he asked. Who were these sanctimonious hypocrites who had
the audacity to cast their votes in such a manner? Who were these
"poltroons," these "dough faces" who dared quote the Holy Scriptures
to prove that it was permissible to destroy the souls of their fel-
low men? Ripley and Mallary protested against his abusive language,
but to no avail. The young editor merely sneered at their conten-
tion that Northern agitation of the slavery question would destroy
Southern good will. "Are we--in the Fifty Third Year of the
Independence of the United States--are we to gravely discuss the
question, whether all men are born free and equal, as if it were a
new doctrine?" he asked. "Are we to learn, whether the colored of
of our race are really brutes or human beings?"22

Despite the new emphasis which he placed on antislavery,

Garrison was not about to forget the other issues which had so

 

21Thomas, Liberator, p. 87.

221bid., pp. 87-88; Journal 23 EEe Times, January 50,1829,
February 20, 1829. John Thomas has noted that Garrison chose the
phrase "colored of our race" to show that his case for universal
brotherhood rested on the belief in a single creation. God had
created all men at the same moment, and they were all equally His
children. Thomas, Liberator, p. 88.

Ah

concerned him in earlier years. In the columns of the Journal, he
lashed out against Sunday mail delivery, the doctrine of universal
salvation, intemperance, and war. He became especially critical of
Unitarian doctrine--on one occation referring to a discourse by
John Pierpont as containing "novel, illogical, subtle, and incon-
clusive arguments." Included among the projects which he promoted,
thinking that they would help the people of Bennington steel them-
selves against such evils, were a lyceum, a temperance hall, a new
heating plant for the church, and bigger and better Sunday Schools.
As long as sin continued to buffet and tempt the souls of men, he
would refuse to remain a passive spectator of the "contest between
right and wrong--virtue and vice--truth and error." As he wrote in
a December, 1828 editorial, "While drunkenness and intemperance
abound, I will try to reclaim the dissolute, and to annihilate the
progress of vice. While profanity, and sabbath-breaking, and crime,
wound my ear and affect my sight, I will reprove, admonish, and
condemn.... While a soul remains unenlightened, uneducated, and
without 'the glorious gospel of the blessed God,'... I will contri-
bute my little influence to the diffusion of universal knowledge."23

While in Bennington, Garrison continued to live an upright
Christian life. On Sundays he sat under the preaching of Rev.

Daniel A. Clark of the First Church. He made his home at Deacon

 

23Journal 2; EQe Times, October 51, 1828, December 26, 1823,
January 50, 1829; Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 11k; Thomas,
Liberator, pp. 85-86. After the pastor of Boston's Hollis Street
Church complained that Garrison's references to his speech had been
unjust, the young editor not only printed Pierpont's letter, but
also gave copious extracts from the address in question. Garrison
declared that he enthusiastically admired everything in Pierpont
except his theology. Journal 2; £22 Times, November 1“, 1828. See
also Garrison to Jacob Horton, June 27, 1829, Garrison Papers,
Boston Public Library.

45
Erwin Safford's boardinghouse with pupils who were attending the
Bennington English and Classical Seminary. His friends continued
to be drawn from the ranks of the regenerate--chief among them being
James Ballard, principal of the seminary. It was not long, however,
before an older acquaintance, Benjamin Lundy, appeared at the edi-
tor's doorstep and convinced him that he could best serve both God
and suffering man as the resident editor of the Genius. On March 29,
1829 the editor of the Journal published his valedictory. In it he
stated that he had been invited to "occupy a broader field, and to
engage in a higher enterprise." The field would embrace the entire
country and the enterprise would be in behalf of the slave popula-
tion. He declared that if he could be the "humble instrument" of
breaking at least one chain and thereby restoring a single captive
to liberty, he would feel that he had been amply repaid for his
labors.2“

Back in Boston, Garrison met William Goodell, an antislavery
man who had merged his own religious paper, the Investigator, with
the National PQElanthropist. The two men discussed the merits of
various antislavery projects and called upon a number of prominent
ministers in an attempt to enlist their support for the cause of
emancipation. They accomplished little of lasting value, but their
activities did help win Garrison an invitation from the Congrega-
tional Societies of the city to deliver the annual Fourth of July
address in Park Street Church. The invitation provided him with an

opportunity to present his case against slavery to the most powerful

 

ZHGarrison and Garrison, Life, I, 116-117, 121-122; T. D.

Seymour Bassett, ed., "A Letter by William Lloyd Garrison, Written
from Bennington, Vermont, on March 50, 1829," Vermont History,
xxxvxl (Autumn, 1969), 258; Journal 9; the Times, March 27, 1829.

1+6
25

and influential elements in Boston society.
In his lengthy speech, Garrison spoke of the ills which beset
the nation on the fifty-third anniversary/Eflitg‘birth. In his
estimation, the prevalence of infidelity, the ravages of intemper-
ance, the desecration of the Sabbath, the profligacy of the press,
and the corruption of party politics all constituted grave threats
to the continued existence of the republic. Nevertheless, the
greatest evil of all was slavery, an institution which he likened
to "a gangrene preying upon our vitals--an earthquake rumbling under
our feet, a mine accumulating materials for a national catastrophe."
The system of chattel labor was a curse that was debasing in its
effect, cruel in its operation, and "fatal in its continuance."
The physical conditions under which the bondsmen existed in the
southern states was deplorable. Moreover, it seemed to Garrison that
the condition of the slaves "in a religious point of view" entitled
them to a "higher consideration" than they had been receiving from
the nation's "Christians and Philanthropists." In fifty-three years
of independence, American Christians had done comparatively little
for the Negro. The black men in bondage were seldom remembered by
the churches of the land. From one end of the country to the other,
charitable societies formed "golden links of benevolence" and scat-
tered their contributions "like rain-drops over a parched heath,"
but brought no sustenance to the perishing slave. It could truly be
said that the "blood of souls" was upon the garments of the American
Church, yet it refused to take notice of the stain.

What could be done to remedy this long-standing contradiction

 

' ZsGarrison and Garrison, £322: I, 12h; Nye, Humanitarian
Reformers, p. 25. ‘

#7

between American profession and practice? Garrison called upon the
nation's churches to place themselves in the vanguard of the great
antislavery enterprise. If the power of prayer was omnipotent, let
the churches pour out their supplications to heaven in behalf of
the slave, he said. If the human soul was immortal and priceless,
let the churchmen combine their energies to rescue the suffering
chattel and save his soul from "remediless woe." If the churches
were interested in works of benevolence, let antislavery charity-
boxes stand uppermost among those for missionary, tract, and educa-
tional purposes. If Christians were ashamed of being so long
asleep to the cause of humanity, let them shake off their slumbers
and "arm for the holy contest."26

Those who took the time to analyze Garrison's address
closely could see the direction in which his mind was moving. His
emphasis was now clearly on the sin of slavery rather than on the
assorted vices with which he had been concerned at the Philanthro-
2123' Moreover, by the time that he left Boston to join Lundy in
Baltimore, he had decided that neither colonization nor gradual

emancipation was the correct way to deal with the chattel system.

The doctrine of immediate emancipation, borrowed from the British

 

26Speech at Boston, July 4,1829, in William Lloyd Garrison,
Selections from the Writin s and S eeches of William Lloyd Garrison
(Boston: R. F. Wallcut,118527-pp. 52-53,‘Zo; Garrison and Garrison,
Life, I, 127-157. During a Fourth of July celebration at Newbury-
port in 1828, Garrison read a "spirited ode" which spoke of his be-
lief in a God who was always to be found on the side of liberty and
justice. It read in part:

And now, while our cannon ring out to the skies
Their eloquent peals in the accents of thunder,
In clouds let the incense of gratitude rise
To Him who alone burst our shackles asunder;

National Philanthro ist, July 11, 1828; Garrison and Garrison, Life,
I! 93-970

 

as
abolitionists, now seemed to be the only key that would free the
slave from his dank prison.27
Garrison made his priorities clear in a salutatory address
which appeared in the Genius in early September, 1829. Ten months
ago, the new managing editor noted, he had vowed to direct his
energies toward the overthrow of three great national evils--
slavery, intemperance, and war. His resolution was unchanged. In
concentrating his efforts upon the extinction of slavery, he did
not mean to lose sight of the other two abominations. Nevertheless,
honesty forced him to admit that in the future they would, of neces-
sity, receive less of his "attention and aid" than slavery. After
stating his new views on colonization and immediate emancipation,
he concluded by promising to "give no quarter to the open advocates

of slavery, nor easily excuse those pseudo—philanthropists who find

an apology for its continuance in the condition of the slaves."28

 

27For a discussion of what Garrison meant by "immediate

emancipation" see Thomas, Liberator, pp. 103-105.
28Genius of Universal Emancipation, September 2, 1829;

Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, lHZ-lau. Responding to a somewhat
critical article which appeared in the Newburyport Herald of May 25,
1830, Garrison wrote: "My 'stubbornness' and ‘dogmaticalness' con-
sist in ardently cherishing, and fearlessly avowing, the following
notionsza-That 'all men are born equal, and endowed by their Creator
with certain unalienable rights'--consequently, that a slave-holder
or slave-abettor is neither a true patriot, a good citizen, nor an
honest man, in all his transactions and relations, and that slavery
is a reproach and a curse upon our nationzo-That intemperance is a
filthy habit and an awful scourge, wholly produced by the moderate,
occasional and fashionable use of alcoholic liquors--consequently,
that it is sinful to distil, to import, to sell, to drink, or to
offer such liquors to our friends or laborers, and that entire ab-
stinence is the duty of every individua1:--That war is fruitful in
crime, misery, revenge, murder, and every thing abominable and
bloody—~and, whether offensive or defensive, is contrary to the pre-
cepts and example of Jesus Christ, and to the heavenly spirit of the
gospel-~consequently, that no [professor] of christianity should
march to the battle-field, or murder any of his brethren for the

“9

That Garrison was a man of his word was evident from the
vehement manner in which he blasted the pro-slavery forces in sub-
sequent issues of the paper. The more that he saw of the infamous
institution--and there were many evidences of it on the streets of
Baltimore-~the more heated his invective grew. His abusive attacks
on the slave traders operating in the Baltimore--Washington area
brought angry letters and threats of reprisal. His abusive edito-
rials and immediatist doctrines cost the struggling journal much
good will and many subscriptions. Nevertheless, he refused to be
silenced. Until his career at the Genius was ended by his 49 day
imprisonment for libeling Francis Todd, a Newburyport shipowner,
Garrison continued to spare neither Northznr South in his censures.
Not even the Church and clergy escaped criticism. American reli-
gion, he said, continued to complacently tolerate "open adultery,
oppression, robbery, and murder." Seldom, if ever, lifting up "a
warning voice, or note of remonstrance" against slavery, it re-
strained no human lust, but merely engendered selfishness and
cruelty. The religion of America had exchanged its "garments of
humiliation" for the "splended vestments of pride." It was a creed
which had neither courage, faithfulness, or self-denial--deeming it
better to heed the words of men than the pronouncements of God.
Garrison predicted that if the moral laxity of the nation's churches
was allowed to retain its stranglehold on the impulse toward reform,

the present generation would have a "solemn account to give in the

 

glory of his country. These are the first fruits of my bi otr ,
fanaticism, rashness, and folly." Garrison to editor of Newburyport
flggglg, June 1, 1830, in Merrill, Letters, I, 100.

50

great and terrible day of judgment."29

After his release from jail on June 5, 1830, the young re—
former continued to lament the lack of interest which America's
Christians had shown in the Negro's plight. He believed that as
long as the Church refused to act on the subject, all plans for the
emancipation of those in bondage would prove to be ineffectual. It
was necessary that the American Church be thoroughly purified "as
by fire" so that it could lend its wholehearted support to the anti-
slavery cause. One way of effecting such a purification was to ex-
clude slaveholders from the Christian communion. Garrison noted
that, while it seemed almost morally impossible for a man to be a
slaveholder and "a follower of the Lamb" at the same time, it was
a fact that many professed Christians did hold property in slaves.
These men styled themselves as ambassadors of Christ and professed
to love their neighbors as themselves. In actuality they spent
their days dealing in "bones, and sinews, and souls"--whipping and
branding the Negroes simply because they were of a different skin
color and because the laws of the State and the corrupt usages of
society justified such conduct.

As for himself, Garrison would hold no fellowship with

 

29Thomas, Liberato , pp. 106-107; Nye, Humanitarian
3&12222259 P- 273 Genius 2; 231132531 E anci atTTi, October 23,
l 29; Speech at Boston,0ctober 14, 1878in Daily Evening Traveller,
October 15, 1878. See also Genius of Universal Emancipation,
September 16, 1829, October 13, 1829, November 27, 1829. While at
the Genius, Garrison also denounced Thomas Paine and Thomas
Jefferson for their "infidelity," lamented the fact that the
Marquis de Lafayette was given a fete on the Sabbath, and expressed
his dislike of Lydia Maria Child's "religious notions." At the age
of 23 he wrote: "It is impossible to estimate the depravity and
wickedness of those who at the present day reject the gospel of
Jesus Christ." See Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 157; Genius of
Universal Emanci ation, October 30, 1829, February 5, 1830,
February 12, 1830; Thomas Wentworth Higginson, "Garrison and
Whittier," Independent, LIX (December 7, 1905), 1312-1313.

51

slaveholders. He would not make a truce with them for even a sin-
gle hour. "I blush for them as country men," he wrote, "I 532!
that they are not christians; and the higher they raise their pro-
fessions of patriotism or piety, the stronger is my detestation of
their hypocrisy." Such men were dishonest and cruel. God, the
angels, the devils, and indeed the entire universe knew that they
were "without excuse." The time would come when the forces of sla-
very would be crushed--for "the mouth of the Lord of Hosts has spoken
it." All oppression would then cease and every man would be free
from fear. Even if the men of the present generation did not live
to see that glorious day, they could still hasten its arrival by
their prayers, their toil, and their sacrifice in the cause of
emancipation. By doing so they would be abundantly rewarded. The
"King of Heaven" would bestow that "noblest of panegyrics" upon
them--"well done, good and faithful servants!"30

It did not take long for Garrison to discover that he could
not continue to forward such inflamatory sentiments and still ex-
pect the nation's churchmen to rally to his side in the fight
against slavery. In August, 1830 he announced that he intended to
found a new journal devoted to "the abolition of slavery, and the
moral and intellectual elevation of our colored population." After
mailing copies of his prospectus to antislavery sympathizers in
various cities, he set out upon a speaking tour to raise funds for
the new project. In September, after lecturing in Philadelphia,
New Iork, Hartford and other Northeastern cities, Garrison proceeded

to Newburyport. Resolved that his native town should be the first

 

3°Garrison to George Shepard, September 13, 1830, in
Merrill, Letters, I, 107-109. See also Matthew 25:14-30.

52

place in Massachusetts to hear his lectures on slavery, he contacted
Dr. Daniel Dana, pastor of the First Presbyterian Church. Dana
agreed to let the young reformer speak in his meetinghouse, but

when the audience gathered for the first lecture they found the
doors of the sanctuary locked. Dana had been overruled by the
church trustees. It seemed that no one who had been convicted of
criminal libel against such a respectable and influential citizen
as Francis Todd could expect to be greeted with open arms by those
entrusted with preserving the morals and good name of the community.
Shortly thereafter, Dr. Luther F. Dimmick, pastor of the Second
Congregational Church promised Garrison the use of his meetinghouse
only to find himself as helpless in the hands of his trustees as
Dana had been. After one lecture, Garrison found the church doors
barred against him. Disappointed and irritated by the reception
which he had received from the churchmen, he wrote the editor of
the Herald that, if he had visited Newburyport to plead the cause
of twenty enslaved white men, "every hall and every meetinghouse
would have been thrown open, and the fervor of my discourses anti-
cipated and exceeded by my fellow townsmen." The fact was, however,
that he had returned to the town of his birth to acquaint its citi-
zens with the plight of some two million Negroes who were "groaning
in bondage." This problem, it seemed, excited "no interest nor
pity" in the hearts of the Newburyport people. However unfortunate
the situation, Garrison claimed to "entertain no ill-will" against
those who had exerted their influence, "with a malignity and success

which are discreditable to themselves and the place," to silence him.

I...

.v‘}

I.-

O"

.J

Us

‘q
u

M
H

r.‘

If'.‘

I
-m-

53

They would answer to God and to posterity for their conduct.31
Immediately upon his return to Boston in the fall of 1830,
Garrison paid a visit to Lyman Beecher. Expecting to find a supporter
for his newspaper project, he instead found that the minister was
indifferent to his appeal. Beecher was alarmed by the young re-
former's demand for immediate and unconditional emancipation. "Your
zeal," he said, "is commendable, but you are misguided. If you will
give up your fanatical notions and be guided by us [the clergy]
we will make you the Wilberforce of America." Having been confident
of winning Beecher's sympathy and support, Garrison was disappointed
and saddened by the minister's remarks. He had listened to Beecher‘s
preaching with much profit and delight and had longed to hear his
eloquent voice pleading the cause of the imbruted slave. Garrison
could not understand how Beecher or any other Christian minister
could advocate gradualism as the solution to the problem of slavery--
it was as if they favored telling the drunkard, the thief, and the
wife beater that they must refrain from these crimes gradually and
aim at some indefinite, far-off reformation of character.32
After experiencing this rebuff to his immediatism, Garrison
sought the cooperation of Jeremiah Evarts, Secretary of the Board of
Commissioners for Foreign Missions, but received the same response--

as did letters to William Ellery Channing, Justin Edwards, Daniel

Webster, and Jeremiah Mason. Later in the year, an old acquaintance

 

31Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 199- 202, 207- -209;
Garrison to editor Newburyport Herald, September 30, 1830, in
Merrill, Letters, 1,111.

32 Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 215, Johnson, Garrison
and His Times, pp. hk-hs; Truman Nelson, ed., Documents of U heaval:
Selections from William Llpyd Garrison' s The Liberator,l 1831 -1885
(New York: Hill and Wang, 1966), pp. xii-xiii.

5k

in the temperance cause, Deacon Moses Grant, even refused to grant
him enough credit to obtain the ream or two of paper which he
needed to produce a specimen number of his journal. Grant did not
take this course of action out of any fear that Garrison would fail
to make good his debts, but did so because he was opposed to the
issuance of an antislavery paper of the type proposed.33

Garrison's pleas for aid and encouragement were finally an-
swered, not by the members of Boston's orthodox religious estab-
lishment, but by Abner Kneeland and his First Society of Free
Enquirers. After an unfruitful search for a suitable place in
which to hold his lectures, Garrison had been forced to place an
advertisement in the Boston Courier seeking "a Hall or Meetinghouse...
in which to vindicate the rights of TWO MILLIONS of American citi-
zens who are now groaning in servile chains in this boasted land
of liberty." In response to his plea, Kneeland, a former Universa-
list minister turned rationalist and pantheist, offered him the use
of the Society's rooms in Julien Hall. Reluctantly, the young
Baptist reformer accepted this kind offer from a man whose "infidelic"
views he had so uncharitably denounced in the pages of the National

Philanthropist.}k

 

33Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 21h-215, 22}; Samuel J.
May, Some Recollections g; 92; Antislavery Conflict (Boston: Fields,
Osgood, & Co., 13395, pp. 20, 30.

3“Merrill, Wind and Tide, pp. kO-hl; Garrison and Garrison,
Life, I, 211. In his 11:3? lecture, Garrison acknowledged his in-
debtedness to the First Society of Free Enquirers and spoke of the
shame which he felt because the churches of Boston had allowed them-
selves to be surpassed in charity and toleration. He explained
that he was very far from sympathizing with the Society's views on
religion and asserted that slavery could be abolished only through
the power of the Christian religion. Garrison and Garrison, Life,
I, 212.

55

Among those in attendance at Garrison's lecture on
October 13 were Samuel Joseph May, a Unitarian minister from
Brooklyn, Connecticut; his cousin, Samuel E. Sewall, a fellow Uni-
tarian and a Boston lawyer; and Sewall's brother-in-law, A. Bronson
Alcott. May in particular was taken with the young orator. In
later years he recalled, "Never before was I so affected by the
speech of man. When he had ceased speaking I said to those around
me: 'That is a providential man; he is a prophet; he will shake
our nation to its centre, but he will shake slavery out of it.'"
At the conclusion of the address, May, Sewall, and Alcott intro-
duced themselves to Garrison-~May saying, "Mr. Garrison, I am not
sure that I can indorse all you have said this evening. Much of
it requires careful consideration. But I am prepared to embrace
you, I am sure you are called to a great work, and I mean to help
you." After Sewall seconded this pledge, Alcott invited the group
to his home where they discussed immediatism far into the night.
Before morning Garrison had three new converts. While Alcott even-
tually lost sight of abolition among his other enthusiasms, May
and Sewall became Garrison's strongest Boston supporters.35

The events of October, 1830 made it increasingly clear to
the young reformer that it was possible to overlook theological
differences as great as those which separated him from May, Sewall,

or Kneeland in order to further the antislavery cause. It was

 

3SGarrison and Garrison, Life, I, 214; Nye, Humanitarian
Reformers, p. 31; Thomas, Liberator, p. 126; May, Recollections,
pp. 18-20. In their biography, Garrison's sons described their
father's feelings: "It is difficult to overrate the value of Mr.
May's and Mr. Sewall's friendship to him at that period. The
farmer's hearty and enthusiastic response to his appeal at Julien
Hall had been as unexpected and delightful as his own self-conse-
cration to the cause had been to Lundy, two years previous."
Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 217.

56
obvious that liberal religious convictions did not necessarily make
a man unsympathetic to the plight of the slave. As he wrote the
following year, "Universal emancipation from despotism is, and ought
to be, common ground.... If the religious portion of the community
are indifferent to the cries of suffering humanity, it is no rea-
son why I should reject the co-operation of those who are more deeply

interested, though they make no pretension to evangelical piety."36

 

36Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 226-227, 307: Liberator,
Mater]. 5 , 1831 e

CHAPTER III
A SLAVEHOLDING RELIGION

The cowskin makes as deep a gash in my flesh,
when wielded by a professed saint, as it does
when wielded by an open sinner
--Frederick Douglass
January 27, 18h6
Within the young nation lived a group of Americans who
were more interested in making the bondsmen's chains secure than
in exposing the sinful nature of the chattel system. Frederick
Douglass was the human property of several of these slaveholders
during his years in bondage and his attitude toward religion was
greatly influenced by the slave experience.
Born in 1817, Douglass, or Frederick Augustus Washington
Bailey as he was then known, spent his early childhood in Talbot
County on the eastern shore of Maryland.1 Separated from his slave
mother by the workings of the chattel labor system, young Frederick
was cared for by his grandparents, Betsey and Isaac Bailey. It is

not known whether the Baileys introduced their grandson to any of

the major tenets of Christianity, but it has been recorded that he

 

11h a letter to an unidentified correspondent, Douglass
wrote (May 2A, 1880): "I don't know the date of my birth. I have
a strong impression, I can hardly tell how it was made, but think
it was by some word said by old master's daughter when I was a very
little fellow, that I was born in February 1817, so that I am now
En my 64th year." Journal of Negro Histor , XXXVI (January, 1951),
3.

57

58

became acquainted early in life with the superstition inherent in
many nineteenth-century southern folk beliefs. In later years
Douglass recalled the local superstition which held that "Grandmother
Betty" had only to touch the seedling sweet potatoes when they were
about to be placed in the ground for them to grow and flourish. Her
"good luck" was actually due to a careful nurturing of the roots,
but it was nevertheless reason enough for her to be held in great
esteem and to be sent for "in all directions" simply to help with
the planting each year.2

Even though he lived a somewhat sheltered life at the
Bailey's, Frederick gradually became aware of the realities of the
slave system. Initially, this occurred through the realization
that there existed a person known as "Old Master" who claimed owner-
ship over grandmother, their "little hut," and even himself.3
This knowledge sometimes threw a shadow across his otherwise rela-
tively untroubled childhood, but was merely the precursor of even
more foreboding revelations about life in perpetual servitude. He
feared that such an existence would become intolerable because it
would eventually necessitate an unwelcome separation from his be-
loved, though surrogate, parents.

The day of reckoning came when Douglass reached the age of
seven and was taken some twelve miles from his birthplace to the
residence of Captain Aaron Anthony. Captain Anthony owned three

farms and thirty slaves, but spent the major portion of his time as

 

2Frederick Douglass, My Bondage and My Freedom (New York:
Dover Publications, Inc., 1969, Reprint of the 1855 edition), p. 36.

3Grandfather Isaac Bailey was a free Negro.

“Douglass, Bondage, pp. 38-s2, #5.

59

general overseer of the twenty or thirty farms and the thousand
slaves of Colonel Edward Lloyd.5 Douglass characterized the Lloyd
"home plantation" as "a little nation of its own, having its own
language, its own rules, regulations and customs"--a secluded and
out-of-the-way place, largely untouched by the social and intel-
lectual currents of the day. Religion, too, was apparently excluded
from the mainstream of plantation life. In his autobiography
Douglass bitterly noted that "éhe poon have the gospel preached to
them, in this neighborhood,_only2when they are able tqmpayfljpr it.
The slaves, having no money, get no gospel.... Thewrich planter can w
gafford to learnmpolitics_in the parlor, and to dispense with reli-
sisaealtessEher."6

Nevertheless, the slave community did have its own divine
of sorts. Crotchety, crippled "Uncle" Isaac Copper was both the
slave's doctor of divinity and doctor of medicine. Not long after
his arrival at Lloyd's, Frederick and twenty or thirty other black
children were sent to this local figure to learn The Lord's Prayer.
Douglass found his instructor seated on a large three-legged oaken
stool, armed with several good-sized hickory switches which he used
to enforce attention and good behavior. After receiving general
instructions, the children were commanded to kneel down and to re-
peat each portion of the prayer after Copper. A strict taskmaster,
Uncle Isaac seldom found any means of maintaining discipline short
of switching. Quite understandably, Frederick was often a truant

from these "prayer meetings." He later wrote that such devotions

 

5Philip S. Foner, Frederick Douglass (New York: Citadel
Press, 1964), p. 15.

6Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 61-65.

60

combined too much of the tragic and the comic to make them very
salutary "in a spiritual point of view."7

The youngster soon learned that the master class of the
plantation used even more force than Uncle Isaac to discipline the
bondsmen. Frederick witnessed numerous acts of cruelty on the
Lloyd plantation. He covertly observed the brutal whipping of his
aunt for secretly meeting with her lover, saw Anthony reject a plea
of mercy from a bloodied slave girl who feared the consequences of
returning to the purvue of her cruel overseer, and witnessed the
whipping of a mother of five for the crime of "impudence."8 Before
he left the Lloyd plantation, these incidents, as well as the mur-
ders of several "impudent" slaves, had given Douglass a vivid and
memorable picture of slavery in Maryland.

Such acts of brutality inevitably led young Frederick to
inquire into the origin and nature of slavery. He wanted to know
why some people were slaves and others masters, whether there was
ever a time when the institution did not exist, and how it began.

As he later wrote: "The very first mental effort that I now remem-
ber on my part, was an attempt to solve the mystery, Why am I a
slave?... When I saw the slave-driver whip a slave—woman, cut the
blood out of her neck, and heard her piteous cries, I went away into
the corner of the fence, wept and pondered over the mystery."9

Since his questions concerning these matters were put to children

only a little older and better informed than himself, Frederick did

 

71bid., pp. 70-72.

81bide, pp. 82-83. 85-88, 92‘950

9Douglass to Thomas Auld, September 3, 18A8, in Anti-Slavery
Bugle, September 29, 1848.

61

not solve the problem easily. HehgaswtoldgthatuflGod, up inxthensky"
hadhmgggflgllflthings. Blagk people were created to be slaves and
white peoplgmfiq be masters. God_was good and knew what was best for
_allmgf_gi§wgreatures. Douglass was not completely satisfied with
these answers. They came, he wrote, "point blank, against all my
notions of goodness." How could it be good to have his aunt suffer
under the whip? How did people know that God made black people to
be slaves? How could there be, as he knew there were, blacks who
were not held in slavery or whites who were not slaveholders? More
agreeable was the concept that God would eventually banish "bad"
masters to an evil place where they would be "burnt up," but he
still could not reconcile slavery with his crude notion of goodness.
After considerable thought and the chance overbearing of a slave
conversation detailing the process of their forefather‘s enslave-
ment in Africa, Frederickngamewto the conclusion that "it was not
ggigglflbutvcrime,flng£mggg,fibutmag, that afforded the true explana-
tion of thgwexistenceiofnslavery."lo Thus, he began early to develop
the idea that slavery existed in opposition to the will of his
Creator.

During his stay at Lloyd's, Frederick was in continual con-
tact with the forces of superstition. Located only a short way
from the great house of the plantation was the Lloyd family ceme-
tery. Strange sights had been seen there by some of the older
slaves. Douglass often listened to tales of shrouded ghosts riding

upon great black steeds, of great balls of fire which flew through

 

10Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 89-90; Frederick Douglass, Life 53g
Times 2; Frederick Dou lass (New York: Collier Books, 1962, Reprint
of the 1892 editionS, p. 50; Douglass to Thomas Auld, September 3,
l8k8, in Anti-Slavery Bu 1e, September 29, l8#8.

62

the air at midnight, and of the startling and dreadful sounds that
had often been heard coming from the burying ground. The cemetery
was a gloomy and forbidding place which, along with the stories con-
nected with it, was enough to discourage the slaves from approaching
the area. As Douglass later noted, "it was difficult to feel that
the spirits of the sleeping dust there deposited reigned with the
blest in the realms of eternal peace."ll

After a year's residence on the Lloyd plantation, the eight-
year-old slave boy learned that the first phase of his "education"
was over. He was being sent to a new master in Baltimore. Frederick's
treatment while at Lloyd's was not exceptionally harsh when com-
pared to that of the adult bondsmen. An occasional cuff from the
ill-tempered "Aunt" Katy and a "regular whipping" from Captain
Anthony, "such as any heedless and mischievous boy might get from
his father," was all that he could account for in the line of cor-
poral punishment. His work load was not excessive and was suited
to his age and capabilities, but he did complain of hunger and a
lack of warm clothing.12 Perhaps the personal deprivations of the
slave life were not as telling on Douglass' mental makeup as were
the observed cruelties and emotional torments which accompanied
such an existence. He had seen natural affections and relationships
crushed or distorted when they were deemed to be inconsistent with
slavery. He had perceived the debasing effects of slavery on mas-
ter and chattel alike. He had witnessed the telling effects of

long hours of hard, unremitting labor on the part of the field hands.

 

11Douglass, Life, p. #1.

laDouglass, Bonda e, pp. 75-76, 129-132.

63

Indeed, he was "as well aware of the unjust, unnatural and murderous
character of slavery, when nine years old" as he was in later life.
Therefore, it is immaterial how young Frederick was treated during
his first years as a slave, for the emotional bruises of the slave
life were duly inflicted. As Charles W. Chesnutt has written, "It
is enough to say that this lad, with keen eyes and susceptible feel-
ings, was an eye-witness of all the evils to which slavery gave
birth.”13

Frederick's new master was Hugh Auld, the brother of Anthony's
son-in-law, Captain Thomas Auld. For the next seven years Douglass
served as a house boy and then as a laborer in Auld's shipyard.

While Hugh Auld cared very little about religion, his wife, Sophia,
introduced the slave boy to a new experience-~11fe in a Christian
environment.

Remarkably pious, in Douglass‘ estimation, Mrs. Auld fre-
quently attended worship services, read her Bible diligently, and
often sang hymns to herself when her husband was away from home.
Unused to the supervision of slaves, Sophia Auld lacked the "super-
cilious contempt for the rights and feelings of the slave, and the
petulance and bad humor which generally characterize slaveholding
ladies." There was no sorrow or suffering for which she had not a
tear. No beggar left her door hungry or ill clad. Indeed, as
Douglass later noted, it was impossible to witness her fervent piety
and watchful uprightness without thinking and feeling that she was

a Christiane 1L}

 

13£222;. PP- 60. 80-81. 133: Charles W. Chesnutt, Frederick
Douglass (New York: Small, Maynard & Company, 1899), pp. -9.

1“Douglass, Bonda e, pp. lh2-143, 153.

6h

The initial experience of hearing "Miss Sopha" read the Bible
aroused in Frederick the desire to learn the art of reading. Late
one Sunday night Mrs. Auld's reading awakened the young slave. Some-
how he learned that the scripture she was studying was the first
chapter of Job. Years later he still remembered his sympathy for
the "good old man" and his great anxiety to know more about him.

This feeling led Douglass to ask Sophia to teach him to read--a pro-
cess which was begun in earnest only to be thwarted by Hugh Auld.

His reaction to his wife's declaration that she felt it her duty to
teach Frederick to read the Holy Scriptures was simply, but force-
fully put: "Learning would spoil the best nigger in the world."15

Douglass' search for wisdom and spiritual enlightenment next
took him to his white playmates and to a popular school book of the
day called 223 Columbian Orator. Higmyoung friends,.who taught.him
to read, tglgwhimwrapeatedly~that they did not believe God ever made
anyone towhc,anslave. Surely he had as much right to freedom as
they did. Ihfi.dislnzueawandnspeeches in the Orator enforced
Frederick's alggadywstrong belief that God had not ordained and
SégfifiigéggmfiPe inatitufiigg,9§”§layery. Once again he had discovered

‘F-Ur" -~ ‘. Mam—DI.-

the true foundation of the slave system in the pride, power, and

16

avarice of man, not in the will of God.

Despite the improved living conditions of his Baltimore

 

15Speech at Belfast, Ireland, January 6, l8h6, Douglass
Papers, Library of Congress; Douglass, Bonda e, pp. lh5-146.

l6Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 155-160. After his death, Jane Marsh
Parker wrote that Douglass had purchased Th2 Columbian Orator "with
his carefully hoarded pennies" so that he could "learn something to
speak at the Sabbath-school exhibitions of the free negroes, which
he attended by stealth, and where he was beginning to shine as an
orator." Jane Marsh Parker, "Reminiscences of Frederick Douglass,"
Outlook, LI (April 6, 1895), 553.

65
home, Frederick gradually became disconsolate with his lot. To a
large extent, prolonged reflection on his unfree state explains
this change. The more that he read and thought about it, the more

17

he came to abhor slavery and to detest his enslavers. Another,
and perhaps more satisfactory explanation for this hardening of
attitude was that the atmosphere of Christian love and kindness
which he had entered upon his arrival in Baltimore seemed to have
dissipated.

One of Auld's neighbors first gave young Douglass an un-
favorable picture of Christian charity. Mrs. Hamilton owned two
slaves, Henrietta and Mary. These young house slaves were brutally
treated and kept in a half-starved condition by a woman who, almost
in the very moments of her "shocking outrages of humanity and de-
cency," would "charm you by the sweetness of her voice and her
seeming piety." In his autobiography, Douglass wrote that Mrs.
Hamilton could lash her chattels as punishment for indolence one
moment, and in the next, continue to sing hymns "as though her
righteous soul were sighing for the holy realms of paradise."18

More importantly, however, was the fact that a marked change
had taken place in Sophia Auld's character since she had become a
slaveholder. Douglass later noted that under the influence of
slaVery her "tender heart became stone, and the lamblike disposition
gave way to one of tiger-like fierceness." She acquiesced in Hugh's

views on the education of bondsmen and eventually became even more

violent in her opposition to Frederick's attempts to read than was

 

17
18

Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 159-162.

Ibide’ pp. lh8"1500

66
her husband. This shift in character undoubtedly upset the young

slave, causing him to become "wretched and gloomy" beyond his ability
to describe.19 It now seemed that both non-Christian and supposed
Christian masters found pleasure in his enslavement and misery.
Saddened and disillusioned, Frederick, now 13 years of age,
found a religious solution to his problems in the sermons of a white
Methodist minister named Hanson. Preaching the doctrines that all
men, great and small, bond and free, were sinners in the light of
the Supreme Being, that they were, by nature, rebels against His
Divine Government, and that all must repent of their sins and be re-
conciled to Him through Jesus Christ, Reverend Hanson made Douglass
feel that he had a friend in God. Having been rather indifferently
exposed to theological concepts, Frederick did not have a very dis-
tinct idea of how he could obtain God's gift of salvation until he
consulted a black man named Charles Johnson. This understanding
individual told Douglass to pray and, more importantly, he told
him what to pray for. After weeks of being tormented by doubts and
fears, Frederick finally found his burden lightened by "that change
of heart which comes by 'casting all one's care' upon God, and by
having faith in Jesus Christ, as the Redeemer, Friend, and Savior
of those who diligently seek Him."20
This salvation experience brought Douglass into "a new
world, surrounded by new objects." He felt a deep love for all

mankind and was determined to have the whole world converted. Along

 

19Frederick Douglass, Narrative of the Life of Frederick
Dou lass, An American Slave (New York: Signet Books, —l968, Reprint
of the 18h5 -edition5, pp. 52-53; Douglass, Bonda e, pp. lkh-lhs,
153-154,160.

20Douglass, Life, p. 90; Douglass, Bonda e, p. 166.

67

with these feelings came an increased desire to know more of the
truths found in the Bible. From the mud and filth of the gutter he
gathered scattered passages of scripture, washed and dried them, and
"read the words of heavenly wisdom, which they contained, with a
glad heart."21

While thus seeking religious knowledge, Douglass met a man
who he was later to call his "spiritual father."22 Charles Lawson,
a devout, elderly, black man lived near the Auld residence and was
employed as a drayman. His real calling, however, appeared to be
more in the clerical line. Fervent in prayer and trusting in his
faith, "Uncle Lawson" took Frederick with him to prayer meetings
and met with the new convert on Sundays for "refreshing times" of
"singing, praying and glorifying God." Lawson told Douglass that
the Lord had a great work for him to do in preaching the gospel.
Although Frederick expressed doubts as to the feasibility of this
suggestion, Uncle Lawson convinced him that the Lord would "bring
it to pass in his own good time" and that Douglass must continue to
read and study the scriptures. When Frederick explained that he
was a slave for life, Uncle Lawson declared that "the Lord can make
you free, my dear. All things are possible with him, only haze faith
in 92g." Thus assured, and comforted, Douglass prayed that God

would, "of His great mercy, and in His own good time, deliver me

 

ZlDouglass, Bonda e, p. 16?; Speech at Belfast, Ireland,
January 6, 1846, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

ZZIn his autobiography, Douglass also noted that Charles
Lawson was, "in christian graces, the very counterpart of 'Uncle'
Tom. The resemblance is so perfect, that he might have been the
origgnal of Mrs. Stowe's christian hero." Douglass, Bonda e,
p013.

68

from my bondage."23

Since he served as the young slave's "chief instructor, in
matters of religion," it is very likely that Uncle Lawson was the
major influence behind Frederick's decision to become affiliated
with a local church. By joining the Methodist Episcopal Church in
1831, Douglass allied himself with a rapidly growing body of be-
lievers which had nevertheless experienced many trials and diffi—
culties in attempting to offer "acceptable worship to God."2‘+

Methodism had been established in Maryland during the
l760's--its influence spreading rapidly. Endeavoring to preach
the same gospel to all classes and colors, Methodist preachers frat-
ernized with Negroes and established mixed congregations. During
this early period, American Methodism lacked an educated leader-
ship, their preachers stressing the aspects of religious faith that
they and the masses could readily understand. Emotionalism marked

25

their worship services.

 

23The Aulds knew that Frederick had "become religious" and
seemed to respect his "conscientious piety," but when Hugh Auld be-
came aware of, and averse to, the frequent meetings with Lawson, he
threatened to whip Douglass if he ever visited the old man again.
Despite his knowledge of Frederick's continued attendance, Auld
never executed the threat. Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 167-169, 172.

auDouglass, Bonda e, p. 168. Sophia Auld was a member of
the Milk Street Methodist Episcopal Church, where she attended class
meeting every Monday evening under the leadership of Rev. Beverly
Waugh. Douglass had heard Rev. Waugh "exhort and pray" in the Auld
home, but it is likely that Lawson influenced his choice of churches
more than either Waugh or Mrs. Auld. See Douglass, Bondage, p. 168;
Douglass, Narrative, p. 58.

25N. C. Hughes, Jr., "The Methodist Christmas Conference:
Baltimore, December 24, l78h-January 2, 1785," Maryland Historical
Ma azine, LIV (September, 1959), 273; James M. Wright, Thg_Free
Ne ro in_Maryland l62k-l860, Columbia University Studies in History,
Bconomicsand Public Law, Vol. XCVII, No. 3 (New York: Longmans,
Green & Co., 1921), pp. #7, 210.

69

Near the end of the Revolution,Methodists began to attack
the institution of slavery. By the time of the Baltimore Christmas
Conference in 178“ there were in America eighty-four Methodist
preachers and almost 15,000 communicants, many of whom agreed with
the sentiments of the conference that slavery was "contrary to the
Golden Law of God." At this formative meeting of the Methodist
Episcopal Church, QEEEEESMEHlQSHHQEE,fidOPfied which directed slave:
holdigg_memhers_gfwflethodist“churchesito free their chattels_within
§_Pr§§£zihedwperiod of time or suffer exclusion from the communion.26

Although some Maryland masters freed their slaves, a greater
number in Virginia, where almost half of all American Methodists
lived, raised a storm of protest. With an extant antislavery sen-
timent, the opportunity to control the communion, and the desire to
begin their church with a clean moral slate, the conference members
quite naturally overextended their moral demands. The Methodists
had increased their numbers so rapidly that they had not been able
to create that special sense of community which could have helped
to assure compliance with the rather stringent demands of 178%. (The
rules on slavery were suspended six months after the adjournment of
the Baltimore Conference.€7

Despite this lapse of principle and the reluctance of the

Methodists to ordain Negroes as ministers, black men continued to

 

26Wright, Free Negro, pp. h7-49; Hughes, "Christmas Confer-
ence,"’p. 276; Cart€r G. Woodson, The History of the Negro Church
(Washington, D. C.: Associated Publishers, I921):—pp. 29-30; I. C.
Matlack, The Antislavery Struggle and Triumph in the Methodist
Episcopal-Church (New YorET‘-?Hillip§ E Hunt, 18817: p. 59.

 

 

27Donald G. Mathews, Slaver gag Methodism: A Chapter $9
American Moralit , 1280-18#§ (Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1965;, pp. 11-13; William B. Gravely, "Early Methodism and Slavery:
T32 Boots 3f a Tradition," Wesleyan guarterly Review, II (May,
1 50?. 7o

70
flock to the Methodist Church in unprecedented numbers. In 1787

Negroes constituted fifteen percent of the church membership.
Constant evangelization increased their rolls to twenty percent
or 13,500 by the turn of the century. In 1816 almost one-fourth
of the some 214,000 American Methodists were black. Thirty thou-
sand of these Negro communicants were in the South and were
gathered primarily from the slave population. By 18hh one-third of
all southern Negro Christians were Methodists.2

At the time of the Christmas Conference, Baltimore was one
of the nation's five largest cities and the fastest growing urban
center in the land. Thickly populated with Methodists, Baltimore
represented the geographic heartland of the Methodist movement.
Prior to the Revolution, the building of the city's Methodist church
establishment was a joint effort of black and white Christians.
Together they founded the Strawberry Alley church, which Douglass
joined on November 13, 1831, and the Lovely Lane church, which was
the site of the 178k conference.29

Soon after the war, white Christians drew the color line

 

28Wright, Free Ne ro, p. 211; Mathews, Slavery and Methodism,

pp. 63, 66-67; Joseph C. Hartzell, "Methodism and the Negro in the
United States," Journal 2; Negro Histor , VIII (July, 1923), 301;
Dwight W. Culver, Negro Segregation in The Methodist Church (New
Haven: Yale University Press, 1953), pT—KZ.

29Hughes, "Christmas Conference," p. 281; Wright, Free Ne ro,
p. 212; Annie Leakin Sioussat, 01d Baltimore (New York: Macmillan
Company, 1931), pp. 1h7-lh8; In-1891 Douglass described the Strawberry
Alley church as it was when he first became a member: "I remember
well the little, unpretentious house in which we used to gather. It
was looked upon as a large church for us then, but would not be no-
ticed now beside the many handsome edifices that have since been
erected. Then we had no regular pastors. Ministers would be sent
to us from the white conference, and if a colored preacher could be
found sufficiently capable and intelligent to instruct us and preach
to us, he was looked upon by the colored people as a marvel."
Baltimore S25, September 7, 1891.

 

71

across Baltimore Methodism. They began to shun their black
brothers in Christ and tended to control the church organization
without consulting them. -$§2§Eu§?5?°9§m3h9.f9lt the growing dis-
crimination most keenly withdrew, worshipped apart, and eventually
formed the nucleus of the African Methodist Episcopal Bethel Society
and Bethel Church. Blacks who declined to secede were specially
provided for within the parent Methodist church. In 1792 they were
given a building on Sharp Street. Separate preaching services and
class meetings were held for them by the same staff of preachers
which served the white churches. Substantial growth followed,
making Sharp Street Church the principle Negro church in Baltimore
for years. The congregation was incorporated under black trustees
in 1832, but was still served by white pastors.3O

Frederick had only a short time to enjoy the fellowship of
theflflfltimore Methodists and to revel in the pleasures of his new-
found spiritual life. In March, 1833 he was sent to a new master
in St. Michaels, Maryland. The change of ownership as a consequence
of the death of Captain Anthony and a subsequent family quarrel
placed Douglass in the possession of Thomas Auld, Anthony's son-in-
law. To the sixteen-year-old slave it seemed that each time "the
young tendrils" of his affection became attached to a certain lo-
cale, they were rudely broken by some outside power. He was "be-

31

ginning to look away to heaven" for the rest denied him on earth.

 

30Wright, Free Ne ro, pp. 212-218. Douglass joined the Sharp
Street church in 1836, eventually becoming a choir member and class
leader. See Benjamin Quarles, Frederick Douglass (New York: Atheneum,
1968), p. 11; Richard T. Greener, "Reminiscences of Frederick
Douglass," Champion Ma azine, I (February, 1917), 291.

31Frederick found that the habit of "tippling" among the
St. Michaels oyster fishermen had become so pervasive by 1833 that

 

72

Captain Auld and his new wife, Rowena, were not generous
to their slaves. For the first time in seven years Frederick felt
intense pangs of hunger and was driven to begging and stealing to
keep mind and body intact. The young Christian hated to steal, but
after weighing the matter carefully, he decided that such a course
was justifiable. He stole with "a clear apprehension of the claims
of morality." He realized that his thievery was an abomination ac-
cording to the law and gospel that he heard from the slaveholding
pulpit at St. Michaels, but he had already begun to attach less im-
portance to the pronouncements from that quarter, on that point,
while still retaining his deep reverence for religion.32

To Douglass, Thomas Auld appeared to be an intensely selfish
man who was wholly caught up in the pride of mastery and the love of
domination--a human being incapable of a noble deed. Understandably,
Douglass hoped that by making a formal profession of religion at an
August 1833 Methodist camp meeting, Captain Auld would be led to
reform his "cruel" and "cowardly" ways. Nevertheless, as the young
slave watched his master proceeding through the emotion-laden throes
of the conversion experience, he could not help wondering whether
the end result would be as favorable to Auld's slaves as it appar-
ently was to Auld's soul. "If he has got religion," Douglass
thought, "he will emancipate his slaves; and if he should not do
so much as this, he will, at any rate, behave toward us more kindly,

and feed us more generously than he has heretofore done." Douglass

 

it was admitted by the few "sober, thinking people who remained
there, that St. Michaels had become a very unsaintl , as well as
an unsightly place." Douglass, Bondage, p. 186-187.

32Douglass, Bondage, pp. 188-191.

 

73

could not regard the slaveholder as being genuinely converted unless
some favorable, observable change followed the profession of faith.33
.u——~9>Qefifiiigmbifiahopes,,Douglass was once again confronted with
the apparentwtruth that a Christian profession is no guarantee of
of a Christ-like treatment of the.black man. Thomas Auld's home
literally exuded piety. Both in the morning and in the evening hymns
and prayers were offered by the Captain and his wife. Soon the new
convert was leading class, hosting visiting clerics, and partici-
pating in revivals. Yet, to Douglass' mind, Auld's conversion made
him even "more cruel and hateful in all his ways." Thgwprgfession
warslizionmseemed to reinforce rather than remove the wickedness
frpmigglgismhaart. ebonversion neither led him to free his slaves
nor caused him to treat them with greater humanity.3

Several incidents occurring after his conversion illustrate
Thomas Auld's lack of Christian compassion. In St. Michaels,
Frederick was forbidden to continue the Sabbath school activities
in which he had participated when living in Baltimore. When a young
white man named Wilson asked him to help organize a Sabbath School
for the instruction of slaves who wanted to learn to read the New
Testament, Douglass jumped at the opportunity. With some twenty

students, a dozen dog-eared spelling books, and a few testaments,

the two instructors earnestly began their project. At their second

 

33Ibid., pp. 191-196.

3“Of Rowena Auld, Douglass wrote: "A great many times have
we, poor creatures, been severely pinched with hunger, when meat and
bread have been moulding under the lock, while the key was in the
pocket of our mistress. This had been so when she knew we were nearly
half starved; and yet, that mistress, with saintly air, would kneel
with her husband, and pray each morning that a merciful God would
bless them in basket and in store, and save them, at last, in his
kingdom." Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 189-190, 196-197.

74

meeting, however, they learned that the wrath of an outraged
Christian is sometimes akin to demonic terror. They had scarcely
begun the day's lesson when a mob, led by Captain Auld and two other
Methodist class leaders, broke up the meeting. Armed with fsticks
and_other”mi§siles,flwthesemYprofessedlyholy men" warned_the two
iggpgugpggfiwgevenwto meet for such a purpose again. One of the in-
truders charged Douglass with trying to be another Nat Turner.35
As Douglass later noted, the incident ”did not serve to strengthen
my religious convictions."36

Auld's treatment of a slave woman named Henny certainly did
not increase Douglass' respect for his master's profession of reli-
gion. This cousin of Frederick's had lost the use of her hands in
an accident and, hence, was a burden to Captain Auld. (He showed. f;‘“““'
his vexation at her disability by repeatedly whipping her in a most
brutal manner>~all_the_ghileflquoting the scripture passage, "that

servant whighmkneguhis lordis will, and prepared not himself,

 

35Douglass, Bondage, pp. 199- 200; Baltimore Sun, September 7,
1891; Douglass, Narrative, p. 68. To guard against the spread of
any spirit of disaffection or rebellion, tumultuous meetings of
slaves had long been forbidden in Maryland, but there was never
anything in the laws of the state to prevent bondsmen from quietly
holding religious services on their master's estate. After the
Southampton insurrection, a new statute was enacted which forbade
Negroes to assemble or to attend meetings for religious purposes
which were not conducted by a white clergyman or some respectable
white person of the neighborhood. The 1831 Act did not, however,
unduly interfere with religious exercises held by slaves at home
with their master's consent. Negroes in Annapolis and Baltimore
could hold their own services up to the hour of ten at night with
written permission of a white minister. Jeffrey R. Brackett, The
Negro_ in Maryland: A Study_ of the Institution of Slavery, Johns
Hopkins University Studies in Historical and Political Science,
Vol. VI (Baltimore: N. Murray, 1889), pp. 110, 199-200.

36Garrison West, a member of the mob, was Douglass' class
leader in St. Michaels. Deemed by Frederick to be a Christian until
he took part in breaking up the school, he "led" the young slave
"no more after that." Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 200, 266.

 

75

neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many
stripes." Eventually, on the pretext that "he could do nothing with
her," Auld abandoned the crippled Henny, setting her adrift to fend
for herself.37

Douglass also felt the cruelties of the Christian master in
a more personal way. Once, when a carriage lamp was discovered to
be missing, Captain Auld went to the stable area with a cart whip
and, with its heavy lash, beat Frederick over the head and shoulders
to make him tell how it was lost. This punishment continued until
the slaveholder had wearied himself. This was not an isolated in-
cident. After nine months at the Auld residence, Douglass had re-
ceived "a number of severe whippings."38

Undoubtedly,€Frederick felt that he would have received
scarcely better treatment from the Christian guests whom Captain
Auld entertained) In his autobiography, Douglass complained about
the lack of compassion shown the bondsmen by visiting ministers.
Tghhimgwtheynseemedwflnlmosthasfluncongerned about our getting to hea-
taaajajhexmvere.amateueurisetiinaneat.9f. Slavery." The lone ex-
ception to this characterization was an English-born cleric by the
name of George Cookman. Unlike the other ministers on the St.
Michaels circuit, Cookman took an interest in the temporal and

spiritual welfare of the slaves. A colonizationist, Rev. Cookman

gave the general impression that he was laboring to convince local

 

37Douglass, Bondage, p. 201; National Anti-Slavery Standard,
December 23, 18kl; Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison, April 1 ,
1846, in Liberator, May 15, 18k6; Douglass, Narrative, pp. 68-69.
The scripture passage is essentially that found in Luke 12:47.

38Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison, April 16, 18k6, in
Liberator, May 15, 18h6; Douglass, Bonda e, p. 203.

 

76

masters to free their bondsmen, and that he did this as a religious
duty. When Cookman was a guest of the Aulds, the slaves were as-
sembled for a morning prayer service and given words of "exhorta-
tion and of encouragement."39

Douglass received little spiritual encouragement from his
next master. On January 1, 1834 he was sent to Edward Covey, the
local "slave breaker." Captain Auld had become increasingly dis-
gusted with Frederick's "carelessness” in handling the horses. He
finally decided that a year's service at Covey's would remove any
lingering intransigence that the repeated whippings had failed to
remove. Like Auld, Covey was said to "enjoy religion" and was a
class leader in the Methodist Church. As Douglass observed, "few
men would at times appear more devotional than he." The Covey house
rang with prayers and hymns, morning and evening. At first, Frederick
was called upon to lead the devotional singing, but the repeated
floggings which he received at the hand of the slave-breaker led
him to feel that such worship was a mockery. As often as possible,
he avoided taking an active part in the exercises.

These contradictions between the ideal of Christian virtue
and the reality of Christian behavior caused Douglass much mental
and spiritual anguish- liimsiehiestenhical,account, of.,fl.this,-eperiod ~*
antai s fiellgggflpgssageswdescribing how his mind passed over "the

whole scaleflor circle of belief and unbelief, from faith in the

 

39Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 198-199. When ministers other than
Cookman visited the Auld home, the slaves were sometimes called in
to prayers and sometimes not. Douglass, Narrative, p. 68.

“oDouglass, Narrative, pp. 69-70, 74; Douglass, Bonda e,
pp. 203, 217; Frederic May Holland, Frederick Douglass: Th2
Colored Orator (New York: Haskell House Publishers, Ltd., 1969,
Reprint of the 1895 edition), p. 19.

 

77
oxenrnling_pmoxidsncelofmGod,.to“the.blackest atheism." At times

he was certain that he had no friend on earth and doubted whether
he had one in heaven. On other occasions he beseeched the God of
the oppressed to deliver him from the living hell of slavery.“1

Continued observation confirmed Douglass' suspicion that,
in actuality, Covey's religion was "a thing altogether apart from
his worldly concerns." How else could one explain the contradiction
between his benevolent behavior during the prayer meetings and the
cold-hearted deeds perpetrated during the week? (Covey could "cut
and slash" Douglass' body during the week, but would not hesitate,
on Sunday, to teach him the value of his soul and "the way of life
and salvation by Jesus Christ.") Could a true Christian be a slave
breeder as well as a slave breaker? Could the chosen of God be ac-
cused of causing another human being, whatever his skin color, to
be broken "in body, soul, and spirit"?‘+2

This line of thought did not, however, prohibit Frederick
from completely renouncing any remaining religious tenets which for-
bade him protection against a cruel master. The indifference with
which Thomas Auld met his plea for relief from Covey's abuses sev-
ered the last link in this "slaveholding" theology. Douglass‘ new
assertiveness was shown in his oft-recounted fight with the slave
breaker. His success in this encounter not only showed how far he
had "backslidden" from the "slave's religious creed," but also re-

kindled his hopes of someday escaping from the house of bondage and

 

W,

“lDouglass, Bonda e, pp. 228, 234; Douglass, Narrative, p. 76.

“aDouglass, Narrative, p. 75. 0f Covey's religion, Douglass
wrote: "He knew nothing of it as a holy principle, directing and
controlling his daily life, making the latter conform to the re-
quirements of the gospel." Douglass, Bonda , pp. 217-218, 240-241.

78
recalled to life his crushed self-respect.“3

Yet Douglass did not renounce "the Christian creed" for
that of superstition. While at Covey's he came into contact with
Sandy Jenkins, a slave who believed in the magical powers of certain
herbs. This ex-African told Douglass that if he would only carry
a particular root with him it would be impossible for any white man
ever to whip him again. While Douglass did finally agree to try
Jenkins' charm simply to please the well-meaning fellow, he did so
with the feeling that the whole idea was absurd and ridiculous, "if
not positively sinful." He felt a powerful aversion to all pre-
tenders to "divination" and considered it "beneath one of my intel-
ligence to countenance such dealings with the devil, as this power
implied."uk In any case, Covey's brutish nature soon drove any be-
lief in the potency of the root far from Douglass' mind.

His term of service fulfilled, Douglass left the Covey farm
on the first of January, 1835. He was now hired out to William
Freeland, who lived about three miles from St. Michaels. Unlike
his recent experience, he now found himself as the slave of a man
who made no pretensions to or profession of religion. To Douglass,

Freeland was, despite his irreligion, "the best master I ever had,

 

ujDouglass, Bonda e, pp. 228-232, 241-249. Douglass de-
scribed the fight with Covey in the chapter of his autobiography en-
titled "The Last Flogging." Of its conclusion he wrote: "Covey
at length (two hours had elapsed) gave up the contest. Letting me
go, he said, --puffing and blowing at a great rate--'now, you
scoundrel, go to your work; I would not have whipped you half so
much as I have had you not resisted.‘ The fact was, 23 Egg 225
whipped pg 23 all. He had not, in all the scuffle, drawn a single
drop of blood from me. I had drawn blood from him; and, even with-
out this satisfaction, I should have been victorious, because my
aim had not been to injure him, but to prevent his injuring me."
Douglass, Bonda e, p. 246.

hulbid., pp. 238-239.

79

until I became my own master." Under the improved mental and physi-
cal conditions that he found in his new surroundings, Douglass once
again revived his plans to conduct a Sabbath school. He was not
long in rounding up more than forty young slaves willing to meet
secretly in order to learn the skill of reading the Bible. He also
devoted three evenings each week to this project during the winter
months.“5

Douglass seems also to have revived his plans to become a
preacher. In his autobiography he wrote that the improved condi-
tions at Freeland's rekindled the dreams implanted in his mind by
"Father Lawson." Sometimes, when all were asleep, Douglass would
try to prepare for the pulpit by going out to the pigs and talking
to them as "Dear Brethren."t‘6 Apparently, neither this activity
nor his Sabbath School was disrupted during his stay with the non-
Christian Freeland.

In contrast to the character evidenced by his new master
was that of two Christians living in the vicinity. They made
Douglass aware that Captain Auld and Edward Covey were not wholly
atypical of Maryland masters when it came to heartlessness and
cruelty. The first of these men was described as being "both pious
and cruel after the real Covey pattern." A Methodist minister and
a "most zealous supporter of the ordinances of religion, generally,"
Rev. Daniel_flnndnn_nsxazth§19$§eheldwpgmphewbelief”that a good slave
must be whippegwtgwhewhfillxQbedient and a_bad slave must be whipped

to be gadg Qbegignp, The bloodied back of his slave women, Ceal,

 

“sgpggg, pp. 264-265, 267-268; Douglass, Narrative, p. 86.

uéDouglass, Bonda e, p. 264; Holland, Colored Orator, pp. 25-
26.

80

was proof positive that he was not lax in putting his theory into
practice.“7
A counterpart to Weeden was Rev. Rigby Hopkins, who also
lived near St. Michaels. His system of slave government incorporated
the practice of whipping the chattels in advance of their deserving
punishment. By whipping for small offenses, he sought to prevent
the commission of large ones. Hopkins, like Weeden and Covey, was
shunned by those slaves who had the privilege of "finding their own
masters" at the end of each year. Yet, despite his cruelties, there
was, according to Douglass, not a man who made higher professions
of religion, was more active in revivals, or who "prayed earlier,
later, louder, and longer" than this "reverend slave-driver.“+8
Entrapped in these surroundings, Douglass once again drifted
into a period of spiritual depression. He wondered why his count-
less prayers to the God of the oppressed, asking for freedom from
slavery, had not been answered. "Where now," he asked, "is the God
of justice and mercy?" However perplexed and disconsolate these
thoughts rendered him, Douglass was buoyed and sustained by the
consoling thought that "the day of the oppressor will come at last."
He was fully convinced that the admonition of the St. Michaels‘ pul-
pit to the bondsmen to be content in their bondage, recognizing God
as the author of their enslavement and regarding their condition as
a merciful and beneficial arrangement, was being wasted on himself
and most of the other slaves. He considered himself to be "quite

free from slave-holding priestcraft." As he later noted, Father

 

‘+7
48

Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 258-259,

Ibid., pp. 259, 261; Douglass, Narrative, p. 88.

81

Lawson's vision of what he ought to be and might be, "in the
providence of God," had not been extinguished by his years in bond-
age.‘+9

Shortly after his removal from Freeland's and his return to
the supervision of Hugh Auld in Baltimore, Douglass escaped to the
North by impersonating a free American sailor.50 Baffled and dis-
couraged at times while a slave, he had asked himself whether his
condition might not actually be God's work and purpose for his life.
He had prayed for liberty and trusted in God for freedom, but he
could not accept the line of reasoning which argued that a reli-
gious conversion freed the slave from the fetters of sin, that such
freedom was the only truly significant kind, and that ownership of
the body under these circumstances was a mere irrelevancy. Compli-
mentary to his faith in_thgflSupremewBeing was a belief in the adage
that—Qflduhfilnfinihgégihhq”help”themselves. As a slave, Douglass
never missed an opportunity to acquire the knowledge that would
prepare him for freedom and give him the means of escape from bond-
age. As he later wrote, "The contest was now ended; the chain was
severed; God and right stood vindicated. I was a FREEMAN, and the

"51

voice of peace and joy thrilled my heart. Perhaps now, without

 

“9Doug1ass, Bonda e, pp. 272, 275-276, 295-296. In a speech
at Market Hall, New York City, on October 22, 1847, Douglass noted:
"For a long time when I was a slave, I was led to think from hearing
such passages as 'servants obey, &c.' that if I dared to escape, the
wrath of God would follow me." National Anté-Slavery Standard,
October 28, 1847. He was referring to verses such as Ephesians 6:5,
Colossians 3:22, Titus 2:9, and I Peter 2:18.

50For a more detailed account of his escape see Douglass,
Life , pp 0 197-201 0

51Douglass, Bonda e, p. 337; J. W. Cooke, ”Freedom in the
Thoughts of Frederick Douglass, 1845-1860," Negro History Bulletin,
XXXII (February, 1969), 8-9; Chesnutt, Frederick Dou lass, p. 12.

82
his chains, the professors of religion in the North, unlike those
of the South, would treat him as a brother, would not forbid him

the rights and privileges of a fellow Christian, and would not cause

him to doubt the benevolence of his Creator.

BOOK TWO

CHAPTER IV
ORTHODOXY-HETERODOXY

So with Paul, I make this simple answer to
all inquiries respecting my religious sen-
timents--"by the grace of God, I am what I am."

--William Lloyd Garrison
June 28, 1838

Despite the rebuffs which he had received from Beecher
and several other churchmen, William Lloyd Garrison still hoped
that American Christians would awaken to their duty, go to the aid
of the downtrodden slave, and prove to all that their religion was
powerful enough to accomplish the great work of emancipation. The
delusions of the hour, he thought, would soon pass away. Meanwhile,
he would continue to urge men of all denominations to unite with
him under the banner of antislavery. As he noted in the first
issue of 2p; Liberator, which finally appeared on January 1, 1831,

men "of all religions and of all parties" were more than welcome to

 

join him in defending "the great cause of human rights."1
1Johnson, Garrison and His Times, pp. 46-47, 49; Libgpgggr,

January 1, 1831. In the prospectus for the new weekly, Garrison

had appealed "to the American people--to philanthropists and patriots,
to moralists and Christians" for patronage. In 1832 he told of the
"mighty" influence of the nation's clergymen. To convert one minis-
ter to abolitionism was "nearly the same as to convert a whole church
and congregation." Oliver Johnson held that it was in the power of
the churches, "if they had had any heart for the work," to make the
movement their own--to lead and guide it from beginning to end. "This,
indeed," he wrote, "was what Mr. Garrison desired and expected."
Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 201; Garrison to John B. Vashon,
August 15, 1832, in Journal 25 Negro History, XII (January, 1927).

34; Johnson, Garrison and Hip Times, p. 9. See also Garrison to 223
Liberator, October 2, I332 in Liberator, October 27, 1832.

84

85

If most of the nation‘s more orthodox religionists failed to
respond favorably to Garrison's pleas for assistance during the
first years of 253 Liberator, it was not because they found his reli-
gious views unacceptable or because they were afraid of joining in
a cause led by an infidel. During the early 1830's, the Boston
editor was a pillar of rectitude in religious matters. The pages
of his new weekly gave evidence both of his piety and of his devo-
tion to the antislavery cause. In hisiEMoral" column; Garrison =3)
sought to inspire in his readers.g:desire to liggwgwpgpgmgpgflupright
Christiap lifg. In January 1831 he told the story of a thief who
continued to steal corn from a neighbor's field until his eight-
year-old son informed him that the Supreme Being was a witness to
all of man's deeds. "God sees me" was a thought which would keep
men from "evil acts" if they would only strive "to feel its truth."
Later in the year, The Liberator reminded its readers that the dis-
ciples had "returned to Jesus" and "told him all things, both what
they had done, and what they had taught."2 If modern day believers
would go to the "Master's feet" every evening and tell Him where
they had been, what they had seen, and by what motives they had
been actuated in carrying out their daily business, their behavior
would undoubtedly improve. .While "reading over each day's page of
life" with the realization that Christ was "reading it too," men
could detect many "errors and defects" in their behavior which.
would otherwise pass unnoticed. On other occasions the column dis-
cussed Christian consistency. According to pp; Liberator, a Chris-

tian had no right "any where, or under any circumstances" to be

 

23.. Mark 6:30, Luke 9:10.

86

"any thing else than a Christian." NQ beligyericouldimorewsurely .

Wuhanpxflfrequentins any circle._which he
.nnai.£n&3£ifliih9kimhia.religion," That it was immoral to act in
such an unspiritual manner was obvious if one studied Christ's words

in Matthew 10:33: "Whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I
3
II

also deny before my Father which is in heaven. but

Garrison's poetry, which appeared quite frequently in the
columns of his paper during this period, also testified to the fact
that the young editor was no purveyor of irreligion. In "The Prince
of Philanthropists," he sang the praises of a Savior who delighted
in "doing good" even though He usually received more scorn than
gratitude from those He sought to help:

Wealth, complexion, grandeur, station,
Vain distinctions were to thee:
Love like thine, nor caste nor nation
Bounded its infinity.
Thou didst heal the lame--the dying;
Feed the multitude with bread;
Nor a suppliant denying;
Raising up to life the dead!

The manner in which Garrison treated the divinity of Christ in this
poem was calculated to please even the most orthodox evangelical

Christian:
As the WAY to glory leading,
As the TRUTH that sets us free,
As the LIGHT from heaven proceeding,
Chiefly do we honor thee.
'FOLLOW ME!'--Yes, precious Saviour,
In thy footsteps will we tread;
By thy grace, our whole behaviour“
Shall be worthy of our HEAD!

Several of Garrison's poems spoke of the vanities of the

 

8 jgipgpgpgp, January 15, 1831, December 17, 1831, January 7,
1 32.

ALiberator, March 8, 1834.

87
world and the blissful state of existence which awaited the child
of God upon the termination of his earthly journey. In 1831 he
wrote:
Happy is he who disdains the earth,
And plumes his hopes for a heavenly birth,--
Whose treasures are wisely laid above,
Seal'd by the bond of eternal love,--
Where neither moth nor rust doth infest, 5
Nor thieves break through to disturb the blest!
On another occasion he expressed these sentiments in a more personal
manner:
I mourn not--care not, if my humble name,
With my frail body, perish in the tomb;
It courts a heavenly, not an earthly fame,
Which through eternity shall brightly bloom:
And in 'the last great day,‘ a golden crown award!

In his correspondence, Garrison often contrasted the glories
of heaven with the afflictions of earthly existence. He believed
that it was impossible for a Christian to be perfectly happy on
earth. As an "exile" from his heavenly home, the believer quite
naturally experienced sadness, loneliness, and "a restlessness of
mind" that could never be fully satisfied until he heard the "notes
of angels" and was able to "mingle with the ransomed above."{ All
of man's earthly achievements were petty, imitative, and ultimately
worthless, but God's heavenly kingdom was a realm of "unutterable
and inconceivable blessedness." This being the case, Garrison as-
serted that he did not covet earthly treasures. He sought only to

be continually engaged in "laying up those which shall never perish."

In 1834 he wrote: "My soul leaps at the prospect of its being

 

5Liberator, August 13, 1831.

6£$22£§£259 January 8: 1831. See also Liberator, March 7,

1835.

88

ultimately released from its brittle tenement of clay.... Soul-
enrapturing is the thought of heaven! What peace, and joy, and
safety, and love, reign there!"7
Garrison's correspondence also contained many allusions to
his belief in the triumph of the spirit over death through a belief
in the Savior. He held that "We shall never be able to exclaim,
'0 death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?’ until
we have first died unto sin--crucified the old man with his lusts--
put on the new man who is after Christ--and risen in spirit with
Him who is able to save all who believe in him." To Garrison, the
grave had no power over the soul. It received only "a body of
dust--a tenement of clay." It was the place where men laid down
their infirmities, diseases, and sorrows that they might "rise up
to a new and glorious life." There a man could shed his imperfect
earthly tabernacle and be transformed into an "angel of light."
"Jesus Christ has triumphed over death and hell," he wrote, "and

so may we by putting him on, and walking in newness of life."8

 

7Garrison to Helen E. Benson, August 29, 1834 in Merrill,
Lette s, I, 407; Garrison to Ebenezer Dole, June 29, 1832, Garrison
Papers, Boston Public Library; Garrison to George W. Benson, August 11,
1834, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library; Garrison to Samuel J.
May, February 18, 1834, in Merrill, Letters, I, 285; Garrison to
Helen E. Benson, May 1, 1834, in Merrill, Letters, 1, 337; Garrison
to Anna E. Benson, May 20, 1834 in Merrill, Letters, 1, 345.

8Garrison to Sarah T. Benson, December 24, 1836, in Louis
Ruchames, ed., Eh: Letters 2; William Lloyd Garrison, II (Cambridge:
Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1971), 193; Garrison to
George W. Benson, May 31, 1834, in Merrill, Letters, I, 353; Garrison
to Henry E. Benson, December 17, 1836, in Ruchames, Letters, II, 190.
In an 1837 letter,Garrison noted that one of his "cherished maxims"
was that it could "never be a calamity for a good man to go to heav-
en, either sooner or later." Urging that men "feel no concern what-
eVer" as to the time of their "exit" from the world, he wrote, "Let
us only--py dying pg self--be prepared to enter those mansions pre-
Psred for the righteous in glory and all will be well." Garrison to
George W. Benson, January 4, 1837 in Ruchames, Letters, II, 200-201.

89

During the early 1830's, the young abolitionist evidenced
a deep faith in the righteousness and power of his Creator. For the
success of his antislavery exertions he claimed to "rely exclusively
on the blessing of God"--the one Being in the universe who could see
"the end from the beginning." With His divine assistance the aboli-
tionist cause would be sustained. As he wrote in 1833, "Our trust
for victory is solely in GOD. W; may be personally defeated, but
our principles never." Unlike many religionists, Garrison main-
tained this strong faith both under conditions of adversity and in
times of apparent success. In discussing the actions of a New York
anti-abolition mob in the summer of 1834, he wrote that, in the day
of "great crisis," it was incumbent upon all abolitionists to be
"watchful unto prayer" and to put unlimited confidence in the Lord
of Hosts. When they were called upon to "pass through many perils"
they would be able to "encounter them Victoriously" if they allowed
the love of God to "reign supremely" in their hearts. Later in the
year, when surveying the progress which the cause had made since
1831, the ebullient Garrison repeatedly thanked God for the rapid
advancement of the antislavery sentiment and for allowing him to
become "a signal instrument in the accomplishment of this astonish-
ing change." As he had noted on an earlier occasion, even though
the friends of abolition were multiplying rapidly, the final battle
against slavery could not be won unless the antislavery forces per-
severed, remained true to their principles, and continued to look

"9

"to Him who alone is able to give us the victory.

___

9Garrison to George W. Benson, January 12, 1835 in Merrill,
Letters, I, 434; Garrison to Sanuel J. May, February 14, 1831 in
Merrill, Letters, I, 115; Libeggtgg, December 14, 1833, December 27,
1834; Garrison to Samuel J. May, July 23, 1834, in Merrill, Letters,

9O

AGarpispnjsficharggfigrization of God as a_helpmeet,of the
rigpteous complemented his beliefhin the_Holy Scriptures as the
thistianismchiefmweap n against sin. Take away the Bible, he
wrote, and the war against oppression, infidelity, intemperance, and
crime would quickly come to an end. The believer would then have
"no authority to speak, and no courage to act." According to
Garrison, God's "Statute Book" contained all of the laws and ordi-
nances needed to govern mankind. Thgugihle_xaamimmutable. Neither t:
the vicissitudes of time, the waves of revolution, nor "the explo-
sions of empires" could change one of its acts. It was also impar-
tial. Having "no respect of persons," it levelled all of the "vain
distinctions"of the world. Tpg_Bihla.masflaspsnisllxmhsxélgnwphp (a
mggmgho dared disobey its commgpdments. How terrible were its de-
nunciations against the oppressor! How wonderfully it unmasked hy-
pocrisy, condemned injustice, and punished crime! How marvelous
was its power to detect and expose the thief, the drunkard, the
voluptuary, and the impostor! On the other hand its requirements

were eminently reasonable--1ove to God and love to man.10

 

I, 383; Garrison to J. Telemachus Hilton, Robert Wood, and J. H. How,
August 13, 1831, in Liberator, August 27, 1831. See also Garrison
to Sarah M. Douglass, March 5, 1832, Garrison to Ebenezer Dole,

June 29, 1832, Garrison to William Ellery Channing, January 20, 1834,
Garrison to Henry E. Benson, February 26, 1834, Garrison to George W.
Benson, June 16, 1834, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library. 0f
the New York mobocrats he wrote: "I pity and weep over those poor
misguided, ignorant creatures who have actually committed the vio-
lence, and who have been made the tools of intelligent and influ-
ential, but base and cowardly men. I pray God to forgive them, as

I most cheerfully do, and as I hope to be forgiven. Perilous times
have come--but our trust is in the Lord of hosts, and our souls are
unmoved--we cannot be driven back." Garrison to Helen E. Benson,
July 15, 1834 in Merrill, Letters, 1. 376.

1°Liberator, April 2, 1831.

91

a
:
jSince Garrison considered the Bible to be the chief weapon

against sin and Negro slavery to be the chief American sin, it was
not surprising that he saw no wrong in using the language of the
Bible to arraign slaveholding sinners. According to Garrison, God's
pronouncements were efficacious only as they were personal. Both
the commendations and the rebukes found in the Scriptures were per-
sonal. In this respect it was a remarkable volume. Christ, having
been forced to deal with sinners, called them by their proper names--
"hypocrites," "an adulterous and perverse generation" and "a brood
of vipers." "Look at the language of the patriarchs and prophets,
of Christ and the apostles!" Garrison wrote, "...we are authorized
to imitate the conduct of 'holy men of old,‘ in rebuking and warning
those who are led into error." B9th~pheg§cripturesLandfiphemhistory .2‘___
0..f____J:aL£9m° .fgrnmteeiifieé. that _.sin._ wealtgwberviewed- and. Spoken, of
withmflggpgpgflggralmdispleasure." Holy principles were just as odious
to the evil man when expressed in mild language as they were when
presented in a much harsher manner. In December 1834 Garrison
noted that "a violation of the law of God presents no occasion for
the exercise of moral complacency. God regards it with holy indig-
nation, and so should those who desire to be holy even as he is
holy."11

One of the sins which Garrison sought to eradicate during
the early 1830's was related both to slavery and to the Bible. In

the early volumes of The Liberator he pleaded for the universal

diffusion of the Bible as a powerful instrumentality for the

_—

11Garrison to Gerrit Smith, January 31, 1835, in Liberator,
January 31, 1835; Liberator, December 27, 1834. See also speech at
Boston, April 2, 1833 in Garrison and Garrison, Life, I. 335-336;
JOhnson, Garrison and His Times, p. 55.

92
When notified in 1831 that the

promotion of the antislavery cause.
New York General Tract Depository had issued 30,000 copies of the

Scriptures to be distributed in the Mississippi Valley Area, he was
Surely the cause of eman-

overcome with "lively sensations of joy."
cipation would receive an immense benefit from this liberal distri-
but ion of the Word of Life. "THE BIBLE--THE BIBLE!" he wrote, "how
shall we subdue the obdurate heart, and awaken the seared conscience,

and successfully impeach the criminal conduct of slaveowners; how

Wampublicmopinion, and call into, vigorous exer-
Cstnersiqapfthe nation...without THE BIBLE?" Its

8PILI-:I.t was so benevolent that it would "dry up rivers of human
blood, and turn the sword into a ploughshare, and break every fetter,
md renovate the face of the world...." Its precepts and doctrines

taught men neither to oppress nor defraud, but to "break every yoke
Unfortunately there was one impor-

and let the oppressed go free."
tut segment of the population which was being denied access to the

g.

11°13? Scriptures--the imbruted slaves. Accordingwto Garrison. the

Wt“ Bible away from the bondsmen placed an
in‘3-.111:o1e br renama.i!pec_uliar.e. institution."
Earl); in 1834, the editor of pg: Libepapor asserted that if asked

t
0 give a sound reason for his opposition to slavery, he could give

to

non. more weighty or_ more irresistible" than that it robbed the
. ‘

3‘e‘V'es of the Bible. (Since the bondsmen were rational beings ac-
c

cuntsble to God and "destined to an eternity of bliss or wo," it

"‘3

vitally important that they be permitted to own and to read the
'e
..
‘cred book which brings life and immortalityd) That they were

 

 

12

133 Johnson, Garrison 55g pg; Times, p. 67; Liberator, April 2,
1. April 9. 1831. -----

93
denied this right by their cruel masters should, in Garrison's
opinion, mightily "stir up the holy indignation of every follower

of Christ."13
The Boston editor was no less devoted to the cause of keep-

ing the Sabbath holy. In the columns of his weekly he lashed out

against the operators of theaters and ballrooms who kept their es-
tablishments open on Sunday, decried the "laxity of morals or reli-
gion" which allowed them to willingly desecrate the Holy Day, and
even penned a poem describing the "huge eclipse" which would "dress
the world in gloom" if the "moral sun" of the Sabbath were "blotted
His most extensive remarks on the subject of Sabbath observ-

out-"

ence , however, came in a letter of April 27, 1834 to his bride-to-

“. Helen Benson. Wimmrfirst day..o_fi_theweek

Wubficughaimperfect," type of heavenly rest.

It Vila a "rich and special provision" for those who hungered and
“31’3th after righteousness. Certainly the "superior excellence"

°f this sacred day over every other was obvious to those who had

studied the Word of God. gthjhemSabfibgghmhad‘ ffimperstixfifind.

W9;...teo.....uni!$£!9}m9?3933292..‘1'1‘9.93 arm e truth 8° that
twagigguiattribute.rcorctworetq.take the ..name of God in
15;“? "When was the fourth commandment revoked? Garrison asked.
"D‘rQ may to be so presumptuous as to erase it from the ten? Why
not, -trike out the first--the third--the fifth--the seventh? Why
not t‘epeal the whole decalogue?" Indeed. had it not 31‘1"“ been

th.
"Wrists“ (10'1” 0‘ Satwf'.e.:§9 £13..i.at.§.. the Sabbath .snd Maiden”?!
its 1--

~~‘\§§.nctity? I,£._ih.ee§!_il One succeagedflinwDLQLMtWthiswd-N

\

183

 

13Liberator, January 4, 1834; Speech at Boston, March 10,
a in Liberator, March 15, 1834.

94

WQWQIBLHCOMnd rest" he would hold complete

dominion over ‘jhgflpnivgerse.

In his many letters to Helen, Garrison also discussed the

importance of prayer. Even though he felt "a vacancy" in his heart

because she was not with him on a trip to New York City in 1835,
the abolitionist was cheered by the thought that the "omnipresence
of our God fills all space, and attends our footsteps whithersoever

we 30." Men could commune directly with their Maker at all times

and in all places. By so doing they could "rejoice in the infini-

tudo of his love, and feast upon the banquet of heavenly munifi-

cenco" no matter how far they strayed from their homes and families.
In

15

Garrison believed strongly in the efficacy of prayer.
Jun- 9 1831 he noted that the cause of emancipation was proceeding

at an unnecessarily slow pace because "so few petitions are put up

t0 the Throne of Grace on the subject." Prayer would forward the

'01“: of the antislavery forces "faster than all the pens in the
“ado " Surely, the abolitionists could do nothing without it.

L‘tel‘ in the year, in discussing the plight of the black man, Garrison
a-°-§-¢£‘I:Q£1__12Q1g,_1;,wmuesliegrarechildlfindnhtv1parid security onlyein God.

If they would "cry mightily to him for succor," He would surely an-

at:
e:- their petitions. The Boston editor was no less convinced that

\

 

lnLiberator, March 19, 1831, April 9, 1831, April 16, 1831,

J

A2223»), 14, 1832, January 31, 1835; Garrison to Helen E. Benson,

1-1.71 27, 1834, in Merrill, Letters, I. 333-335. See also Exodus 20:

thfi-t- In his biography of the Boston editor, Oliver Johnson asserted

th. "Mr. Garrison held and inculcated in 'The Liberator' at first

3011 “cat Orthodox views of the Sabbath. He would no sooner have

he ‘ to the post-office on that day to mail or receive a letter than
““hld have stolen the contents of a contribution-box." Johnson,

’3‘
1‘
W and H18 T1108, pe 69o

15Garrison to Helen E. Garrison, March 16, 1835 in Merrill,

1"
N, I, “650

95
he and Helen could find the solution to their problems by daily

seeking God in prayer. In the spring of 183“ he wrote, "Dear Helen,

in our morning and evening devotions,...1et us pray that we may be
kept from all sin--from the temptations and snares of an evil world--
from idolatry-—from slothfulness and folly-wand that we may be con—

tinually replenished with heavenly wisdom, purity, goodness and

trut h . "16

Garrison's belief in the efficacy of prayer-~and his concern

for the bondsman, caused him to support the observance of days of

fasting and prayer. In May, 1831 he urged that the coming Fourth of

Jilly be set aside as a day of mourning and self—abasement among the

colored people. The object of the fast day would be to have the

Churches register their disgust at the "miserable and heathenish"
condition of the slaves, to beseech the Lord to abolish slavery "in

‘ BPe edy and peaceful manner," and to ask His blessing on all Just

‘e‘aures seeking the accomplishment of that great work. He earnestly

110de that black men all over the country would observe the day in
this Ingmar, calling upon God to give them relief and to take away

t
h°1r "reproach" forever. ”[L] et us pray more, and fast more," he

Hr
01:; s "and the Lord will do great and signal things for us."17

\

fr. 16William Lloyd Garrison, 5;; address delivered before th
33;? :Eeogie g_f_ color, _i_h_ Philadel hia, Ea! York, 53; other cities,
M the month of June, 1321 (Boston: Stephen Foster, n.d.), p. 9;
1 l 31; Garrison to Helen E. Benson, April 25,

‘- in Merrill, Letters, I, 331. An item appearing in the "Moral"
b1. 33‘s: of 323 Liberator in August 1831 noted that the "appropriate
the ity" of all of the prayers, both public and private, recorded in
ticlBible, was one of their most striking characteristics. The ar-
at- Q went on to criticize overly-long family devotions because in-
oaua‘d of "exhibiting religion in an interesting attitude" they

a ‘Od it "to be associated, in the minds of children, with all that
‘111, wearisome and disgusting." Liberator, August 20, 1831.

 

D - 8 17Liberator, May 7, 1831; Garrison, Philadel his, New York,

96
The editor of The Liberator was also an ardent champion of

religious revivals. Just as he believed in the "wonder-working"

power of the Scriptures, Garrison looked to the revival as an in-

strumentality likely to hasten the day of emancipation. Surely the

transformation of earthly kingdoms into the "kingdoms of our Lord
and of his Christ" could never come to pass independently of great

revivals. The "grasp of oppression" would be weakened and the liber-

ation of the bondsmen hastened only in proportion to the quantity

of "Eure religion" prevailing in the land. In Garrison's opinion,

§,hfi_£act_thatwopla,,regardgd revivals as "unnatura1"_and.."11..1-
Jurious" wagingtflsufficient cause to abandon faith in these,"out-

P0 aging; of the. Spirit ."

of revivals that individual excesses were sometimes committed during

 

It argued nothing against the efficacy

the meetings. Could it be denied that the struggle between holi-

ness and sin was often "protracted and terrific"? The religious

°°11Versions which occurred during times of revival were eminently

rational in nature. To Garrison's mind, special grace or a "mira-

culous interposition of the spirit" was no more requisite for men

‘0 19‘.»e and obey God than "special depravity" was to hate and rebel

v’.’

a
Sainet Him. 31:53 was a free agent. He_:pczssessed jfeverymessential

e
'g‘q‘gl'fyshggt'LtQJMBaWdinnd.evil, obedience and disobedi-

en
“SE-9»- Conversions were "scriptural occurrences." Without them,

0'
t
he Dromises of God would fail, and the earth be flooded with ini-
Qu
1"? ." Indeed, only extensive revivals of "pure religion" could
18

3a».
9 the land from "great plagues and sudden destruction."

In the ranks of those opposed to revivals of religion were

 

(3% l8Liberator, April 9, 1831; See also Revelation 11:15;
l‘inon to The Liberator, June 10, 1831, in Liberator, June 18, 1831.

g

97

the purveyors of infidelity. Garrison found that the necessity to

"cry aloud, and spare not" regarding "irreligion" had never been as

great as it was during the early 1830's. He was appalled at the

rapid growth of "lacivious, blasphemous, heaven-defying, God-

rejecting atheism" in New England. He considered such "skepticism"

to be "a war upon the inward and outward man," its votaries going

down. to the grave with a "pestilential rapidity." This was indeed

a time for "plain dealing with sin in every shape." What the nation
needed, he asserted, was a return to the "triumphant and memorable”

days of martyrdom. A "race of men" had to be created who would be

bold for God-u-"open-mouthed and trumpet-tongued" for his truth even

in the face of death. Apparently eager to Join the band of martyrs,

Garrison wrote: "My prayer to God is, that I may be kept from the
fear and the wisdom of man, and be ready to lay down my life vic-

t°r10usly in his service, whenever it shall be necessary."19

The editor of The Liberator was certainly not a timid per-
'°n and was ever willing to instruct his readers in matters of morals

”“1 I‘Qligion. In countless articles and speeches he sought to con-

Vine- others of the correctness of his views. In a poem called

"0
n1" ‘rsal Emancipation," which appeared in the first issue of his

B
o‘tQh weekly, he urged the slaves to:

Bear meekly--as ye’ve borne-oyour cruel woes:

Ease follows pain--light, darkness--plenty, dearth:
So time shall give you freedom and repose,
And high exalt your heads above your bitter foes!

Revenge and rapine ne'er did bring forth good.

GOD's time i5 bestlc-nor will it long delay:

Even now your barren cause begins to bud,

And glorious shall the fruit be! Watch and pray,...

\

L31: 19Garrison to George w. Benson, January 12, 1835, in Merrill,
We 1: “34-435; M, May 14, 1831. See also Isaiah 58:1.

98

Later he cautioned the nation's freedmen to resort to no "unseemly

or violent measures." 1.3.”931, ?H§,e¥_..5h99}3_99¢5.the}. .-'.:§°?§§§.193_9€.
salvatimgpgnedminmthe gospel,"--as well as educationhtemper-
Mmestic pupity',“peace,, and moral excellence. By June 1831

he had organized these bits of advice into a cohesive lecture which

he delivered before black audiences in Philadelphia, New York, and

other cities. On these occasions he put forward his belief that

tho time was not far distant when all of the nation's Negroes would

be free to enjoy the same rights as white Americans. Inflordegwto

Whaliyerancenheflurgggfi 3119. “black- men towrespect
E—h—EQWAMPQW‘ .998 “anotherio to, terminocietiea 1.01.: ,moral im-
P?” ngflhandeiflmftsntly, to make the Lord their "refuge -and exem-

‘

2.1.9::- - " Asserting his own belief that "through Christ strengthening
you, you may do all things," Garrison told his listeners that Jesus
“a the only standard around which they could successfully rally.

H” "as the "great Captain of Salvation" in the war against slavery

""1 pr oscription. "If ever there were a people who needed the con-

solat ions of religion, to sustain them in their grievous afflictions,"

the abolitionist said, "you are that people."20
\

p 20Liberator, January 1, 1831, May 26, 18}2; Garrison,
Garrison showed an almost fatherly

W, fig! York, pp. 4-17.
negran for both the physical and the spiritual condition of the
in c>es. In 1832 he stated his desire to see black men progressing
“tor tue and knowledge. "I have a higher aim than merely to re-
bong- them to their proper station in society;" he wrote, "for the
the 11‘s, and offices, and emoluments of this life, are as dust in
Qt- balance compared with the favor of God, and the obtainment of
Garrison to The Liberator, September 1}, 1832

in ”MI happiness."
October 13, 1832. For Garrison's "advice" to the

Ne \Liberator,

tugroes on the religious instruction of their children, on the vir-

pgl‘ of temperance, and on the formation of "a Christian party" in

Jnhitics see Liberator, July 16, 1831; Speech at Philadelphia,

It). ‘ 15, 1832, in Liberator, June 30, 1832; Garrison to the Colored

IBS‘Qbitants of Boston, December 18, 183‘} in Liberator, December 20,
I". For his disclaimer that he had ever tried to bias any of

P1“

ttL.

eu .lfi s a.“ in.‘

99

Garrison also hoped to convince his readers that the imme-

diate emancipation doctrine was far superior to the schemes of the

gradual emancipationists and colonizationists. He found it both

sad and disturbing that some men could continue to look upon the

bloody system of slavery with "philosophic composure"--that "even

professing Christians" could "coldly talk of its gradual abolition."

Tho Boston editor likened the freeing of the slaves from bondage to

the liberation of mankind from sin. In 1831 he noted that the gos-

pel called upon sinners to repent immediatelyo-it did not authorize

"the delay of a moment." But, he asked, if all men could not, or

rather would not, be instantly repentant, what would be the result?
Because difficulties obstructed the way should gradual repentance
b0 preached to mankind? To do so would be folly-ojust as it would

be foolish to adhere to the concepts forwarded by the supporters

°t nadual emancipation. 21

In the same year that he was appointed corresponding secre-
tar-y O f the newly organized New England Anti-Slavery Society,

Gut-1 eon published Thoughts on African Colonization, a lengthy in-
dictmant of the principles and purposes of the American Coloniza-
tion Society. "Think not to succeed in your eXPulBi" crusade;" he
told the colonizationists. "you 03111101? hide 30” “OH-'93 from th’

Gr
9“: Searcher of hearts.... You may plot by day and by night; you

\

th
t°:t“ minds on any "religious or political points" see Garrison
he Colored Inhabitants of Boston, December 18,1831“ in

W, December 20’ 1834.

ZlLiberator, August 13, 1831; Garrison to Ebenezer Dole,

J‘s)
Rev” 11, 1831, in Merrill, Letters, I, 122. For a discussion of
George Bourne's influence on Garrison's abolitionist doctrines

Fan Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 306; David Brion Davis, "The
rSence of Immediatism in British and American Antislavery Thought,"

“1
w Valley historical Re___v____iew, XLIX (September,l 1962). 223-2%.

 

g

100

may heap together the treasures of the land, and multiply and enlarge
your combinations, to extricate yourselves from peril; but ygg gag-
ggt succeed. Your only alternative is, either to redress the wrongs
of the oppressed 923, and humble yourselves before God, or prepare
for the chastisements of Heaven."22

Professing his own lively sense of accountability to God,
and devout aspirations for the guidance of the Holy Spirit,"
Garrison appealed to those men who had been "redeemed from the bond-
age of sin by the precious blood of Christ" to join him in the aboli-
tionist crusade. Certainly there was power enough in the religion
of the Savior to melt the most stubborn prejudices, to overthrow
the highest walls of partition, to break the strongest caste, and
to unite in fellowship even the most hostile combatants. As he
vowed the following year, "We shall enlist the PULPIT and the PRESS
in the cause of the suffering and the dumb" while aiming at the
purification of the nation's churches from all participation in the
guilt of slavery.23

Garrison would not have anyone believe that his opposition
to the colonizationists' plans had made him hostile to the ideal of

civilizing and Christianizing Africa. "Most intensely" did he desire

 

2ablilliam Lloyd Garrison, Thoughts 25 African Colonization

(New York: Arno Press and the New York Times, 1963, Reprint of the
1832 edition), p. 10%.

23Ibid., pp. 3, 8, 143; Liberator, December 14, 1833.
Garrison hoped that his Thoughts would have a "salutary influence"
upon the clergy. In the introduction he wrote: "It may grieve them
to discover that they have been misled themselves, and that they have
unwittingly misled others.... such a confession may indeed require
much grace in the heart, but this grace, I am persuaded, they will
obtain. As apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ,...they will not shut
their eyes, or stop their ears, or refuse to examine, or disregard
the truth, in a case involving the temporal and eternal happiness of
millions of their fellow creatures." Garrison, Thou hts, p. 38.

101
to see that "ill-fated" continent transformed into the "abode of
civilization," of the arts and sciences, of evangelical piety, of
liberty, and of "all that adds to the dignity, the renown, and the
temporal and eternal happiness of man." In fact, if the American
Church had not so long neglected the Africans' spiritual welfare
and had directed its efforts at civilizing and converting them in-
stead of acquiescing in the rape and pillage of the continent by
slave trading "pirates," Africa would long ago have been "redeemed,
regenerated, and disenthralled." Nevertheless, Garrison found the
concept of evangelizing Africa by sending to it "a population de-
graded by slavery, and, to a lamentable extent destitute of religious
and secular knowledge" to be absurd and inept. (The colonizationist (33
propagandists who promoted this scheme asserted that the free blacks
were "pests in the community;" that they were an "intemperate, ig-
norant, lazy, thievish class;" and that, owing to the prejudices of
society, no efforts to improve them in this country could be success-
ful.) 'Inihanastihmm-meritolémq.f_,£h9 mighty-overlie which_the
QElfiniésgsuntlfliiagggléhsEbielcszthatathey were the missionaries of
salxation_nho.gere_tgmil;gains.alliofHAfricaerthat they would create

g_gggond American republic. Garrison had no faith in such an "in-
stantaneous metamorphosis." Ignorant and depraved black men who
were transported across the ocean would be Just as ignorant and de-
praved upon reaching the African coast. Likewise, those who were
"capable of doing well, surrounded by barbarians" would be even
more successful if allowed to ply their trades among a civilized

and Christian people. It was the Boston editor's "sober conviction"
that no enterprise could be more fatally calculated to obstruct the

progress of Christianity in a "heathenish country" than the

102

establishment of colonies of selfish, ignorant, or even intelligent
and high-minded men on its shores. In every settlement of this
kind, no matter how "choice" the original materials, vice would
soon prevail over virtue, intemperance over sobriety, and impiety
over godliness. The natives would see just enough of Christianity
to hate and shun it. Finding that its fruits were generally had--
that it had no restraining influence upon the majority of its nom-
inal professors--they would spurn with contempt the precepts of the
gospel.2u

How then could Africa be evangelized? Garrison believed that
missionaries of the Cross who were actuated by "holy zeal and gen-
uine love;" who were qualified to instruct, admonish, and proseli~
tize; and who would not, by their examples, "impugn the precepts,
or subject to suspicion the inspiration of the Word of Life" should
be found to take the gospel to the African people. "A hundred evan-
gelists like these," he wrote, "...would destroy more idols, make
more progress in civilising the natives, suppress more wars, unite
in amity more hostile tribes, and convert more souls to Christ, in
ten years, than a colony of twenty-thousand ignorant, uncultivated,
selfish emigrants in a century." Was not the blessed Savior's com-
mand to his disciples "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gos-
pel to every creature" rather than "Send out from among yourselves
those whom you despise..., those who need to be instructed and con-
verted themselves; those who are the dregs of society, made vicious

and helpless by oppression and public opinion..."?25

 

2“Garrison, Thou hts, pp. Zk-afi, 27-29, 155-156.

ngpigg. pp. 35-36. See also Mark 16:15. Garrison viewed
as fallacious the argument which posited that such a project could

103

In the pages of his Thoughts, Garrison arraigned not only
the colonizationists, but also severely criticized the American
church and clergy. E"The pulpit is false to its trust, and a moral
paralysis has seized the vitals of the church," he raged) The sanc-
tity of religion had been thrown over the horrid system of slavery
like a mantle. Under its auspices robbery and oppression had been
allowed to flourish. As an immediatist, Garrison claimed to have
been "almost as cruelly aspersed" by ministers of the gospel and
church members as by any other class of men. legsswtheflpulpit
$11252n92m$§§mxoiccwin flwarning" and."supplication" and planned for
the redgmppignKgfmthgmbondsmen--directly assaulting "the strong
holdsflgfwdgspgtifim." Jehovah would surely pour His indignation upon
the land and consume it with "the fire of his wrath." Men of all
denominations were duty—bound to bear unqualified testimony against

I“ = .
the sin of slavery. (Slaveholders could no longer be allowed to fi“~“w

share in the Christian communion) Igmsum,,America's churches had

t9,hg_"purified 'aswpy figg.'"26

Garrison's fulminations against the churchmen were not con-
fined to the pages of his anti-colonization tract. In his Thou hts,

the abolitionist had registered a protest against the "obscure, remote

 

not be initiated because of the fatal effects which the African
climate had on whites. If white men could not or would not go to
Africa, it was the duty of American Christians to "educate colored
young men of genius, enterprise and piety" to do the job of evan-
gelizing the continent. "If our free colored population were
brought into our schools, and raised from their present low estate."
he wrote, "I am confident that an army of christian volunteers
would go out from their ranks, by a divine impulse and under the
guidance of the Holy Spirit, to redeem their African brethren from
the bondage of idolatry and the dominion of spiritual death."
Garrison, Thou hts, pp. 36-37.

26Garrison, Thou hts, pp. 1, 9. 53-5“.

104
and unseemly pens or boxes" in which the people of color were
forced to occupy in the northern churches. During the early 1830's,
his concern over the treatment of black religionists was also evi-
denced in the columns of his weekly. In April, 1831 The Liberator
printed a story about the furor caused in Park Street Church be-
cause a "respectable colored man" had purchased a pew there for him-
self and his family. {Approximately three weeks after he had first
occupied the pew, a deacon, two committee men, and a constable inter-
fered, refusing him permission to take his seat. The black man was
eventually driven away by this prescriptive treatment and the pew
passed into other, whiter hands. Considering the church sanctuary
to be the last place on earth where the "exercise of despotic prin-
ciples" should be allowed to go unchecked, Garrison fumed at the
practices of the professed Christians of Boston. "ETJalk as we may
of the distinctions of 22333 in Burmah," he wrote, "they are not
more unjust or exclusive than those which are made in this christian
country, and by our christian assemblies." If one were to consider
their influence and the force of their example, it would undoubtedly
be found that the Negroes' worst enemies were the white religionists.
These so-called Christians carried their "wicked and relentless"
prejudices into the house of God, "driving from thence all who have
sable complexions" unless the Negroes consented to debase themselves
by occupying the "menagerie" provided for their use. Garrison con-
sidered such conduct to be anti-Christian--a gross violation of the
Savior's golden rule. If the black man's soul was held to be equal
in value to the white man's soul, men of both races ought likewise
to be able to share the same church facilities in their quest for

spiritual improvement. In his opinion, every Negro who continued

105

to worship in a segregated church was only dishonoring himself. In-
stead,they should "shun it as they would a cage for wild beasts"
until "a better arrangement be made." To speed.the end of the pro-
scriptive practices,the editor offiihg Liberator called upon the
churches to put away "this great sin" and no longer let pride and
prejudice "mar the beauty of christian worship."27)

e e a a

By the mid-1830's, abolitionist agitation had progressed to
the point where the American clergy was forced into taking a stand
on the issues which Garrison and his supporters had so dramatically
and glaringly illuminated. The fact that many churchmen were op-
posed to Garrison‘s immediatism only served to deepen his convic-
tion that they were apologists for the slave system~osen who called
themselves "Christians" but who nevertheless refused to take an
active part in the campaign to liberate the nation's oppressed
bondsmen.

Despite the encouraging news that several ministerial
gatherings had passed resolutions favorable to the abolition cause}8
Garrison was both saddened and angered by the actions of other
meetings in refusing to Join with him in condemning slavery. In

September,'1834 the Baptist Board of Foreign Missions declared, on

 

27Garrison, Thou hts, p. 127; Liberator, April 23, 1831,

Ray 21, 1831, May 28, l 31, August 13, 1831. See also Liberator,
July 30, 1831. For Garrison's opinion of the southern clergy see
Liberator, October 1, 1831, December 3, 1831. For a description of
his quarrels with Rev. Howard Halcom and Rev. John Breckinridge
‘see Garrison to 222 Liberator, September 7, 1832, in Liberator, ‘
October 6, 1832; Garrison to Samuel J. May, July 28, 1335, Garrison
Papers, Boston Public Library.

8 28Liberator, July h, 1835, August 22, 1835, November 28,
1 35.

106

the "best evidence," that their slave-holding brethren were sincere
followers of Christ. Therefore, the Board did not feel that it
would be proper to use language or to adopt measures which might
"tend to break the ties that unite them to us in our General Con-
vention,... and to array brother against brother, church against
church, and association against association, in a contest about sla-
very." At a meeting of<§he Board of Managers of the Baptist General
Tract Societj the following year, it was unanimously voted thatmthe ;
WEEEBELJQchdeWthat"they would in no way inter-
mggglgmhiihmih§_slaverygquestion while in the employ of the Society.29

Presbyterians too put themselves on record as being opposed
to the abolitionist crusade. In January 1836 the Synod of Philadel-
phia recommended that "all our people...discountenance the revolu-
tionary agitations and unrighteous plans and doctrines of the self
styled abolitionists." Advocating colonization as the solution to
"the evils of slavery," the Synod declared that the abolitionists
were retarding the progress of universal emancipation "more than
all other causes combined." These sentiments were echoed by the
Synod of Virginia, which asserted that the abolitionist doctrine
holding American slavery to be sinful and thus deserving of imme-
diate abolition was "directly and palpably, contrary to the plain-
est principles of common sense, and common humanity, and to the

clearest authority of the word of God.“30

 

29Liberator, Harch l“, 1835, November 28, 1835-

30Liberator, November lh, 1835, January 9, 1836. In 1836
the Synod of Virginia described I Timothy 6:1-5 as a passage of
Scripture which "not only shews the criminality of abolition doc-
trines, but also...plainly and fully prescribes our duty in rela-
tion to them,..." Liberator, December 3, 1836.

107

At the General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church,
which met in Cincinnati during the spring of 1836, Garrisonian
tenets were again roundly condemned. In a strongly worded resolu-
tion, the delegates disclaimed "any right, wish or intention" to
interfere "in the civil and political relation between master and
slave" as it then existed in the slaveholding states. By a vote of
122-11 they also proclaimed their disapproval "in the most unquali-
fied sense" of the conduct of two General Conference members who
were reported to have lectured in favor of "modern abolitionism."
Earlier, two bishops of the Church had addressed a pastoral letter
to the New Hampshire and New England Conferences urging that aboli-
tionist lecturers be refused the use of Methodist pulpits and houses
of worship. Examples of this type of clerical opposition to aboli-
tionism were numerous during the 1830's, causing Garrison to remark
that the antislavery cause was "in danger of being injured chiefly
by the c1ergy...."31

The editor of 2h; Liberator was especially angered by the
appearance of a series of "clerical appeals," protests, and pastoral
letters during 1837. These remonstrances against Garrisonian doc-
trine and methodology by men of professed allegiance to both the
cause of the slave and the cause of Christ elicited from Garrison
some of his harshest invective. Calling them extraordinary apolo-
gies for "those who either vigorously assail, or give no countenance
to the anti-slavery cause," he treated the appeals with contempt.
They displayed nothing but "the weakness of folly, and the fierce-

ness of 'clerical' malignity." -They were "imbecile and verbose."

 

aléihszgzgg. October 31. 1835, June 11, 1836, October 20,
1837.

108

They were "nothing better than drivel."32

Garrison believed that the various appeals evidenced the
continued existence of a "clerical conspiracy" which sought to
wrest the reigns of New England abolitionism from his hands and
place them with the clergy. Should this happen, he asserted, the
integrity of the antislavery movement would be constantly endan-
gered. During 183h and 1835 a group of ministers had attempted to
organize a new moderate abolition society in order to combat his
influence. That the American Union for the Relief and Improvement
of the Colored Race collapsed within a few months of its formation
did not mean that clerical opposition to Garrison's course was like-
wise destroyed. In the fall of 1837 the Boston abolitionist warned
that "a plot is going on for a distinct anticslavery organization
on sectarian grounds." The anti-Garrison portion of the clergy were
busily engaged in holding caucuses , corresponding with each other,
and "laying plots" to "carry their point" against the Garrisonians.
By the end of the following year he could write that the plot was
"extensively laid." The plan of the clerical abolitionist and
their supporters was "to rally at our [Massachusetts Anti-Slavery
Society] annual meeting, elect a different board of managers, start

a new anti-slavery paper, to be the organ of the Society--&c. 8‘s."33

 

3ZLiberator, August 18, 1837, September 8, 1837, September 22,
1837, October 6, 1837. For accounts of the appeals, protests, and
related anti-Garrisonian correspondence between ministers see also
Liberator, August 11, 1837. August 25, 1837, September 1, 1837,
September 29, 1837; Wendell Phillips Garrison and Francis Jackson
Garrison, William Lloyd Garrison, 1802—1822: The Stor 2; gig Life
Told b £22 Children, II (New York: Century Co., 1 5 , l33-lh3,
155-15 ; Johnson, Garrison and fig; Times, p. 274-277.

33The name of the New England Anti-Slavery Society had been
changed in 1836. Liberator, October 20, 183?, January 11, 1839;
Garrison to Lewis Tappan, September 13, 1837 in Ruchames, Letters,

109

Despite a mighty battle of wills and words, Garrison man-
aged to survive the assaults that his opponents launched at the
1839 Esthering. The old Board of Managers was re-elected and the
proposition to establish another antislavery newspaper in Massachu-
setts was indefinitely postponed. Nevertheless, the Garrisonian
ranks did not emerge unscathed. At least two dozen dissidents chose
to separate themselves from the Society following the meetings-~a
foreshadowing of the schism which was to rend the American Anti-
Slavery Society with such destructive force in 1840. With mixed
emotions, the editor of The Liberator reported the outcome of the
Confrontation. He told his readers that, while he was gratified
that the enemy faction had been routed, he was nevertheless filled
with "pain and sorrow" whenever he recalled the "turbulent scenes"
of the annual meeting. Garrison believed that the "spirit of in-
subordination" which had been exhibited by the professed friends
of abolition could only injure the "holy cause." Such behavior pro-
vided "the enemies of human rights" with a good excuse to point the
"finger of reproach" at the Massachusetts abolitionists and to
"exult in view of their dissentions."3u

Convinced that nearly all of the clergy were against him,

the editor of The Liberator continued to lash out against the

 

II, 299; Garrison to George w. Benson, October 20, 1837, in Ruchames,
Letters, II, 312-313; Garrison to Mary Benson, December 23, 1838,
I; Ruchames, Letters, II, 407; Garrison and Garrison, Life, I, 468-
h75; Nye, Humanitarian Reformers, pp. 83-8#. In September 1836
Garrison wrote: “I am conscious that a mighty sectarian conspiracy
is forming to crush me, and it will probably succeed, to some ex-
tent. Wello-from the heart I can say, 'The Lord is my portion-oI
will not fear what men can do unto me.'" Garrison to Samuel J. May,
September 23, 1836, in Ruchames, Letters, II, 178.

3l‘rLiberator, February 1, 1839; Merrill, Wind and Tide,
pp. lk8-150; Thomas, Liberator, pp. 266-280.

 

110
churchmsnlisallinzethem "blind leaders of the.blind," "revilers and.
galsewgitngsseslffland ”a corrupt priesthood." It was just this
type of language that had contributed so greatly to the alienation
of the clergy from the Garrisonian ranks in the first place. Be-
tween 1835 and l8HO, Garrison bombarded the American religious es-
tablishment with every epithet that was not too vile to include in
a speech or a newspaper article. "What an oath-taking, war-making,
man-enslaving religion is that which is preached, professed, and
practised in this country!" he declared. "It is like ‘clouds with-
out water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth,
without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; raging waves of
the sea, foaming out their own shame.'" In his condemnation of the
American profession of religion, Garrison spared no denomination.
The General Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church was a
"cage of unclean birds, and synagogue of Satan." The members of
the Baptist Board of Foreign Missions were treacherous and cowardly
apologists for southern "men~stealers." Qnitarianflgndazpificqnslo
Universalist and Roman Catholic, Baptist and Methodist were alike
charged with the shedding of innocent blood. All were accused of
recognizing as members "those who grind the faces of the poor, and
usurp over the helpless the prerogatives of the Almighty!" Southern

clergymen were said to be "openly abandoning their God, and bowing

down to Satan." In their wickedness_they were even_brazen enough <E””“““‘

t2_mainisin_ihat_the_slazg_§{Eggsiyaa not evil in itselfe.wae author-

!aea_hx_§adi_andithssefersiieashtfisot to be abandoned- The spirit
0 ."35

of the Northern churchmen was found to be "scarcely more human

35Liberator, March 14, 1835, October 10, 1835, July 23, 1836,
December 11, 1850; Garrison to James Mott, March h, 1839 in Ruchames,

111

That Garrison considered the American profession of faith

to be a markedly unholy imposture was also exhibited in the stinging
rebukes which he meted out to the religious press. Like many of the
nation's Christians, many of the nation's religious papers were "a
disgrace to Christianity." They were filled with "apologies for
sin, and sinners of the worst class." With "scarcely an exception,"
they countenanced the oppressor while denouncing those who were
"warning him of his danger and urging him to repent." "Melancholy,
disgust, indignation and amazement" welled up within Garrison when-
ever he perused their "vitiated columns." He considered it to be a
"public calamity" that papers such as the Vermont Chronicle, the
Boston Recorder, the Christian Mirror, and the New Hampshire Observer
were controlled by editors who deemed it proper to band together in
opposition to "every moral and religious reform" which was "at pre-
sent struggling against the wind and tide of popular clamor." How-
ever "orthodox" they might try to appear, these men were totally

lacking in Christian liberality, courage, benevolence, and moral

 

Letters, II, tho; Garrison to Oliver Johnson, August 14, 1837, in
Liberator, August 25, 1837; Garrison to George M. Benson, September 12,
1335, in Merrill, Letters, I, 527; Garrison to Samuel J. May,
January 17, 1836, in Liberator, January 23, 1836. See also Jude
verses 12-13; Revelation 2:9, 3:9, 18:2. Garrison denied that, in
rebuking the Baptist Board of Foreign Missions, he was trying to
destroy its usefulness or to injure the Baptist denomination. He
also noted: "We have been, from early childhood, taught to regard
that denomination as most truly apostolical in its doctrines: and
consequently, all the prejudices and predilections of our education
have naturally clustered around it. In our opposition to that
which is evil, we sha11 make no exception in favor of any sect or
party, for we do not care by what names men call themselves, and
give very little heed to their professions. 'By their fruits ye
shall know them,‘ is the infallible test, established by Christ
himself." In April, 1840 he wrote: "There is not a sect, which,
as a sect, has taken even nominally the right ground with regard to
our cause, except, perhaps, the Freewill Baptists." Liberator,
March 28, 1835, April 3, 18h0.

112
discernment. It could truly be said that they possessed a "cau-
tious and time-serving spirit."36

Garrison claimed that the hostility of these editors toward
him was rooted not only in their animosity toward the cause of aboli-
tion, but was also due to the fact that he would not "cordially em-
brace gl; their religious dogmas."37 There was much truth in his
analysis. The indifference and hostility with which a large seg-
ment of the American religious establishment met his pleas for im-
mediate and unconditional emancipation not only caused him to be-
come alienated from the clergy, but also served to convince him that
he needed to reconsider many of the religious views which he had
held since the days of his youth. When combined with his immedia-
tist doctrines, the new religious views which emerged from this re-
appraisal served to widen even further the breach between himself
and the more orthodox evangelicals.

Between 1835 and 18k0 Garrison greatly modified his views
on several of the more formal aspects of religious practice. In
November, 1835 he voiced his opposition to the "custom of appoint-
ing one day in the year to be specially thankful for the good gifts
of God." Believing that men should be grateful to their Maker at
all times and not just when the fall harvest was gathered, he wrote:
"There is great danger that if we are thankful only when we are
full or prosperous, ours is merely the gratitude of selfishness."

Besides helping to instill the notion that it was immaterial whether

 

36Garrison to Mary Benson, December 23, 1838, in Ruchames,
Letters, II, #08; Liberator, September 26, 1835, September 10, 1836.

37¥$22£2£2£9 September 10, 1836.

113

one was thankful or not during the remainder of the year, Thanks-
giving, since it was proclaimed by a civil officer, was a dangerous
example of Church-State union. Garrison found it to be "quite an
absurdity" that men should "mourn or rejoice--fast or gluttonise"
in response to a proclamation made by a governmental authority. By
agreeing to fast once a year and to be thankful once a year, pro-
vided that "a Proclamation comes forth from head quarterso-not
otherwise," the people of Massachusetts were following in the foot-
steps of the ancient Jews. As for himself, he asserted that he was
growing more and more hostile toward "outward forms and ceremonies
and observances, as a religious duty."38

Another custom which he now found to be "obviously abhorrent
to the spirit of the gospel" was the practice of putting church pews
up for sale at auction. By doing so the Church was saying to the
rich man, "Sit than here, in a good p1ace--take thy choice of the
best pew thou canst select, as thou art able to pay for it" while
telling the poor man, "Stand thou there by the door, or take refuge
in yonder obscure corner-~for thou hast no money, and thy raiment
is vile." The Boston editor considered this practice to be an
"odious monopoly" which evidenced the "abominable pride" of some
professed Christians.39

In like manner Garrison protested against the "monopoly" of

suitable and proper places of worship claimed by the clergy. He

objected to the term "house of God" when applied to any building

 

38Garrison to Mary Benson, November 27, 1835, in Merrill,
Letters, I, 563; Garrison to George W. Benson, November 27, 1835,
in Merrill, Letters, 1, 561.

39Liberator, February 25, 1837.

114

made by human hands because it was not correct in fact, because it
was the cause of "much superstition," and because it was not "author-
ized in the gospel." The believer was not required to journey to

a meeting house in order to render "acceptable worship to the Most
High." No mere mortal could command "those who are the sons of God"
to "Go to this mountain in Samaria" or "Go to Jerusalem" to worship.
They were the Lord's freemen and, as such, should be the first to
realize that Christian worship was nothing more than Christian
obedience-—the "simple, unbroken, perpetual obedience of the heart,
and entire consecration of body and soul, mind and strength, repu-
tation and property" to the service of God. Most assuredly,
Garrison asserted, such heart-felt obedience was not a thing of
"form, or locality, or time, or circumstance."

By the mid-1830's Garrison had also begun to question the
sanctity of the Sabbath. Although a strict Sabbatarian in early
life, he had long considered it to be proper, and in accordance
with the example of Christ, to plead the cause of the enslaved on
the Sabbath day. In 1831 he boldly declared that he was prepared
to champion antislavery principles "on all days, on all convenient

occasions, in all suitable places, before any sect or party,..."

 

40Ibidq Garrison to Samuel J. May, June 22, 1839, in
Ruchames, Letters, II, 495; Garrison to Francis Jackson, June 18,
1838, in Ruchames, Letters, II, 369; Garrison to Helen E. Garrison,
June 14, 1840, in Ruchames, Letters, II, 6G3. In May 1838 Garrison
wrote his wife that, in Christ Jesus, “all stated observances are
so many se1f~imposed and unnecessary yokes: and that prayer and
worship are all embodied in that pure, meek, childlike state of
heart, which affectionately and reverently breathes but one peti-
tion-~‘Thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.‘ Religion,
dear Helen, is nothing but love--perfect love toward God and toward
Inns-without formality, without hypocrisy, without partiality--
dspending upon no outward form to preserve its vitality, or prove
its existence." Garrison to Helen E. Garrison, May 12, 1838, in
Rucheeee, Letters, II, 359.

115

For the abolitionist there was "no day too holy, no place impro-
per, no body of men too inconsiderable to address." Nevertheless,
as late as July 2, 1836 Garrison was more than willing to decry
the arrival of a military company in Providence on Sunday as "a
specimen of the growing wickedness of the times." To a man of
Sabbatarian upbringing, the strutting of troops through the streets
on the Sabbath seemed "a most aggravated profanation of the day."u1

Garrison first gave his readers cause to doubt his ortho-
doxy on the Sabbath question in Th2 Liberator of July 23, 1836.
In a lengthy article criticizing a speech that Lyman Beecher had
recently made in Pittsburgh, he objected to the "extravagant and
preposterous language" used by the clergyman in referring to the
Sabbath as "the great sun of the moral world...the cord by which
heaven holds up nations from the yawning gulf of corruption and ruin."
Such language, said Garrison, was not authorized by the gospel. If
every thing that was valuable or sacred depended upon the outward
observance of one day in seven, was it not strange, he asked, that
neither Christ nor any of the apostles ever hinted at such a fact?

Was it not more proper to consider the fourth commandment as "only

one of ten" instead of as "the great sun of the moral world"?

 

hlGarrison, Philadel hia, E3! York, p. 3; Johnson, Garrison
22$ hhh Times, p. 363; Garrison to Helen E. Garrison, July 2, l 3
in Ruchames, Letters, II, 136-137. In a letter which he wrote to
his future wife on Sunday, April 27, l83h, Garrison noted: "You,
my sweet Helen, are too familiar with the liberality of my mind
to suppose that I am contending for a bigotted observance of this
holy day.... No one is less tenacious of devotional forms than
myself, or more desirous that every man should worship God accord-
ing to the dictates of hi3 222 conscience. Indeed, there is so
of the form of godliness, and so little of its ower, in our land,
that I am compelled to take refuge in silent meditation and secret
prayer, more frequently than in outward exhibitions of worship."
Garrizon to Helen E. Benson, April 27, 183k, in Merrill, Letters,
1. 33 .

116

Basing his argument on the teachings of the New Testament,
Garrison held that, while under the first covenant there was a
Sabbath, a "worldly sanctuary," a set of divine ordinances, an ark
of the covenant, and a chosen priesthood that were "indispensable
and obligatory"‘ to proper worship, the "purely spiritual reign of
Christ" had long ago been "ushered in, to the abolishment of every
type and shadow." The priesthood, as such, was now extinct, the
ark had vanished, and the sanctuary had been demolished--the "hand-
writing of ordinances" had been "nailed to the cross." Thus,(he
asserted, men should not attempt to coerce an observance of the
Sabbath by legislation,but should consecrate 2;; of their time,
thoughts, actions, and powers to the service of God,)

Garrison was "more and more convinced" that every attempt
to determine precisely what was or what was not a violation of the
Sabbath would prove nugatory both on the basis of its utter imprac-
ticality and on its unauthorized interference in the lives of men.
It was his belief that "where the Spirit of the Lord is there is
liberty"--the liberty to pray in public or private, to worship
wherever one pleased, to break the fetters of mere outward observ-
ances, and "to set apart any portion of time for religious purposes."
To Garrison's mind it was obvious that such a liberty was diametri-
cally opposed to all that was "sectarian, or formal, or pharisaical."
If men would "put on Christ" they would be as free as their Master--

and he was Lord even of the Sabbath day.“2

h

uzLiberator, July 23, 1836: See also Mark 2:27-28 and
11 Corinthians 3:17. Garrison noted that the "chief design" of his
July 23 article was "to show the inconsistency of Dr. Beecher." The
Iinister was "loud, earnest, eloquent" in behalf of the Sabbath, yet
he gave his "protecting influence" to a system of slavery which, "at
9 Single blow, annihilates not only the fourth commandment, but THE

117

It was not long before the editor of The Liberator became
aware of the fact that his remarks on the sanctity of the Sabbath
were causing "some fluttering in certain quarters." Within a month
of the appearance of the Beecher article,Garrison noted that his
comments had already subjected him to a great deal of censure by
both the religious press and by private individuals. He was es-
pecially grieved by a letter which he received from a Massachusetts
minister who wrote, "I have thought of you as another Wilberforce--
but would Wilberforce have spoken thus of the day on which the Son
of God rose from the dead?" In defense of his position, the aboli-
tionist noted that John Calvin, Thomas Belsham, George Fox, Martin
Luther, and "manygothermdistinguished commentators and pious men"
Qééafiléflugéigfé£gggflgh§gwphdegmhhewgospelidispensation_there was

QQ_§39h thing a8_21229llwéaxafl,and that all of man's time ought to
43

 

w
u—e-‘ _“__'..»-a-—)-

In an August 27 editorial,Garrison sought to calm the tem-
pest that his new views on the Sabbath had caused. He was not op-
posed to the religious observance of the first day of the week--
"if it be voluntary," but he was of the decided opinion that any
attempt to enforce its observance as a peculiarly "holy day" by

"pains and penalties," whether civil or ecclesiastical, should be

WHOLE DECALOGUE!" Liberator, July 23, 1836. See also Liberator,
August 6, 1836, August 27, 1836; Garrison to William S. Porter,
July 30, 1836 in E2! England S ectator, August 17, 1836; Garrison
to Samuel J. May, September 8, l 3 , Garrison Papers, Boston Public
Library.

“BGarrison to Henry E. Benson, August 11, 1836 in Ruchames,
Letters, II, 156; Garrison to Henry E. Benson, August 18, 1836,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library; Garrison to Henry E. Benson,
August 21, 1836, in Ruchames, Letters, II, 166-167; Garrison to
Effingham L. Capron, August 2#, 1836, Garrison Papers, Boston Public

Library .

118

resisted by "all the Lord's freemen" as an act of tyranny. The
editor assured his readers that the appearance of the July 23 arti-
cle did not mean that he was going to allow himself or his paper to
be diverted from the antislavery cause. He had merely tried to warn
America's religionists about being overly dogmatic on the subject
of an exact and formal observance of the Sabbath. Since the ques-
tion of the divinity of the Sabbath was "not strictly sectarian, but
general," it was obvious that his remarks were not to be construed
as an attack upon the "peculiar tenets or ecclesiastical arrangements
of any sect."‘+l+

Any hopes which Garrison may have had of quashing the pro-
test over his anti-Sabbatarian views were dashed when the Sabbath
issue became entangled in the clerical appeals controversy. In
their "Protest of Clerical Abolitionists, No. 2," which first ap-
peared in the Egg England Spectator of August 2, 1837, Charles Fitch
and Joseph Towne noted that they had "entertained suspicions of the
Liberator" ever since its editor commenced his "attack upon the
Sabbath." When they had first discovered that the formerly upright
Garrison was determined to forward sentiments which were "calculated
to remove from the minds of men that pressure of obligation which
heaven has laid upon them, to devote a seventh portion of time to
the public worship of God," they were "deeply pained." They were
especially concerned because his sentiments were "disguised under
the cloak of philanthropy." Pernicious principles, "coming from
such a source, and mingled with so much that is true," were "un-

sPeakably more dangerous" than the attacks of an open and avowed

h

“hLiberator, August 27, 1836. See also speech at Boston,
January 27, 1337, in Liberator, February 11, 1837.

119

enemy. It was now evident to those who knew his "peculiar theolo-
£222; notions" that, in Garrison's vocabulary, "abolition" meant
the abolition of the Christian ordinances, the Christian ministry,
and the visible church]+5

In a letter which Garrison printed in the columns of his
weekly in early September, the sentiments of the Clerical Protest
were seconded by James Woodbury, an Acton, Massachusetts clergyman.
Responding to the charges levelled against him by Fitch, Towne, and
Woodbury, Garrison declared that on the Sabbath question he was as
orthodox as John Calvin. As to the Christian ordinances, he assert-
ed his belief in "eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the
Incarnate Word, and being baptized into the death of the Son of God."
In addition, he considered the Christian ministry to be a "royal
priesthood" of the character described in I Peter 2:9 and held to
a "visible church," but one that was visible only to those who were
"gifted with spiritual vision." Such was the true nature of the
"jacobinical heresies" with which the three ministers had sought to
brand him in hopes of kindling a "sectarian flame in the bosoms of
abolitionists" which would consume the "ties of a common brother-
hood" which bound them in allegiance to the cause of the slave.“6

Garrison was again forced to take a defensive stance when
William S. Porter, editor of the fig! England Spectator, charged that
many of the black people of Boston were following his example and

neglecting "the Sabbath and the house of God." Denying Porter's

 

ASLiberator, September 8, 1837.

#6J. T. Hoodbury to Charles Fitch and Joseph H. Towne,
August 17, 1837, in Liberator, September 1, 1837; Liberator,
September 1, 1837, September 8, 1837.

120

claims and declaring that his "new-born zeal" for the Sabbath was
merely "personal hostility," Garrison compared the journalist to
those scribes and Pharisees who "watched him [Christ], whether he
would heal on the sabbath-day, that they might find an accusation
against him." In Garrison's estimation, Porter's defense of the
Sabbath placed him in the camp of the legalists who were endeavoring
to obtain righteousness by the law. "What is your 'eternal life'?"
he asked, "The ten commandments!" The editor of the Spectator
seemed to be ignorant of the fact that mankind had been delivered
from the law--that men were now supposed to "serve in newness of
spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." His critical arti-
cle only proved him to be a "deceitful and bigoted man" who delighted
to "take refuge in formal hypocrisy." To Porter's charge that he
neglected "the house of God" on the Sabbath, Garrison replied that
it was one of his "legal impostures" to represent a building made

of bricks and mortar as God's "house." Since there was no such
"holy building" on earth, it was impossible for anyone to "neglect
that which does not exist." To the charge that he "did his own
pleasure" on the Sabbath, Garrison wrote, "This is a libel upon

that Spirit which has translated me from darkness into marvellous
light.... My meat and drink is to do the will of my heavenly Father.
It is not my object, on any day, to 'do my own pleasure,‘ in a
worldly sense.... The things of this world--its pursuits, its honors,

its emulations, its fortunes, its reputations-~I tread under my feet."“7

h‘

“7L1berator, October 27, 1837; Garrison to William 3. Porter,
October 20, 1837, in Liberator, October 27, 1837. See also Luke 6:7
‘nd Romans 7:6. In his October 20 reply to the editor of the S ec-
lflfigg, Garrison wrote: "Remember, this language is not uttered for
°ffect, or boastingly. Few men in the world have less to do with
Profession than myself; nay, my crime is, that I have not made what

121

Still another ”mighty stir" was created in October 1840 when
222 Liberator printed the call for the Chardon Street Convention.
This gathering was held in Boston in mid-November to "examine the
validity of the views which generally prevail in this country as to
the divine appointment of the first day of the week as the Christian
Sabbath, and to inquire into the origin, nature and authority of the
institutions of the Ministry and the Church, as now existing."1+8
Although Garrison's name was not appended to the call, he was gen-
erally given credit for sponsoring the "infidel convention." Once
again his opponents rushed to the attack. In a letter to his
brother-in-law, George Benson, Garrison noted that not only was "the
priesthood" upset, but that even some of their "professed anti-
slavery friends" were also filled with dismay by the call. "Cowards!"
he raged, "not to know that truth is mightier than error, and that
it is darkness, and not light, that is afraid of investigation."
As for himself, the abolitionist asserted that none of this opposi-
tion disturbed him. "I can 'smile at Satan's rage, and face a
frowning world,'" he wrote, "for my trust is in the Lord, and Christ
is my Redeemer."u9

At the convention itself, Garrison found himself surrounded

 

is called 'a public profession of religion.’ But of what value are
professions where fruits are wanting? or what need of professions
where fruits abound?"

“BThe Sabbath question was actually the only issue considered
by the convention. Ralph Waldo Emerson later described those in at-
tendance as "madmen, madwomen, men with beards, Dunkers, Muggleton-
ians, Come-outers, Groaners, Agrarians, Seventh-day-Baptists, Quakers,
Abolitionists, Calvinists, Unitarians and Philosophers." Ralph Waldo
Emerson, "The Chardon Street Convention," in Lectures and Bio ra hi-
ggl Sketches (Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Company, $3365, p. 352.

“gGarrison and Garrison, Life, II, 422-h2k; Liberator,
October 16, 1840; Garrison to George H. Benson, November 1, 1840,
in Ruchames, Letters, II, 722.

122

by men much more radical than himself. Although he strongly op-
posed a proposition calling for the recognition of the first day of
the week as a divinely established Christian Sabbath, he also cham-
pioned the authority of the Scriptures against those who would deny
that they were the only proper "foundation" upon which to base a dis-
cussion of the Sabbath. When a storm of protest greeted Joshua
Himes' suggestion that the convention accept only the Old and New
Testaments as proof for all arguments, Garrison came to his aid by
requesting that all those who rejected divine authority be barred
from participating. As he later wrote, "At the opening of the Con-
vention, and on various occasions during the discussion, I expressly
declared that I stood upon the Bible, and the Bible alone, in re-
gard to my views of 'the Sabbath, the church, and the ministry'....
My arguments were all drawn from the Bible, and from no other
source."50

Despite the fact that the three days of meetings ended with-
out any definite vote or action on the Sabbath question, Garrison
was nevertheless punished for his attendance. In early December he
wrote that the convention had made "no small stir" in the community
and was bringing "fresh vials of wrath upon my devoted head as a
heretic, an infidel, etc." One month later he complained to George

Benson that The Liberator had lost upwards of 700 subscribers during

 

50Garrison and Garrison, Life, II, hZh-h26; Thomas, Liberator,
pp. 301-30#; Liberator, January 29, 18hl; Lindsay Swift, William
Llo d Garrison (Philadelphia: George w. Jacobs & Company, I§IIJ,
p. EUh. In 1835 Garrison asserted that "it is because human enact-
ments are consulted and obeyed, rather than the infallible code of
laws given by the Almighty, so many hurtful customs and practices
abound...to learn my duty, I will not consult any other statute-book
than THE BIBLE; and whatsoever requirement of man I believe is op-
posed to the spirit of the gospel, I will at all hazards disobey."
Liberator, July 4, 1835.

123

the past year. "The Sabbath Convention has been more than they
could tolerate;" he wrote, "and to save the formal observance of
the first day of the week, they are willing that slavery should be
perpetuated."51

In addition to the opposition of the churchmen there were
two other significant factors which contributed to the changes ef-
fected in Garrison's religious beliefs between 1835 and 1840. The
first involved the contact which he had with members and doctrines
of the Society of Friends. In answering Rev. Nathaniel Colver's
charge that he had "headed an infidel Convention" at the Chardon
Street Chapel, the abolitionist noted that he was as strongly op-
posed to infidelity as he was to priestcraft and slavery. He
claimed that his religious sentiments were as "rigid and uncompro-
mising as those promulgated by Christ himself"--"excepting as they

relate to certain outward forms and Observances, and respecting

these I entertain the views of 'Friends.'"52 In the antislavery

 

slGarrison to Elizabeth Pease, December 1, 1840, in Ruchames,
Letters, II, 731; Garrison to George W. Benson, January 7, 18hl,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library. See also Garrison to John A.
Collins, December 1, l8h0, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library.
In response to Louis Filler's assertion to the contrary, Aileen
Kraditor has written that reformers such as Arthur Tappan, who held
to rigid sabbatarian principles and exhibited an anti-Catholic bias,
probably outraged fewer potential abolitionists than did Garrison
with his antisabbatarianism and defense of women's rights. She
noted: "Anti-Catholicism and sabbatarianism were quite respectable
with the evangelical Protestants among whom the abolitionists exerted
their main efforts at conversion." Aileen S. Kraditor, Means and
Ends in American Abolitionism: Garrison and Big Critics 22 Strategy
and Tactics, 18gu-1820 (New York: Vintage Books, 19695, p. 75. See
also Louis Filler, The Crusade Against Slaver , 1830-1860 (New York:
Harper Torchbooks, 15335. P. 130.

52Liberator, January 29, 1841. Feeling that the observance
of special times and ceremonies was unnecessary and stressing the
need for a daily rebirth of Christ in the heart, the early Friends
proclaimed every day as the Lord's day and every week as Holy Week.
Believing in a spiritual baptism and communion, the Quakers considered

124

crusade Garrison had become acquainted with many Quakers-~Benjamin

Lundy, Arnold Buffum, Sarah and Angelina Grimke, Elizabeth Pease

among them. Since these members of the Society of Friends differed

from one another in their interpretations of Quaker beliefs, it was

not surprising to find them, as well as many other Friends, taking

various positions on the slavery issue. The editor of The Liberator,

not being one to allow differences of opinion to exist in the area

of antislavery doctrine, was often moved to criticize the Quakers

for their "lukewarmness" toward Garrisonian immediatism. He con-

trasted their lack of enthusiasm for the abolitionist creed with

that of their English brethren who had met "the opposing hosts of

oppression" with great courage and zeal. Igwwasupgtwenough that the q.,,

Egienda were ggtwslayehglderswgr that some of them_occasionally bore

"Egg_tg§timonywof a few wordsfi_against slavery. His desire was to

have "not one, or ten, or a hundred, but all be quickened" in the

"benevolent work" of abolishing the American system of bondage.53
Two Friends who apparently met Garrison's standards of

benevolence were James and Lucretia Mott, early opponents of slavery

and, after 1827, members of the Hicksite branch of the Society.5u

 

the Christian Sacraments to be mere rituals without any real signi-
ficance. Formal creeds were shunned. They did not believe that
religious services had to be held in certain consecrated buildings.
Neither did they believe that the Scriptures could be considered

the principle ground of truth or that an ordained ministry was a
necessary feature of Christian worship. The Friends held that God

was known directly. Since He was present in every human heart, all

men had within themselves the true source of their religious inspiration.

53Garrison to Samuel J. May, March 14, 1857, in Ruchames,
Letters, II, 233; Liberator, May 1, 1840; Garrison to Mary Benson,
November 27, 1835 in Merrill, Letters, I, 564. See also Johnson,
Garrison and His Times, p. 251.

5“After 1815, Elias Hicks became recognized as the champion
of certain liberal views which the more conservative Friends believed

125
During a trip to Philadelphia in 1835, Garrison greatly enjoyed and

appreciated the hospitality offered him by the Cuaker couple. In
their home the abolitionist found "much of the disinterestedness,
purity and peace of heaven." He described Lucretia as "a bold and
fearless thinker, in the highest degree conscientious, of most amia-
ble manners, and truly instructive in her conversation." Her hus-
band was no less worthy of praise~-being "distinguished for his
goodness, benignity and philanthropy." As a guest in their home he
did not find it ”3351 difficult" to comply with the Lord's "admir-
able injunction" to "love thy neighbor as thyself." In 1849, as he
looked back upon his early meetings with the Motts, Garrison recalled
that, even though he was "strongly sectarian" in his religious be-
liefs at the time--" and hence uncharitable in judgment touching
theological differences of opinion," they nevertheless manifested a
"most kind, tolerant, catholic spirit," toward him and gave him their
"cordial approbation and cheering countenance" as an advocate of

the suffering slave. "If my mind has since become liberalized in

any degree, (and I think it has burst every sectarian trammel,)" he
wrote, "--if theological dogmas which I once regarded as essential

to Christianity, I now repudiate as absurd and pernicious,--I am

 

to be radical and dangerous. To Hicks, outward authorities, exter-
nal performances, and historical revelations were relatively unim-
portant. He held that the ministry, the Bible, and eVen the his-
toric Christ were unnecessary for experiencing the Inner Light.
These views, along with his charges that the Quaker elders were
seeking to fasten a yoke of enforced orthodoxy upon the Society and
to introduce an evangelical movement patterned after the revivalis-
tic methods of the Methodists, resulted in an 1827 schism. Not all
of the Hicksites shared his anti-Trinitarianism, but all agreed
that the Inner Light, spoken of in John 1:9, was supreme and that
Quakers should have the right to entertain divergent views on theo-
logical matters. See Bliss Forbush, Elias Hicks: Quaker Liberal
(New York: Columbia University Press, 19565: Doherty, Hicksite

Separation.

126

largely indebted to them for the change."55

Lest it be thought that the respect which Garrison had for
several of the Friends' doctrines was solely the result of his ad-
miration for certain Quaker personalities, it must be noted that,
on the whole, the beliefs themselves and not the men and women who
held them were what he valued most highly. He realized that a num-
ber of the principles which he had come to cherish were similar to
those upon which the Friends operated. In a letter which he wrote
to his wife's sister, Mary, in 1835, Garrison described theiQuakers;
asigmrgligigggwbodywwhose,Ngreat leading, fundamental principles
ars_mnzm.in harmony withmmine than those of any other." By 1841
he could complain that he was being "persecuted...for the crime of
cherishing their peculiar sentiments, substantially in regard to
the sabbath, the church & the ministry." The realization that he
was supported in his beliefs by the members of the oft-persecuted,
traditionally antislavery sect served to strengthen Garrison's con-

56

fidence in the correctness of his views.

 

55Garrison to Helen E. Garrison, March 19, 1835, in Merrill,
Letters, I, 467-468; Liberator, November 9, 1849. See also Matthew 19:
19, 22:39, and Mark 12:31.

56Garrison to Mary Benson, November 27, 1835. in Merrill,
Letters, I, 563-564; Garrison to Elizabeth Pease, June 1, 1841,
Houghton Library, Harvard University. In 1838, Garrison wrote that
his views of the Sabbath were in accord with those held by John Calvin,
Thomas Belsham, Joseph Priestley, William Penn, George Fox, and Robert
Barclay, "and which chiefly distinguish the Society of Friends from
other religious sects." He then noted: "As a christian, I hold to
the sanctification of seven days in a week, instead of one day in
seven, as under the Jewish institution. I discard all human creeds,
and all ecclesiastical combinations, and all Observances of times
and seasons, and all rites, ceremonies, forms and ordinances, as con—
stituting no part of christianity, and as being contrary to that lib-
erty wherewith Christ makes his people free. I deny that there is,
now, any worldly sanctuary or ordinances of divine service, or any
priestly office, except that which is exclusively occupied by him

127

The abolitionist and the Friends shared a special kinship
in their opposition to war. Influenced greatly by the Yankee paci-
fist and founder of the American Peace Society, William Ladd, Garrison
declared his pacifism early in life. The subject of war and the
exertions of Ladd in behalf of peace were frequently alluded to in
his early newspapers. In the fall of 1829, after being forced to
pay a fine for failing to appear at the May militia muster he wrote
that, although he was:"not professedly a Quaker?" he "heartily, en- .w
tirely and practically" :EhEggsdflthe.doctrinelofmnon-resistance.
Being "conscientiously opposed" to all "military exhibitionsfl'the
young editor declared that he would never obey any order to bear arms,
but instead would "cheerfully suffer imprisonment and persecution"
for his refusal to enroll in the "sanguinary school" which trained
men to become "skilful murderers." By 1835 he could write that, al-
though it was a "difficult lesson to learn," he was more and more
convinced that it was the duty of the followers of Christ to "suffer
themselves to be defrauded, calumniated and barbarously treated, with-
out resorting either to their own physical energies, or to the force
of human law, for restitution or punishment."57
Three years later Garrison played a major role in the forma-
tion of the New England Non-Resistance Society. In the Declaration

of Sentiments which he penned for the September, 1838 Peace Convention,

 

'who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the
heavens.'" Garrison to Francis Jackson, June 18, 1838, in Ruchames,
Letters, II, 368-369.

57Thomas, Liberator, pp. 49-51; Garrison and Garrison, Life,
I, 113, 125; Garrison to Jacob Horton, June 27, 1829, Garrison
Papers, Boston Public Library; Genius 2; Universal Emancipation,
September 16, 1829; Garrison to Mary Benson, November 27, 1835, in
Merrill, Letters, I, 563.

128

he showed the extent to which he was willing to transcend simple
pacifism. The Declaration denied allegiance to any human govern-
ment, recognized no ruler but God and Christ, and recommended the
abolition of all armies, navies, arsenals and military fortifica-
tions. Since the laws enactedmby human governments were enforced
"gigpgally_atm£hewpointgof”the bayonetfi'the members of the Non-
Rggistance,fiogie y vowed not to hold any office which imposed upon

ii§_999unant the oblisetioartqeflcompel men to do right. on pain.of

 

imprisonmenthereath." Thus, they voluntarily excluded themselves
from all legislative and judicial bodies and repudiated all "human
politics, worldly honors, and stations of authority." Those who
signed Garrison's document pledged themselves to abide by the be-
lief that the "penal code" of the old covenant, "AN EYE FOR AN EYE
AND A TOOTH FOR A TOOTH," had been abrogated by Christ and that,
under the new covenant, the forgiveness, rather than the punishment
of enemies, had been enjoined upon His disciples "in all cases
whatsoever."58

In the Declaration, Garrison asserted that the members of
the Society advocated "no jacobinical doctrines." Many of those

who read the document were not easily convinced that this was

 

58Liberator, September 28, 1838. See also Exodus 21:24,
Leviticus 24:20, Deuteronomy 19:21, and Matthew 5:38-39. Just prior
to the Peace Convention, Garrison wrote: "The desire of putting my
enemies into a prison, or inflicting any kind of chastisement upon
them, except of a moral kind, is utterly eradicated from my breast.
I can conceive of no provocations greater than those which my Lord
and Master suffered unresistingly. In dying upon the cross, that
his enemies might live--in asking for their forgiveness in the ex-
tremity of his agonies--he has shown me how to meet all my foes,
ay, and to conquer them, or, at least, to triumph over them."
Garrison to Samuel J. May, September 8, 1838, in Ruchames, Letters,
II, 387. See also Liberator, December 12, 1835; Garrison to
Henry E. Benson, December 15, 1835, Garrison Papers, Boston Public
Library; Liberator, December 7, 1838.

129

entirely true. Non-resistance, when added to his other "heresiesfi'
was simply too much for some of the abolitionist's sympathizers to
bear. Amos Phelps, for one, resigned his post as General Agent of
the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society in protest against Garrison's
course of action. As might be expected, such opposition scarcely
phased the crusading editor. In a June 1839 letter to Samuel J. May
he wrote, "Notwithstanding the clamor that is raised about the non-
resistance principles and doctrines, I am more and more satisfied
that they constitute the very kingdom of heaven which the Prince of
Peace came to establish; and also the real atonement which Jesus
died to make, that the world might be reconciled unto God."59
fi;(&he third important factor which contributed to the modifi-
cation of Garrison's religious beliefs between 1835 and 1840 was
related to the exposure which he had to the nineteenth-century doc-
trine of perfectionismi One could not read his 1838 Declaration
of Sentiments without realizing that he had come under the influence

of John Humphrey Noyes' perfectionist ideas.60 The abolitionist

 

59Garrison and Garrison, Life, II, 253; Nye, Humanitarian
Reformers, P. 115; Garrison to Samuel J. May, June 22, 1839, in
Ruchames, Letters, II, 495; Liberator, September 28, 1838. See also
Kraditor, Means and Ends, p. 51. For other examples of the confi-
dence which he had in the principles of the Non-Resistance Society
see Garrison to Mary Benson, December 23, 1838; Garrison to
Samuel J. May, January 4, 1839, Garrison Papers, Boston Public
Library. For other examples of his views on non-resistance, war,
and government prior to 1841 see Garrison to James Mott, March 4,
1839. in Ruchames, Letters, II, 440-441; Speech at Boston, March 4,
1839, in Liberator, March 8, 1839; Garrison to George N. Benson,
September 29, 1839, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library; Liberator,
October 11, 1839; Garrison to Charles Stearns, February 10, 1 ,
in Liberator, February 14, 1840; Garrison to Edmund Quincy, June 13,
1840, Garrison Family Papers, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College.

60Noyes was a graduate of Dartmouth College and had studied
for the ministry at Andover and Yale. While at the latter institu-
tion, he became convinced that it was possible to attain perfect
holiness in this life. He also developed a unique view of Christ's

130

first met the editor of 233 Perfectionist when Noyes visited the
Anti-Slavery Office in Boston during the spring of 1837. After
learning the identity of his visitor, Garrison spoke with interest
of Noyes’ monthly--which he had apparently been reading for several
months, if not from its inception in 1834. He also told Noyes that
his mind had been ”heaving on the subject of Holiness and the King-
dom of Heaven" and said that he planned to devote more of his ener-
gies to it "as soon as he could get anti-slavery off his hands."
The Vermont editor then spoke to Garrison on the subject of human
government--finding him "ripe for the loyalty of heaven."61

A few days after their meeting, Noyes wrote his new friend
a letter describing his determined opposition to all human govern-
ments and his supreme allegiance to the principles of perfect holi-
ness. After declaring that he had subscribed his name to "an in-
strument similar to the Declaration of '76, renouncing all alle-

giance to the government of the United States, and asserting the

title of Jesus Christ to the throne of the world," he asked if it

 

second coming--fixing it not in the future, but in 70 A.D. In early
1834 Noyes announced that he had attained a state of sinless per-
fection. As a result of the general Opposition to his views he was
deprived of his license to preach and was forced to withdraw from
college. It was not long before he became convinced that monogamic
marriage was incompatible with perfectionism and that human insti-
tutions were obstacles to human progress. See George Nallingford
Noyes, ed., Religious Experience of John Humphrey Noyes (New York:
Macmillan Company, 1923). Aileen Kraditor has written that Garrison
was a nonresistant "because he was a perfectionist, believing that
men were capable of obeying divine commands to be free of all sin

and that when the time came when they were willing to follow Christ's
example, social relations would be based on love, not on force."
Kraditor, Means and Ends, pp. 103-104. For a study on the perfec-
tionism of the early auakers see R. Newton Flew, The Idea of Perfec-
tion in Christian Theology: An Historical Study“ of the Christian
Ideal— for the Present Life (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 19345, pp. 281-
292.

61Garrison and Garrison, Life, II, 114, 144-145.

131

was not "high time" for the abolitionists to abandon this same re-
probate and oppressive government. Surely, he noted, many of them
had heard the "great voice out of heaven" which commanded, "Come
out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins and of
her plagues." Noyes than reminded Garrison of their conversation:
"You said your mind was heaving on certain momentous subjects, and
you only waited to set Anti-slavery in the sunshine before you turned
your mind to those subjects. Allow me to suggest that you will set
Anti-slavery in the sunshine only by making it tributary to Holiness."
According to Noyes, the abolition cause would most assuredly be
thrown "into the shade" if the Boston editor allowed it to "occupy
the ground" which "ought to be occupied by UNIVERSAL EMANCIPATION
FROM SIN."62

The effect which Noyes' words had upon Garrison was evi-
denced in a letter which the abolitionist wrote to Henry C. Wright
in mid-April. Asserting that human governments would remain in
existence as long as men were "resolved not to bear the cross of
Christ, and to be crucified unto the world," he noted that, in the
"kingdom of God's dear Son," holiness and love were the "only magis-
tracy." In Garrison's opinion, there was nothing more offensive to
the religionists of the day than such "practical holiness. .They_ {3

despised the_doctrine which taught that total abstinence from sin

wggfiflggt_gnlymgommanded but necessarily attainable" and stigmatized
as "a delufiiqgigfiwfihe dcvil”.the idea of being entirely free from

sin. Their worldly wisdom, however, was of little importance when

 

621bid., pp. th-lh8; John Humphrey Noyes to William Lloyd
Garrison, March 22, 1837, in Liberator, October 13, 1837. See also
Revelation l8:#.

132

compared with the teachings of God. hid it not say in Romans that
"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ
Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the
law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the
law of sin and death"? Had the Bible ceased to teach that "If any
man be in Christ, he is a new creature"? Was it not written that
"For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanc-
tified"?63

It was not long before Garrison began to defend Noyes' per-
fectionist ideas in the columns of The Liberator. lnwg_gune4wl832 {a
gnhifilfiahfimheld that human governments were the result of manfs
Qifighfidisnce to "the requirements of_heaven." They were preferable
to a state of anarchy only in the same sense that a hail storm was
to be preferred over an earthquake or an outbreak of smallpox over
a cholera epidemic. If men would "render unto God the things that
are God's" they would not need a "caesar" to rule over them. (ghe
"kingdoms of this world” would then become "the kingdoms of our
Lord and of his Christ" and all "principalities and powers" would
of necessity terminateJ ‘To Garrison's mind, Noyes' "no government"
theory only meant the "perfect reign of Christ throughout the
earth." ggggrdingly, he_wagwinflfavor,ofwvsubverting the rotten,
unegual, ant;;ghristiagmgoxernment_of 222' and establishing, asra
substitut that which is divine.? His deepest hopes were expressed

in a sonnet which he penned to usher in the year l8hl. It read,

in part:

 

63Garrison to Henry C. Wright, April 16, 1837, in Ruchames,
Letters, II, 258-259. See also Romans 8:1-2, II Corinthians, 5:17,
and Hebrews lO:l#.

133

Now let there be on earth an end of sin,
And all contention cease throughout the world;
The glorious reign of holiness begin, 6
And Satan's empire to the dust be hurled!

Garrison's conversion to perfectionism gave his opponents
yet another reason for denouncing him as an infidel. As the furor
over his many "heresies" grew in intensity, the abolitionist be-
came increasingly defensive of his beliefs. Labeling his enemies
as "truly pharisaical enemies of abolition," the Boston editor
flastgglgmsufferings. If the priest and the Levite charged the Lord
with having a devil, why should the modern day disciple marvel at
being likewise defamed? As Christ had been persecuted, so must
those who rallied under His banner expect persecution. "I am ac-
cused of being a Sabbath-breaker," he wrote, "--so was Jesus. 0f
being inimical to government--so was Jesus. Of being a disturber
of the peace of society--so was Jesus. 0f being hostile to the reli-
gion of the lando-so was Jesus." Garrison claimed that such charges
did not trouble him in the least. He was not disturbed to read that
his opponents called him "a disturber of the peace," "an infidel,"
and "a pestilent fellow." It was seldom that a reformer, "however
humble...his sphere of action," escaped being "arraigned by the
tongue of malice" for some "special transgression." His adversaries
knew, as well as he did, that "the truth is not in them"--that they

65

were bearing false witness.

 

61*Liberator, June 23, 1837, October 13, 1837, December 7,
1838, January 1, lghl. See also speech at Providence, July h, 1837,
in Liberator, July 28, 1837; Matthew 22:21 and Revelation 11:15.

6sGarrison to Erasmus D. Hudson, September 8, 1838, in
Liberator, October 26, 1838; Garrison to Francis Jackson, June 18,
1333, in Ruchames, Letters, II, 369-370; Garrison to Phebe Jackson,
September 19, lBkO, in Ruchames, Letters, II, 706; Garrison to

13h

Declaring that since he had not been dismayed by the cries
of "madman! fanatic! incendiary!" which greeted him at the outset
of his antislavery career, he would not now allow himself to be dis-
turbed by the cry of "infidel," the editor of The Liberator gave his
readers a comprehensive description of the moral and religious views
which he had come to hold by 18hl. In the December 11, 1840 issue
of his paper, Garrison wrote that his alleged heresies consisted of
these things: a refusal to agree with the majority in regard to
certain outward forms and observances; a disinclination to become
a member of any religious sect or to adopt a "human creed" as his
standard of conduct; a belief in the somewhat less than Christ-like
character of the American clergy; a conviction that men could not
be slaveholders and still possess the spirit of Christ; a refusal
to support a pro-slavery priesthood or to recognize a pro-slavery
church as a religious body; an assurance that it was not right for
Christians to "imprison, hang or butcher" their enemies; a contempt
{92_1hs_saasnIiQD,£hat human governments, upheld by military power,
and administered by "HiCked rulers" were divine; a disavowal of the
necessity of sinning against God or "being always more or less in
bondage to the devil"; a preference for "holiness of heart" over
"holiness of time"--in the "true tabernacle which the Lord pitched"
over a worldly sanctuary and the ordinances of divine service; a
conception of spiritual worship and communion without the "inter-

vention of any types or figures;" and finally, a refusal to make

 

Francis Jackson, June 28, 1836, in Ruchames, Letters, II, 37%. See
also Liberator, January 3, 1835, November 27, 1637; Garrison to
Samuel Osgood, August 2, 1839, in Liberator, August 2, 1839;
Garrison to Edmund Quincy, June 19, 1833, Garrison Papers, Boston
Public Library; I John 2:“.

135
religion "a thing of circumstance, time or place"--to cause it to
become something distinct from the every day pursuits and avoca-

tions of life. This, said Garrison, was the ”head and front" of

his "infidelity."66

 

66

Liberator, December 11, 1840. A statement of Garrison's

beliefs, in poetical form, can be found in The Liberator, of
August 25, 1837.

CHAPTER V

RELIGION OF A FREE LAND

Slavery gives character to the American peo-
ple. It dictates their laws, gives tone to
their literature, and shapes their religion.

ooFrederick Douglass
May 23, 18#6

Following his escape from bondage in September 1838,
Frederick Douglass made his way to New York City where he was shel-
tered by David Ruggles, secretary of the New York Vigilance Commit-
tee and editor of an antislavery quarterly called The Mirror 9;
Liberty. While staying with Ruggles, the fugitive slave was joined
by his fiancee, Anna Murray, a young black woman whom Douglass had
met while living in Baltimore. Anna had encouraged him to flee to
the North and had given him money to finance his escape. After they
were married by Rev. James H. C. Pennington, himself an ex-slave
from Maryland, the newlyweds traveled to New Bedford, Massachusetts
where they hoped to build a new and better life.1

Encouraged by the prospects before him and by the memories

of the satisfying Christian fellowship which he had enjoyed in

 

1Douglass, Life, pp. 202-206; Quarles, Frederick Dou lass,
pp. 8-10. Anna Murray Douglass, free-born daughter of a Denton,
Maryland slave couple, had first met Frederick when she was a house-
keeper for a wealthy family in Baltimore. She, too, was a member
of the Methodist Church. The only source of information on Mrs.
Douglass' early life is Rosetta Douglass Sprague, Anna Murray
Dou lass: M Mother as I Recall Her pamphlet, Washington, D.C.,
19005. -1

136

.137
Baltimore, Douglass sought to join a local Methodist congregation.
In pursuit of this end, he attended a Sunday morning worship service
at the Elm Street Methodist Church in New Bedford. Upon entering
the sanctuary and proceeding a short way up the aisle, an usher
touched Douglass on the shoulder saying, "The colored people sit up
there." The portion of the gallery to which he was directed con-
tained seats that were different from those occupied by the white
members of the congregation. The partitions between the black pews
were so high that only a very tall person could see the pulpit when
seated. Douglass was disturbed by this proscription and did not lis-
ten to the worship service in a "very devotional frame of mind."
Nevertheless, he chose to regard this shabby treatment as an accomo-
dation to the prejudices of those in attendance who "had not yet
been won to Christ and his brotherhood," and he tolerated it "lest
sinners should be driven away from the saving power of the gospel."
.Ifipnce converted, he thought, they would treat him as a man and a
brother.a
The ex-slave held higher expectations for the converted por-
tion of the church body. Surely, he said to himself, these Chris-
tian people have none of this feeling against color. They, at least,
have renounced this prejudice. When none but the saints are assem-
bled, they will certainly recognize the colored people as children
of the same Father and heirs of the same salvation, on equal terms
with themselves. He was soon to learn that these charitable assump-

tions were false.

 

ZHelen Pitts Douglass, ed., In Memoriam: Frederick Douglass
(Freeport, New York: Books For Libraries Press, 1971, Reprint of
the 1897 edition). p. 2&2; Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 350-351.

138

It being the quarterly meeting, Douglass had an opportunity
to see the "religious part of the congregation by themselves." At
the close of the "very solemn and searching" sermon, the ordinance
of the Lord's Supper was observed. After the unconverted portion
of the assembly was dismissed, the half dozen or so Negro members
of the church descended from the gallery and seated themselves
against the wall most distant from the altar. The minister, Reverend
Bonney, sang "Salvation 'tis a Joyful Sound" and then began to ad-
minister the sacrament to the white members. When all of the whites
had received the bread and wine, Rev. Bonney turned to the colored
members and, extending both hands in an inviting and pleading man-
ner, exclaimed, "And now let our dear colored brethren and sisters
come forward; come forward, brethren and sisters, come forward, and
partake of the sacred emblems, for God is no respecter of persons."
Douglass did not go forward. He went out, never to visit the Elm
Street church again. (Disillusioned and saddened by this experience, 9}
the former slave found it impossible to respect the religious pro-
fession of those "believers" who were held captive by the forces of
anti-Negro prejudice.\ flgugouldm99§imthcrstarsawfeel(thateignJQiEP
inzmsuchwamchurchgwhe would be joining a truly_Christian organiza-
use-3

In subsequent weeks, Douglass attended other churches in
New Bedford with the same result. When one of them was holding a
revival, he attempted to attend one of the meetings, only to be

stopped by one of the deacons, and told, in a pious tone, "We don't

allow niggers in here"! .quglass had not 3°?“P99993 fully acquainted

 

3Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 351-353; Douglass, In Memoriam, p. 242.

139

with the Garrisonian view of the church. He could easily see, from
his own experience, how the slaveholding church of the South, with
its Coveys, Weedens, Aulds, and Hopkins could put on a facade of
holiness while being corrupt and sinful within, but he could_not as
1211394ezfitandnhhxuthawchnrches of the North refused to treat him
afiflampggthsnhin.0hrist.k After numerous rebuffs from white ministers
and deacons, Douglass joined a small sect of his own people, led by
Rev. Thomas James, himself an escaped slave. Here he enjoyed "many
seasons of peace and joy," eventually becoming a class leader and
lay preacher in the little schoolhouse on Second Street which served
as a church home.5
While engaged in these activities, Douglass was also becoming
involved in the antislavery movement. As a slave, he had often over-
heard Hugh Auld and other white men discussing "abolitionists." He
did not know exactly what the term implied, but quickly discerned
that those referred to as such were "most cordially hated and soundly
abused" by the slaveholders. If a slave had made good his escape

fromvbgndagg, it w§§i§§ually said that he had been.persuaded and

 

“Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 351, 353; Holland, Colored Orator,
p. #1; Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison, January 1, 1853, in
Liberator, January 30, l8k6.

5Douglass, Bonda e, p. 3533 Holland, Colored Orator, p. 42.
In his autobiography, Rev. James wrote that when he was preaching in
New Bedford in 1841, he heard Douglass speak and licensed him to
preach. Benjamin Quarles and Philip Foner doubt whether this actu-
ally happened since there is no mention of Douglass in the official
list of ministers and preachers of the African Methodist Church in
18k2. See Wonderful Eventful Life of Thomas James, By Himself
(Rochester: Post Express Printing Co., 1885), p. 6; Quarles,
Frederick Dou lass, p. 11; Foner, Frederick Dou lass, p. 381;
African Methodist Episcopal Church Ma azine, I EDecember, 1842), 89;
Washington Evening Star, February 21, 1895; Amy Hanmer-Croughton,
"Anti-Slavery Days in Rochester," in Rochester Historical Society
Publication Fund Series, Vol. XIV (Rochester: Rochester Historical
SOCietyg 19335, p. llne

1RD

assisted—hznihsisbplitionists. I£_§’§lgve struck his overseer or
committed_gnyflggimevormyiolent act out of the ordinary, it was said
t9 be Sheififnit.°f the abolition movement. Young Douglass was
determined to find out who these abolitionists were and to discover
why they engendered so much hatred among the slaveholders. Surely,
whatever else they might be, they could not be unfriendly to the
chattel. "An old volume" of Walker‘s dictionary afforded little
help, but the pages of a Baltimore newspaper provided him with much
"incendiary information." In the columns of the American, Douglass
read that a vast number of petitions and memorials had been pre-
sented to Congress, praying for the abolition of slavery in the
District of Columbia, and for the abolition of the interstate slave
trade. With this bit of news in hand, the vexing problem of the
abolitionists' identity and mission was solved. Thereafter, when-
ever the young slave heard the words ”abolition" or "abolition move-
ment" mentioned, he felt the matter to be one of personal concern.

Haunted by the lingering memory of the Nat Turner insurrec-
tion, the residents of Baltimore were, during the same period, fur-
ther plagued with multitudinous anxieties and fears created by the
threat of a deadly cholera epidemic. As Douglass later noted, "the
thought was present, that God was angry with the white people because
of their slaveholding wickedness, and, therefore, his judgments were
abroad in the land." The young Christian juxtaposed this line of
reasoning with his thoughts on abolition and came to the conclusion

that there was much to be hoped for from the antislavery men since

 

6Douglass, Bonda e, pp. 163-165; Frederick Douglass,
"Reminiscences," Cosmo olitan, VII (August, 1889), 377.

1A1

their movement was "supported by the Almighty, and armed with
DEATH! "7

Douglass continued to learn about the abolitionists after
his escape to the North. He "had already the spirit of the move-
ment, and only needed to understand its principles and measures."
This understanding was gained from reading Th2 Liberator and asso-
ciating with those who "believed in that paper." Within five months
of his arrival in New Bedford, Douglass was a subscriber to Garrison's
weekly. Through it, he obtained "a clear apprehension" of the prin-
ciples of the antislavery movement. He not only liked, but "loved"
the paper and its editor. Garrison seemed to be an all-sufficient
match for the opponents of emancipation, a man of power and prin-
ciple, his words "full of holy fire, and straight to the point."
Th: Liberator took its place in Douglass' heart "second only to the
Bible," while its editor became his greatest hero.8

Caught up in the spirit of Garrisonianism, Douglass began
to attend the meetings of local black abolitionists. At one such
gathering, he spoke in favor of resolutions condemning slavery, com-
mending Garrison as "deserving of our confidence and support," and
denouncing colonization. Every two weeks he attended a social meet-
ing at the home of a local Quaker to discuss antislavery principles
and events. Soon Douglass began to assume a position of leadership

within the New Bedford abolition movement.9.

7Douglass, Bonda e,pp. 165-166.

8Ibid., pp. 35k-356; Douglass, Life, p. 213.

9Liberator, March 29, 1839: Liberator, July 9, 18u1; H. s.
to Lydia Maria Child, August l#, 1841, in National Anti-Slaver
Standard, August 26, 1841; Foner, Frederick Douglass, pp. 25-28.

lh2

Douglass first heard William Lloyd Garrison speak at a
meeting of the Bristol Anti-Slavery Society. No "face and form" had
ever impressed him with "such sentiments and such hopes" as did those
of the Boston editor. There seemed to be no contradiction between
the speech and the man, only absolute sympathy and oneness. His
words were "mighty in truth" and "mighty in their simple earnestness."
Garrison's power did not appear to emanate from any type of "dazzling
rhetoric," but from his character, his convictions, and his high
moral purpose. Despite the fact that, on this occasion, Garrison
announced nearly all of his "heretical" views, Douglass could not
help feeling that here was the man, the Moses raised up by God to
deliver the black man from bondage. In him, he saw "the resurrec-
tion and the life of the dead and buried hopes of my enslaved peo-
ple."10

Douglass' abolition activities and his participation in the
Methodist meetings at the Second Street schoolhouse soon brought
him to the attention of the Garrisonians. On August 12, 18hl, at a
convention in Nantucket, Douglass was invited to say a few words to
the assembled friends of abolition. His recounting of the cruelties
endured while a slave in Maryland brought an immediate response from
John A. Collins. The general agent of the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery
Society urged Douglass to become a paid lecturer for the society.

After some hesitation, Douglass accepted Collins' offer.11 Had this

 

10Douglass, "Reminiscences," pp. 378-579; Douglass, Life,
pp. 213-21Q; Holland, Colored Orator, p. #3.

11William Lloyd Garrison EJrJ, "Frederick Douglass as
Orator and Reformer," 92; 231, XIV (August, 189“), 182; Douglass,
Bonda e, pp. 357-359; National Anti-Slavery Standard, August 26,
1851. There is some confusion as to who first induced Douglass to
become an antislavery lecturer. Rev. Thomas James claimed that it

1H3

event not occurred, it is entirely possible that Douglass would have
become a minister.12 0n the other hand, he had seen much in both
the northern and southern branches of the church to dissuade him
from following such a path. He was soon to see still more.

New Bedford had become engaged in a "season of revivals."
Many of the inhabitants repented of their sins and were converted.
But, as Douglass saw it, the evangelical practices of the local
Christians left much to be desired. Judged by their deeds, it seemed
as if they likened the kingdom of heaven to a fishing net from which
all those fish having "rather black scales" had to be sorted out and

packed by themselves. Among those who experienced religion at this

 

was his action in calling upon the ex-slave to speak from the pul-
pit of his church which resulted in Douglass' being hired in 1841.
There is probably an element of truth in this claim since the man
who invited Frederick to speak at Nantucket, William C. Coffin, had
heard him speak at one of James's meetings. Garrison‘s sons be-
lieved that their father, through Collins, was the prime mover in
the affair. Charles Chesnutt agreed with this viewpoint, but noted
that the idea had doubtless occurred to more than one of the aboli-
tionist leaders who heard the Nantucket speech. Indeed, Edmund
Quincy asserted that he was the first person to approach Douglass

on the subject. James Buffum claimed joint credit with Garrison for
Douglass‘ employment. John Collins has also been touted as the ini-
tiator of the idea. However, in 18k5, Garrison wrote that Collins
and others only "seconded" his own efforts to bring Douglass into
the fold. Three years later, Douglass himself wrote that Garrison
had "put it into my head that I might make myself serviceable to the
cause of the slave by devoting a portion of my time to telling my
own sorrows, and those of other slaves which had come under my ob-
servation." See Hanmer-Croughton, "Anti-Slavery Days," p. 115;
Garrison and Garrison, Life, III, 20; Chesnutt, Frederick Douglass,
p. 33; Quarles, Frederick Dou lass, p. 14; Foner, Frederick Dou lass,
p. 381; Edmund Quincy to Richard D. Webb, December 13, 1855, Anti-
Slavery Letters to William Lloyd Garrison and Others, Boston Public
Library; James N. Buffum, Commemoration of the Fiftieth Anniversary
of the American Anti-Slavery Society (Philadelphia: T: S. Dando &
Co.,-1885), p. 42; Benjamin Quarles, Black Abolitionists (New York
Oxford University Press, 1969), p. 63; Douglass, Narrative, p. vii;
Douglass to Thomas Auld, September 3, 18H8, in Anti-Slavery Bugle,
September 29, 1848.

 

 

 

 

 

129.2uarles, Frederick Douglass, p. 1“.

144

time was a young black girl. She was baptised in the same water as
the white children, but when she passed the communion cup to one of
her fellow converts, a look of disgust crossed the face of the white
Christian. ‘Befkéihzwtgipartaka.ofifthe-precious blood whichihad

been shediicniallfimbecause_it had been touched by the lips of,a

 

.Ngggg, the white girl fled the church. "Such was the religion Egg

had experienced," commented Douglass.13
As such incidents drove him further and further from a ven-

eration for and a respect of the Church, the abolition movement

loomed ever larger in his thoughts. 'Eventually, he began to speak

of the antislavery cause in a manner, and with a vocabulary, usually

reserved for spiritual things. His new lecturing career was "the

commencement of a higher state of existence" than any to which he

had previously aspired. He claimed that the excellent example of-

fered him by the "Pure, enlightened and benevolent" society to

which he now belonged had exerted a beneficial influence on his

mind and had moved him to rid himself of violent thoughts and much

of his early dislike of white people. Since abolitionism, "the

light of God's truth," had broken in upon his "dark mind,"(he had .31

become "a friend of that religion which teaches us to pray for our

enemies--which, instead of shooting balls into their hearts, loves

them.”1) This was not, to Douglass' mind, the type of religion

practiced by the white Christians of New Bedford.

Black Methodism also began to lose its attraction. Douglass

 

13Speech at Plymouth County Anti-Slavery Society, December,
18kl, in National Anti-Slavery Standard, December 23, 1841.
luDouglass to Thomas Auld, September 3, 18h8, in Anti-
Slaver Bu 1e, September 29, 18k8; Speech at New York City, October 22,
l 7, in National Anti-Slavery Standard, October 28, 1847.

1A5

came to the conclusion that Rev. James's little church ”consented
to the same spirit which held my brethren in chains." The pastor
had been persuaded by the other New Bedford clergymen to join them
in refusing to give out notices of antislavery meetings. This stand
was unacceptable to the ardent new abolitionist and caused him to
leave James's circle of believers. He did, however, continue to
serve, on occasion, as a lay preacher at the Second Street school-
house.15

As the abolition platform started to eclipse the pulpit in
Douglass' esteem, Garrison began to usurp the position of religious
advisor in his heart. He was proud to follow along in the "thin
but brave" ranks of that "great and good man," William Lloyd Garrison.
Douglass thought that the Boston editor had done what all the great
reformers and pioneers in the cause of freedom or religion had ever
been called upon to do. He had made himself unpopular in the fight
for the maintenance of great principles. He had given of his per-
sonal reputation, his individual property, and his "wide and giant-
hearted" intellect so that others could reap a rich reward from the
labors that he had bestowed and the "seed which he had sown."
Surely, to stand up for such a man when attacked and maligned was

the true position. Believing as he did, Douglass came to the

 

lsDouglass, Bonda e, p. 35“; Holland, Colored Orator, p. 42.

In 1895, Douglass questioned the wisdom of leaving the Elm Street
congregation for the smaller group led by Rev. Thomas James. He
wrote: "It would have, perhaps, been better to have endured and
patiently awaited the silent operations of more enlightened views,
especially since there was not the high intelligence in the little
Second street Methodist pulpit, which I found in that of the Elm
street church." Douglass to Leonard B. Ellis, January 5, 1895, in
New Bedford Evening Journal, February 21, 1895.

1A6

conclusion that there was "no man whose judgement I would follow
sooner than his."16

Garrison reciprocated in these sentiments of praise. En-
couraged by the ex-slave's devotion to the cause, as seen through
the reports of correspondents and by personal observation, the chief
abolitionist of Massachusetts saw in Douglass that "union of head and
heart, which is indispensable to an enlightenment of the heads and
a winning of the hearts of others.“ He did not find Douglass' per-
sonal power to lie chiefly in the fact that he had been a slave, bru-
tally treated "even by those professing to have the same mind in them
that was in Christ Jesus," but in the strength of his intellect, in
=the greatness of his spirit, and in the force of his eloquence.l7

During his first few months as an abolitionist lecturer,
Douglass traveled with John A. Collins. At country-wide meetings
they would be joined by Garrison, Parker Pillsbury, Stephen S.
Foster, Abby Kelley, and other leaders of the movement. Douglass‘
speeches were usually narrations of his own experiences as a slave.
One of the most effective portions of his platform repertoire was a
satiric version of a slave-holding minister's sermon. In a canting
tone of voice, he would re-enact the scene at the slaveholding

altar. "Oh! if you wish to be happy in time, happy in eternity,

you must be obedient to your masters; their interest is yours,"

 

16Douglass to Maria (Weston) Chapman, March 29, l8h6, in
Philip S. Foner, ed., 252 Life and Writings of Frederick Dou lass,
I (New York: International lublishers, 19507: 153; Speech at
London, England, March 30, 18A7, in Foner, Life 23g Writings, I,
217; Douglass to a friend, July 31, 1846, Douglass Papers, Library
of Congress.

17John A. Collins to William Lloyd Garrison, January 18,
1842, in Liberator, January 21, 1842; Douglass, Narrative, pp. viii,
x; Liberator, March 5, l8h7.

1A7

Douglass'"minister" would tell the assembled slaves. "How beauti-
ful are the arrangements of Providence! Look at your hard, horny
hands--see how nicely they are adapted to the labor you have to per-
form! Look at our delicate fingers, so exactly fitted for our sta-
tion, and see how manifest it is that God deigned us to be his
thinkers, and you the workers--oh! the wisdom of God." The sermon
was usually followed by a parody on a familiar hymn about being
saved from a burning hell and dwelling with Immanuel "in heavenly
union." It began:

Come, saints and sinners, hear me tell,

How pious priests whip Jack and Nell,

And women buy, and children sell,

And preach all sinners down 0 hell,

And sing of heavenly union.

The bitterness which permeated Douglass' satire on the reli-

gion of the South was soon to become even more intense. On both
sides of the Atlantic, during the years l8kl-1848, the ex-slave de-

nounced the slaveholding religion. He told his audiences that

southern Christianity had been prostituted to such an extent that

 

18Foner, Frederick Dou lass, pp. #7, 50-51; Douglass,
Bonda e, p. 361; Douglass, Narrative, p. 12#; Holland, Colored
2319;, pp. 66-69; National Anti-Slavery Standard, December 23, 1810..
In 1895, Elizabeth Cady Stanton wrote that people never became tired
of hearing Douglass' sermon. Often after he had spoken for an hour,
shouts would go up from the audience, asking for his famous parody.
She remembered that several literary critics had pronounced it the
best piece of satire in the English language. On her last visit
to Douglass' Anacostia home, she asked the elderly abolitionist if
he had ever allowed the sermon to be printed. He said no. She then
asked if he could reproduce it. Once again, Douglass answered in
the negative. He could not, he said, bring back the old feeling if
he tried and he would not if he could. "The blessings of liberty
I have so long enjoyed, and the many tender friendships I have with
the Saxon race on both sides of the ocean, have taught me such sweet
lessons of forgiveness that the painful memories of my early days
are almost obliterated, and I would not recall them." Elizabeth
Cady Stanton to an unidentified correspondent, February 21, 1895,
in Douglass, I3 Memoriam, p. 44.

148

it now supported robbery and openly defended slavery by a perverted
use of the scriptures. Slaveholding, slave buying, and slave trad-
ing was being carried on by members of all the leading denominations.
Men, women, and children were sold to build churches, to purchase
Bibles, and to support missionaries. Southern Christians allowed
the bondsman's God-given intellect to stagnate and waste away. In-
deed, the same people who professed "the largest liberty and devo-
tion to the religion of Jesus Christ" were the very ones who were
denying the slaves the right to read the sacred scriptures.19

In support of his damning charges, Douglass offered the
"general fact" that slavery had existed "under the droppings of the
sanctuary of the south" for the last two hundred years without com-
ing into conflict with the church. Instead of preaching the Gospel
against this "tyranny, rebuke, and wrong," southern ministers had
sought to throw into the background whatever could be found in the
Bible opposing the infamous institution, while bringing forward "that
which they could torture into its support." Such men now stood bra-
zenly exposed as "the foremost, the strongest" defenders of that in-
stitution.20

Answering claims that the slaves had the gospel preached to

them and were being taught to read the Bible by their masters,

Douglass cited an example of a Sabbath school that had been established

 

19Speech at Canandaigua, New York, August 1, 1847, in
National Anti-Slavery Standard, August 19, 18k7; Speech at London,
England, March 30,1847, in Foner, Life and Writings, I, 215;
Speech at Moorfields, England, May 22, 1836, in Foner, Life and
Writings, I, 155; Douglass to Horace Greeley, April 15, 1856, in
Liberator, June 26,18k6.

20Speech at Moorfields, England, May 22, 18k6, in Foner,
Life and Writings, I, 161; Speech at Rochester, December 12,18A7,
in North Star, January 7,11848.

lh9

in Richmond, Virginia. Here, it was supposed, the bondsmen were
being educated. Upon investigation, however, it was discovered that
the school taught nothing but "what would tend to make the slave a
better servant." The knowledge gained at such a school would, in
Douglass' opinion, "more than chains, or whips, or thumb-screws”
give perpetuity to the slave system.21

He did believe, however, that the system could be destroyed
by moral means. Douglass urged that men of all persuasions and de-
nominations resolve, in their conventions, synods and conferences,
to have no Christian fellowship with slaveholders. He wanted the
slaveholding Christians of the South to be surrounded "as by a wall
of anti-slavery fire." The censure of the religious bodies should
"blaze down" upon them "in every direction" until, stunned and over-
whelmed with shame and confusion, they were forced to free their
slaves and restore to them their long lost rights.22

The slaveholding southern Christians were not the only ones
to feel the heat of Douglass' invective. The ex-slave had been ex-
posed to too much Garrisonian rhetoric and had experienced too much
proscription in the Church to exclude northern religionists from
his charges. According to Douglass, the institution of slavery had
tainted the character of the American people. It dictated their
laws, influenced their literature, and shaped their morality and

religion. Northern churches, ministers, and professors of religion

were held to be in good fellowship with and, in many instances, to

 

21Speech at Boston, January 28, l8h2, in Liberator,
February 4, l8k2; Speech at Glasgow, Scotland, April 21, 1846, in
Liberator, May 29, 1846.

ZZSpeech at London, England, May, l8h6, in Liberator,
June 26, 1846.

150

be defenders of "the great abomination." Northern colleges were
charged with teaching the southern slaveholding ministers to per-
vert the scriptures.23

Douglass, like his mentor Garrison, often compared American
Christians to the ancient scribes and Pharisees. "Woe unto you,...
hypocrites!" he would thunder, "for ye are like unto whited sepul-
chres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full
of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness." He held this dark and
terrible picture to be true of the majority of the nation's professed
Christians. Such men attended, "with Pharisaical strictness," to
the outward forms of religion, while neglecting the weightier mat-
ters of "the law, judgment, mercy, and faith." They were always
eager to sacrifice, but seldom deigned to show mercy. They claimed
to profess a love for the "God whom they have not seen" while hating
"their brother whom they have seen." They prayed for the heathen
on the other side of the world, but despised and neglected the hea-
then at their own doors.au

Douglass was not content merely to condemn the American pro-
fession of religion in general terms. He noted that his fellow
abolitionists had resolved to attack slavery whenever and wherever

it manifested itself. Having followed it from the state to the

street, from the mob to the church, and from the church to the

 

23Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison, May 23, 1846, in
Liberator, June 26, 1846; Speech at Rochester, December 12, 1847,
in North Star, January 7, 1848; Speech at Boston, January 28, 1842,
in Liberator, February 4, 1842; Speech at London, England, March 30,
1847, in Foner, Life 223 Writings, I, 216.

ZHDouglass, Narrative. PP. 122-123. The verse that Douglass
used to compare American Christians to whited sepulchres is Matthew
23:27.

151

pulpit, they were now hunting the "hideous fiend” in that quarter.
Hence, he aimed some of his most potent darts at the American minis-
try. These clerics held ”the keys of the dungeon" in which the
bondsmen were confined. In their hands rested the power to mold pub-
lic opinion and to change it "from the spirit of hatred to that of
love to mankind." That they were unwilling to do this was evident,
Douglass said, from the results of their teaching. If the American
church was "the chief refuge of slavery," surely the slave institu-
tion found no champions so bold, brave, and uncompromising as the
American clergy. They were, according to Douglass, more skillful,
adroit, and persevering, and would descend to even greater meanness
than any other class of opponents faced by the abolitionists.25

Douglass had no qualms about attacking certain policies of
those Christians allied with the American Bible Society. In a short
article in the 1848 Liberty 2311, he put forward his argument for
pg_ taking the Bible to the American bondsmen. His position did not
rest on any basis hostile to the scriptures, but on a feeling that,
since the Bible was "peculiarly the companion of liberty," it would
be a mockery to give it to the one portion of the American popula-
tion that was wholly deprived of such liberty. Certainly the idea
of providing the slave with Bibles sounded like a good idea, but in
actuality, such a large scale, organized operation would only serve
to absorb energies and funds "in giving to him the Bible that ought

to be used in giving him to himself." To demand less than the physi-

cal liberation of the fettered bondsman would merely soothe the

 

25Speech at London, England, March 30, 1847, in Foner, Life
and Writings, I, 214, 216; Speech at New York City, October 22,
1847, in National Anti-Slavery Standard, October 28, 1847.

152

conscience of the slaveholder and deceive the slave. Indeed, the
Bible was only useful to those who could read its contents. "Away
with all trifling with the man in fetters!" Douglass wrote, "...give
ice to a freezing man, and tell him of its good properties in hot
weather,--throw a drowning man a dollar, as a mark of your good will,
--but do not mock the bondman in his misery, by giving him a Bible
when he cannot read it."26

In these early years of his lecturing career, Douglass had
little trouble finding examples of the type of thought and behavior
that he so heartily condemned. As was becoming more and more com-
mon, he found church doors barred against abolitionist lecturers.
Experiencing this difficulty a number of times on an 1847 antislavery
tour, Douglass commented that the inhospitable ministers must think
their buildings "too holy" to host those who were endeavoring to
plead "the cause of our own common humanity." With more than a
touch of sarcasm, he noted that when rescuing America's slaves be-
came as popular as killing men in Mexico, the abolitionists would
not only have the churches open to their use, but also, perhaps, "be
voted into religious societies as honorary members." To Douglass,
the closed doors of the churches only made good the proposition that
"humanity is received more cordially in the street than in the

church."27

 

26Frederick Douglass, "Bibles for the Slaves," in The Liberty
Bell (Boston: National Anti-Slavery Bazaar, 1848), pp. 253-255.

27Doug1ass to Sydney Howard Gay, August 20, 1847, in National
Anti-Slavery Standard, September 2, 1847. In 1847, Samuel J. May
commented on Douglass' antislavery speeches at Syracuse: "Some
there were who winced not a little at his ridicule of the current
religion of our country. But most of his audience felt that what
he said was too true. It will, of course, be a very unpopular meas-
ure, but I believe it as necessary now as it was in the days of our

153

Along with the Pharisaical hypocrisy and meanness of the
American Church and clergy, Douglass condemned the prejudice that
he found among Christians. This feeling of white Americans toward
men of a darker skin color always rankled Douglass, but he became
especially indignant when bigotry was discovered among those profes-
sing to be of a pure spiritual nature. He once noted that slavery
and the social climate of the country had so instilled color con-
sciousness in the minds of the white population that there were some
Christians who would even find it disagreeable if colored people
were to greet them at the gates of heaven. The people of the North
claimed to like the black man as well as any other, he said, but
only "ig 323;; proper 21323." White northerners treated the Negro
more like a dog than a fellow man. They refused to admit that he
had a head to think, a heart to feel, and "a soul to aspire." They
degraded the black population and then asked why the Negro was de-
graded. They closed their colleges and seminaries against him and
then asked why he was not better educated.28

Douglass' condemnation of the baneful effects of color pre-
judice was only increased by his 1845-1847 lecturing tour through
England, Ireland, and Scotland. Time and again, in his letters,
he marveled at the equalitarian treatment that he received from
those less contaminated with the onus of color consciousness. "How
different here, from my treatment at home!" he wrote Garrison from

Dublin. "In this country, I am welcomed to the temperance platform,

 

Saviour, to unmask hypocrites, especially those who stand in holy
places." Samuel J. May to Sydney Howard Gay, October 5, 1847, in
National Anti-Slavery Standard, October 14, 1847.

28Speech at Plymouth County Anti-Slavery Society, December,
1841, in National Anti-Slavery Standard, December 23, 1841.

154
side by side with white speakers, and am received as kindly and
warmly as though my skin were white." He rode on stage coaches,
omnibuses, and steamboats without being directed to the second class
seats. He visited museums, art galleries and botanical gardens with-
out being proscribed because of his color. Instead of being accord-
ed the status of "a thing," he found himself treated as a man--"a
child of the common Father of us all." The cordiality with which
members of the clergy greeted him, embraced him, and lent him their
aid, contrasted so strongly with his experience in the United States
that he looked "with wonder and amazement on the transition." When
he attended their worship services, no deacon met him at the door

with "upturned nose and scornful lip" to tell him, "W3 don't allow

niggers 39 here."29

The black abolitionist was treated with less courtesy by
those sections of the Scottish press which supported the Free Church

"30 This was indeed a pre-

and its retention of the "slave-money.
dictable reaction since the Garrisonian abolitionists had been
harshly critical of the Free Church of Scotland for refusing to re-

turn contributions made by American slaveholders to its building

and ministerial projects. Douglass treated this church body and

 

29Doug1ass to William Lloyd Garrison, September 29, 18u5,
in Liberator, October 24, 1845; Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison,
September 16, 1845, in Liberator, October 10, 1845; Douglass to
William Lloyd Garrison, May 23, 1846, in Liberator, June 26, 1846;
Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison, January 1, 1846, in Liberator,
January 30, 181*6e

30Nevertheless, even in Th2 Witness, the official Free
Church paper, his color was respected. Douglass was attacked on
grounds of color by only one paper, the Scottish Guardian, which
consistently referred to him as "the Black." George Shepperson,
"Frederick Douglass and Scotland," Journal gf Negro Histor ,
XXXVIII (July , 1953), 318.

155

its leaders in the same manner that he treated those churches in
the United States which continued to "hold fellowship with slave-
holders." In the agitation to have the Free Church "send back the
money," he saw "the same old question of Christian union with slave-
holders--old with us, but new with most people here." The Free
Church, in vindicating their participation in such a union, acted
upon "the damning heresy" that a man may be a Christian, "whatever
may be his practice," as long as his religious creed was acceptable.
Douglass believed that this tacit approval of the infamous southern
institution only served to put the slaveholder's conscience at ease
and to prolong the antislavery conflict.31
The Free Church was not the only supposed Christian and
benevolent organization to be censured by Douglass during these
years. He termed the tactful, but evasive, 1846 report of the
International Evangelical Alliance relative to slaveholding members
"one of the greatest sins of omission ever committed by British
Christians." Here was a prime example of English religionists al-
lowing themselves to be "sadly hoodwinked," "misled," and "cajoled."
Having it in their power to give slavery "a blow which would have
sent it reeling to its grave, as if smitten by a voice or an arm
from Heaven, they had permitted themselves to be misled by "the
jack o'lanterns from America"--the United States delegates to the
Alliance. These Americans, Douglass said, were skilled in the art

of falsehood and did not hesitate to "use" religion to aid them in

 

31Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison, April 16, 1846, in
Liberator, May 15, 1846; Speech at Arbroath, Scotland, February 10,
1846, in Holland, Colored Orator, p. 123; Speech at London, England,
May, 1846, in Liberator, June 26, 1846; Speech at Glasgow, Scotland,
April 21, 1846, in Liberator, May 29, 1846.

156

their fraud. They succeeded in misleading the English delegates be-
cause they not only had the persuasive skills of an American politi-
cian, but they also combined these "seductive qualities" with a
"loud profession" of piety.32

The compassion and feeling so evident in Douglass' writings
and speeches about the American slave was not merely a color con-
scious type of sentiment. He was leaning toward those aspects of
religious belief which stressed the Christian's responsibility to
help alleviate the physical, as well as the spiritual, problems
plaguing mankind. In August, 1846, he wrote that he found poverty,
crime, and suffering in London, but found no slavery. In this he
deemed England to have "a decided advantage" over America. Yet, he
vowed that he was by no means unmindful of the needy. "You may
rely upon me," he wrote, "as one who will never desert the cause
of the poor, no matter whether black or white." From Scotland, he
wrote Garrison that, though he was more closely connected and iden-
tified with one class of the world's oppressed people, he could not
allow himself to be insensible to the wrongs and sufferings of any
part of the family of man. "I am not only an American slave," he
noted, "but a man, and as such, am bound to use my powers for the
welfare of the whole human brotherhood."33

Thus, it is not surprising that just as he condemned the

religion of the American South for allowing the slaves to exist in

 

3‘2Speech at London, England, March 30, 1847, in Foner, Life
and Writings, I, 218-220; Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison,
January 2, 1847, in Liberator, January 29, 1847.

33Douglass to Lynn Anti-Slavery Sewing Circle, August 18,
1846, in National Anti-Slavery Standard, October 15, 1846; Douglass
to William Lloyd Garrison, February 26, 1846, in Liberator, March 27,
1846.

157

degradation and misery, he rebuked the religious profession of those
on the other side of the Atlantic who allowed their fellow man to
live in squalor. After viewing the living conditions in the Dublin
slums, Douglass wrote, "God help the poor! An infidel might ask...
where is your religion that takes care for the poor--for the widow
and fatherless--where are its votaries--what are they doing?" His
answer to this question also served as a vivid example of the dis-
tinction that he made between the genuine Christian and the mere
professor of religion. The "votaries" were wasting their energies
in useless debate on "hollow creeds" and points of doctrine, which,
when settled, "neither make one hair white nor black." In conversa-
tions with such people, some of whom were "such rigid adherents to
their faith that they would scarce be seen in company with those
who differed from them in any point of their creed," he became dis-
gusted with hearing them quote the text "the poor shall not cease
out of the land" in palliation of their neglect.34
In the appendix to his Narrative, Douglass differentiated
between a widespread, but false Christianity and the genuine Chris-
tianity of Christ. To accept the latter as pure and holy, he found
it necessary to reject the former as corrupt and wicked. To love
the ”pure, peaceable, and impartial Christianity of Christ," he
felt that he had to hate the "slaveholding, women-whipping, cradle-
plundering, partial and hypocritical" religion of America. To asso-

ciate such a corrupt system of belief with Christ was "the climax

 

3“Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison, February 26, 1846,
in Liberator, March 27, 1846. The text is a portion of Deuteronomy
15:11, which reads in full: "For the poor shall never cease out of
the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine
hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy
land."

158

of all misnomers, the boldest of all frauds, and the grossest of
all libels." Only a perverted Christianity would allow a man who
wielded a blood-clotted cowskin during the week to fill the pulpit
on Sunday, claiming to be a minister of the "meek and lowly" Jesus.
Only an inconsistent religion would allow those who preached Bible-
reading as a religious duty to deny the slaves the opportunity of
learning to read the sacred scriptures.35

Douglass made a similar distinction between the two types
of Christianity in an 1846 address at Finsbury Chapel, Moorfields,
England. On this occasion he spoke of his love for that religion
which was pure, peaceable, gentle, "easy to be entreated, full of
mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy."
He loved the religion which made it the duty of its disciples to
help those in need, to "visit the fatherless and the widow in their
affliction," and which was based upon the principle of "love to
God and love to man." It was because he believed in this type of
Christianity that he loathed the "mind-darkening and "soul-
destroying" religion of the South.36

During these years, Douglass was especially careful to make
certain that his northern audiences did not misconstrue the harsh
words with which he bombarded the American religious establishment.
"Do not misunderstand my railing," he told his listeners, ”--do
not class me with those who despise religion--do not identify me

with the infidel. I love the religion of Christianity--which cometh

from above." Douglass stressed the point that the religion of the

 

3sDouglass, Narrative, pp. l2L-l2l.

36Speech at Moorfields, England, May 22, 1846, in Foner,
Life and Writings, I, 162.

159

slaveholders was a mockery of Christ's true religion. Such men,
he believed, actually hated those teachings of Christ which applied
the principle of the love of God to man--to the slave as well as to
the master. To be in harmony with God was to be in open discord
with these "professed Christians" since they were actually only ad-
vocates of that "long-faced Phariseeism" which "goes up to Jerusalem
and worshipfs], and leaves the bruised and wounded to die."37

Douglass' profession of allegiance to a higher form of reli-
gious faith than that which then prevailed in America was not the
only evidence of his deep desire to avoid being thought of as an
"infidel." Despite his criticism of the clergy, he sometimes found
it advisable to stop short of a wholesale condemnation of this in-
fluential body of men. He noted that however low and corrupt a
nationts ministry might be, the "fountain of the purity, as well as
of the corruption, of the community may be found in the pulpit."
He maintained that, despite their many shortcomings, the ministers
of religion, as a whole, were ”always higher--of necessity higher--
than the community about them." The clerics could not conceivably
continue to enunciate the "great abstract principles of right" with-
out exerting, to some extent, a healthy influence upon their own
conduct, even though their own conduct often violated those princi-
ples. Indeed, when Richard D. Webb objected to the inclusion of
letters of endorsement from clergymen in the English version of his

autobiography, Douglass told him: "If clergymen read my Narrative

 

37Speech at Boston, January 28, 1842, in Liberator,
February 4, 1842; Speech at Glasgow, Scotland, April 21, 1846, in
Liberator, May 29, 1846; Douglass to Thomas Van Rensselaer, May 18,
1847, in Liberator, June 4, 1847; Speech at New York City,
Ogiober 22, 1847, in National Anti-Slavery Standard, October 28,
l 7.

160

and approve of it, my prejudice against their office would be but
a poor reason, for rejecting the benefit of such approval.... To
leave them out because they are ministers would be to show oneself
as much and more sectarian than themselves.... The spirit of bigotry
and sectarianism may exist, and be as deeply rooted in those who
condemn sects, as [in] those who adhere to them." Such remarks were
not merely verbal ploys or concessionsto the ministers, but evi-
denced Douglass' feeling that, with the aid of those clerics who
were not yet totally alienated from the Garrisonian movement, the
moral sentiment of the land could be brought into a closer align-
ment with the religion of Christ. As he noted in 1847, it was still
"the religious people who are to be relied on in this Anti-Slavery
movement."38

The Douglass of the mid-1840's also held several other atti-
tudes toward religion which tended to disprove any contention that
he had completely abandoned religious orthodoxy for "Garrisonian
infidelity." Prayer continued to play an important part in his life.
He often prayed that Americans would repent of their sins toward the
black man before an angry God sought retributive punishment for
their infamous deeds. On other occasions he entreated the Supreme
Being to raise up and send forth more workers to unmask the pro-
slavery church and to rebuke the man-stealing ministry--to rock the
land with agitation, and "give America no peace till she repent,
and be thoroughly purged of this monstrous iniquity." For the noble

band of antislavery workers, he gave thanks to God with "a heart

 

38Speech at London, England, March 30, 1847, in Foner, Life
222 Writin s, I, 226; Foner, Frederick Douglass, p. 66; Speech at
New York City, October 22, 1847, in National Anti-Slavery Standard,
October 28, 1847.

161
overborne with gratitude."39
Douglass also continued to venerate the Holy Bible. He

believed that it was filled with wisdom and goodness. ”Faith, hope,
and charity" sparkled from every page. Even though the abolitionists'
opponents had attempted to "press the Bible into the service of sla-
very," he believed that such efforts were futile because the scrip-
tures contained "all that is right" and were opposed to all that was
wrong. It treated all men alike, knew no one by the color of his
skin, and said to all who were willing to hear, "Whatsoever you would
that men should do unto you, do you so unto them."

The view of the Godhead held by Douglass during these years
was also quite orthodox and normally would have aroused little com-
plaint among even the most pious Christians. God was above all a
judge who was ever ready to "confound the wisdom of the crafty, and
bring to naught the counsels of the ungodly." To Douglass' mind,
the crafty and ungodly were to be found in the ranks of the slave-
holders and their clerical allies. This viewpoint was what caused
the great stirring among their numbers and was the root cause of
the slanderous charges hurled at the abolitionists. Douglass was
ever ready to remind his opponents that the Great Judge would even-

tually punish them for their lack of adherence to His holy decrees.

In 1847, Douglass asked the elderly Henry Clay if he thought that

 

39Donglass to William Lloyd Garrison, January 1, 1846, in
Liberator, January 30, 1846; Douglass to Samuel Hanson Cox,
October 30, 1846, in Liberator, November 27, 1846; Speech at New
York City, May 11, 1847, in National Anti-Slavery Standard, May 20,
1847.

40Speech at Belfast, Ireland, January 6, 1846, Douglass
Papers, Library of Congress. The verse that Douglass quoted is com-
monly referred to as the ”Golden Rule." See Matthew 7:12, Luke 6:31,
and Ephesians 4:32.

162

God would hold him guiltless on the "great day of account” if he
were to die with the blood of his slaves clinging to his garments.
The abolitionist noted that Clay had previously made a profession
of religion, had been baptised, and was a church member in good
standing, but asserted that the Kentuckian would stand rejected at
the bar of God unless he ceased to do evil, and learned to do good.
"You must 'break every yoke, and let the oppressed go free,‘" he
warned, "or take your place in the ranks of 'evil doers,‘ and ex-
pect to 'reap the reward of corruption.'"ul

Since his concept of the genuine Christian faith was formed
under the dual influence of his experiences as a black Christian
and as a black Garrisonian abolitionist, it is not surprising that
Douglass found the most satisfactory example of this type of reli-
gious practice in the antislavery movement rather than in the Church.
In his mind, the abolitionist crusade was closely allied with the
religion of Christ and dramatically opposed to the slaveholding re-
ligion of the day. It removed fetters instead of clamping them

tighter, broke the strangling yokes of bondage, and lifted up the

 

ulSpeech at New York City, October 22, 1847, in National
Anti-Slavery Standard, October 28, 1847; Frederick Douglass, "Folly
of Our Opponents," in The Libert Bell (Boston: Massachusetts
Anti-Slavery Fair, 18457: p. 168; Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison,
November 8, 1842, in Liberator, November 18, 1842; Douglass to
Henry Clay. in North Star, December 3, 1847. Douglass also believed
that the Supreme Being entered into the lives of mortals to alter
their fortunes. In discussing his removal from the Lloyd planta-
tion in his Narrative, Douglass wrote, ”Going to live at Baltimore
laid the foundation, and opened the gateway, to all my subsequent
prosperity. I have ever regarded it as the first plain manifesta-
tion of that kind providence which has ever since attended me, and
marked my life with so many favors.... I may be deemed supersti-
tious, and even egotistical, in regarding this event as a special
interposition of divine Providence in my favor. But I should be
false to the earliest sentiments of my soul, if I suppressed the
opinion." Douglass, Narrative, pp. 46-47.

163

crushed and disheartened. To Douglass, the antislavery platform
was founded upon all of the genuine Christian tenets that he so
dearly loved. The abolitionists reached down to the lowest link in
humanity‘s chain, to the most degraded segment of the population
and told them to stand up and be men. Unlike the popular religion-
ists of the land, the members of the abolition movement loved both
God and their fellow man. This was antislavery. This was true
Christianity.“2

Douglass vigorously defended the abolitionists from the
charges of infidelity. He felt obligated to do so as a member of
the lecture tour and because he believed the abolition movement to
be the primary refuge for the "true" Christianity. Douglass held
that there were no more pious and faithful Christians in the United
States than were to be found among the abolitionists. He believed
that when the history of the emancipation movement had been fairly
written, it would be found that they were the only men who had
firmly grounded themselves on the "immutable, eternal, and all-
comprehensive principle of the sacred New Testament--'All things
whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even so unto
them.'" It was because William Lloyd Garrison had ”fearlessly un-
masked hypocrisy" and openly opposed the cant of the clerics that
he was execrated by the American ministry. The clamor was raised,
not against the slaveholders, but against virtuous abolitionists
who were engaged in a campaign to rid the land of a terrible sin
against God. The slaveholding religionists of the South, along

with their northern sympathizers, had branded the antislavery men

 

“ZSpeech at New York City, October 22, 1847, in National
Anti-Slavery Standard, october 28, 1847.

164

as infidels because they alone had tellingly rebuked the nation's
religious leaders for stressing Christian creeds while disregarding
Christian duties. Indeed, at the annual meeting of the American
Anti-Slavery Society in 1843, Douglass asserted that the antislavery
movement was the only earthly hope of the American slave. "There

is no hope for the slave in Church or State," he said. "But this
Society is above either Church or State. It is moving both daily,

more and more."l+3

 

“BSpeech at London, England, March 30, 1847, in Foner, Life
axui Writin s, I, 214, 216-218; Speech at Bristol, England, April 1,
J- ‘7. in Liberator, May 14, 1847; Speech at Moorfields, England,
May 22. 1848, in Foner, Life and Writin s, I, 161-162; Holland,
221329 Orator, p. 79.

BOOK THREE

CHAPTER VI
FREEDOM OF INQUIRY

To discard a portion of scripture is not
necessarily to reject the truth, but may be
the highest evidence one can give of his love
of truth.
--William Lloyd Garrison
November 21, 1845
William Lloyd Garrison's growing hostility toward ”outward
forms and ceremonies and observances" did not cause him to forsake
the God of his youth. Between 1835 and 1840, his writings and
speeches were filled with heart-felt references to that ”merciful,"
"blessed," "omnipotent" Being. In addition to declaring his own
steadfast faith in the promises of God, Garrison urged that others
engaged in the antislavery crusade continue to "lean on the arm of
Omnipotence" even though “the earth be removed, and...the mountains
be carried into the midst of the sea." "Our happiness must centre

in God," he wrote, "--so that whether he gives or takes away, we may

at all times be able to say, 'Blessed be the name of the Lord.”1

 

1Garrison to George W. Benson, October 26, 1835, Garrison
Papers, Boston Public Library; Garrison to Amos A. Phelps, December 16,
1835, in Merrill, Letters, I, 579; Garrison to Helen E. Garrison,
December 28, 1835, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library; Garrison
to George W. Benson, October 21, 1835, Garrison Papers, Boston Public
Library; Garrison to James G. Birney, April 6, 1836, Simon Gratz
Collection, Historical Society of Pennsylvania; Garrison to George W.
Benson, February 17, 1837, in Ruchames, Letters, II, 212. See also
Psalms 46:1-3; Liberator, November 7, 1855; Garrison to Harriet
Foster, January 14, 1839, in Liberator, April 26, 1839; Liberator,
July 19, 1839; Garrison to Joshua T. Everett, April 14, 1840, in
Liberator, May 1, 1840; Garrison to Henry E. Benson, September 3,

166

16?

Feeling that his own feet were firmly "planted upon the
eternal Rock," Garrison had no qualms about rebuking those who ap-
peared to be more worldly and less virtuous than himself. As he
traveled across the Atlantic to attend the World's Anti-Slavery Con-
vention of 1840, Garrison was especially critical of his fellow pas-
sengers, calling them "a prayerless, godless, drinking, card-playing,
low-minded set." Being "awfully estranged from God, and from the
spirit of his dear Son," Garrison's shipboard associates were "dis-
posed to make light of every thing serious and sacred." Although
he had several "serious conversations" with these men, "and not al-
together in vain," he could not help feeling that any attempt to
reason with them was "like casting pearls to swine." In a May 28
letter, he told Helen that if such men were to be his companions
throughout eternity he would indeed be miserable--especially if it

was found that there was "any affinity between my spirit and theirs."2

 

1835; Garrison to George W. Benson, October 21, 1835; Garrison to
Thomas Shipley, December 17, 1835; Garrison to Effingham L. Capron,
August 24, 1836; Garrison to Helen E. Garrison, May 5, 1839; Garrison
to Helen E. Garrison, May 20, 1840; Garrison to Helen E. Garrison,
May 21, 1840; Garrison to John A. Collins, October 16, 1840, Garrison
Papers, Boston Public Library. Upon the birth of his son, George, in
February, 1836, Garrison wrote the following sonnet:

Remember, when thou com'st to riper years,
That unto GOD, from earliest in fancy,
Thy grateful father dedicated thee,
And sought HIS guidance through this vale of tears.
Fear GOD--then disregard all other fears;
Be, in HIS truth, erect, majestic, free;
Abhor OPPRESSION--cling to LIBERTY
Nor recreant prove though horrid death appears.

Later, in a letter to George Benson, he wrote: "It is his moral image
about which I feel the most solicitude. May he early learn to put on
Christ, that he may be made perfect in righteousness, without spot or
wrinkle, or any such thing!" Liberator, February 20, 1836; Garrison
to George W. Benson, March 15, 1836, in Ruchames, Letters, 11, 64.

2Garrison to Helen E. Garrison, July 23, 1840, in Ruchames,

168

The abolitionist also sought to have his brother, James,
join him in finding that "perfect rest" which only a genuine Chris-
tian walk could bring. Long estranged from the things of God and
deeply ensnared in the sins of the world, James Garrison seemed a
fit subject for his younger brother's pious admonitions. ”0, how I
long to see you...reconci1ed to God in your spirit!" the Boston edi-
tor wrote in 1840, "I want to sing praises with you through all eter-
nity, in company with dear mother, and our departed sisters, and with
an innumerable host of the wise and good in all ages, now redeemed
from sin and the power of the devil." When Garrison considered how
mercifully, "almost miraculously," God had preserved James's life
throughout the years, he could not help but feel that the Divine
Being would yet pluck him "as a brand from the burning," and make
him an "heir of glory." Perhaps remembering the entreaties of his
mother, he told James how to become a "new man" in Christ. "If we
have sinned, and are willing to confess and forsake our sins," he
wrote, "he is ready to forgive us. Let his goodness lead us to re-
pentance. His name is Love, and his forbearance, long-suffering and
mercy are infinite. Let us not distrust him...it is but to follow
Christ, to imitate his example, to receive him in faith, and pardon

will be vouchsafed to us, and heaven will be our portion."3

 

Letters, II, 670; Garrison to Helen E. Garrison, May 28, 1840, in
Ruchames, Letters, II, 629-630. See also Garrison to unidentified
correspondent, June 14, 1840, in Liberator, July 31, 1840.

3Garrison to James Garrison, June 4, 1840, in Ruchames,
Letters, II, 636. In a May 1840 letter to Helen, Garrison told of
his concern for his older brother: "My poor dear brother James! I
am sorry to hear that his health does not seem to improve, and that
he has another ulcer internally; but let us hope that the warm wea-
ther, with proper care and treatment, will yet restore him. I love
him with all a brother's affection--of that, he cannot doubt. Ear-
nest is my prayer to God, that he may be led to review his past life,

169

In his personal war against vice and corruption, Garrison
found no group of men more desperately in need of regeneration than
the southern slaveholders. He had long been convinced that, even
though the "mantle of Christianity" had been thrown over it, slavery
was the "worst form of atheism" which had ever cursed the world.
Despite their "pious professions" to the contrary, slaveholders could
justly be called "atheists of the most desperate spirit"--men who
disregarded and trampled upon God's divine teachings in order to ful-
fill their own craven lusts. They felt no shame in defiling the
marriage institution and compelling men and women to "herd together
like cattle." They evidenced no guilt in withholding the Bible from
the millions of chattels who were living in a state of ”forced hea-
thenism." Their conception of religion apparently included "hunting
slaves with bloodhounds--shooting them down with rifles--speculating
in human flesh and blood"--while at the same time talking about en-

joying "the glorious light and liberty of the children of God."k

 

and to perceive how widely he has departed from the path of rectitude,
to the ruin of his immortal soul. 0 that he may be led to speedy and
hearty repentance, that he may rejoice in God, and be made an heir of
glory, through Jesus Christ our Saviour!" Walter M. Merrill has
noted, in relation to this piece of correspondence, that, although
the abolitionist loved his brother and tried to do everything possi-
ble to help him, he nevertheless failed to understand James and his
problems. Garrison looked upon his brother's drinking habit as a sin
which, like any other, could be forgiven and even eliminated if he
sincerely repented and reconciled himself to Christ. Garrison to
Helen E. Garrison, May 19, 1840, in Ruchames, Letters, 11, 617;
Merrill, Behold Mg Once More, p. 105.

hLiberator, February 26, 1847; Speech at New York City,

May 12, 1846, in Liberator, May 22, 1846; Garrison to Sumner Lincoln,
November 8, 1841, in Liberator, November 26, 1841. In 1843 Garrison
wrote: "Among the almost numberless vices and crimes generated by
the prolific slave system, profanity and lewdness are prominent. The
whole southern country is filled with cursing, to an awful extent,
and there are comparatively few on its soil, who do not indulge in
this disgusting habit." Liberator, May 26, 1843.

170

According to Garrison, the mode appointed by God to conquer
atheistic error and destroy the works of Satan was moral suasion,
or "the foolishness of preaching." By making full use of this di-
vinely ordained "tool," the Boston editor hoped to destroy the "sa-
tanic empire" of the slaveholders. No other method was acceptable.
To attempt to destroy slavery through political processes was worse
than imbecility--it was treason to the holy cause of abolition. Be-
lieving that it was as impossible for men to be moral reformers and
political partisans at the same time as it was "for fire and gun-
powder to harmonize together," Garrison held that the so-called
"political abolitionists" found great pleasure in deriding moral
suasion, treating it as "imbecility itself." Such men looked to the
ballot box to effect the regeneration of "a wicked and depraved peo-
ple" and considered a "political harangue" to be "worth a score of
religious addresses." Believing that the Garrisonian abolitionists
had appropriated the only divinely approved method of attacking the
slave system, Garrison asserted that ”the politics of this world
are foolishness with God."5

During the 1840's, the editor of Th2 Liberator weighed his
religious profession against that of the American Church and clergy.
Once again he was able to conclude that his own standards were much
higher than the norm. "I have found the American church to be the
very bulwark of the slave system,..." he wrote, "--and therefore not
the church of Christ." The church of the Savior would not have al-

lowed itself to become spattered with the blood of the slave. Its

 

5Garrison to Richard P. Hunt, May 1, 1840, in Ruchames,
Letters, II, 594-595; Liberator, November 19, 1841, March 11, 1842,
November 11, 1842, July 4, 1845; Garrison to unidentified correspon-
dent, May 11, 1847, in Liberator, May 14, 1847.

171

ministers would not have been found among those seeking to crush
"the sacred cause of emancipation." Its members would not have
willingly and eagerly justified the "adultery, barbarity, man-
stealing and murder" that was so prevalent at the South. Christ's
church would have been "the main support of liberty, and the shield
of the oppressed." It would have remembered "them that are in
bonds, as bound with them." Garrison would accept no Christianity
as genuine which had been "mingled with the institutions of slavery."
He desired, and claimed to profess, a Christianity "such as Jesus
taught, such as Jesus practically exemplified"--a religion which
knew "no color or clime" and made "all mankind our countrymen." As
he told an audience in 1847, "...if you bring me a Christ who shakes
hands with the slaveholder, I will not have him to reign over me.
Jesus does not make common cause with the oppressor, and therefore
I love him. Those who would do so, insult Him, and are amongst those
who would crucify Him in preference to Barabbas."

Feeling as he did about the American profession of religion,
it was not surprising to find Garrison lending his voice to the cry
raised by Stephen S. Foster and Parker Pillsbury to ”come-out" from

corrupt proslavery churches. While he disapproved of their practice

 

6Liberator, January 19, 1844, July 4, 1845, October 2, 1846,
January 15, 1847; Speech at Dedham, Massachusetts, August 1, 1845,
in Liberator, August 15, 1845. See also Hebrews 13:3. For examples
of Garrison's strictures on the Free Church of Scotland and the
Evangelical Alliance, two groups which had also deemed it proper to
"mingle" with the institution of slavery see Liberator, July 17, 1846,
October 2, 1846, November 27, 1846, July 30, 1847; Garrison to Edmund
Quincy, September 18, 1846, Garrison Family Papers, Sophia Smith
Collection, Smith College; Garrison to Elizabeth Pease, October 25,
1846, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library. For his scathing cri-
ticism of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions
see Liberator, July 25, 1845. For his sonnet on "The True Church"
see Liberator, November 26, 1841.

172

of entering worship services on Sunday mornings and loudly calling
upon the congregations to leave, the Boston editor nevertheless ad-
mired the spirit of these radical Christian anarchists. Their en-
treaties to come out from iniquity complemented his own perfectionist
beliefs. Surely the man who had achieved perfection in this world
risked losing it if he continued to hold communion with the unsanc-
tified. The genuine Christian had no choice but to denounce evil-
doers and to remove himself from their religious fellowship. In
Garrison's estimation, "come-outer" was "a most honorable appella-
tion." Since it was a term which admirably described the true dis-
ciples of Christ, no “seeker after truth" should feel ashamed of
bearing it. Such determined men had come out from a "kingdom of
darkness, violence and blood"--from a "soul destroying priesthood"--
from an "apostate church" and a "spurious religion"--indeed from "all
the works of the devil."7

Declaring that proslavery churches "ought to be abandoned by
abolitionists as those who would flee out of Babylon," Garrison
preached the tenets of come-outerism from the lecture platform. In
a December, 1843 address, he charged the American church and clergy
both with justifying slavery and with sanctioning war. Some minis-

ters claimed that slavery existed by divine appointment while others

 

7Kraditor, Means and Ends, p. 105; Thomas, Liberator, pp. 318-
319; Liberator, July 8, 1842, December 22, 1843. In an 1845 letter,
Samuel May, Jr. wrote that “Mr. Garrison has never denied that there
has been, is, and should be a Church; yet has he been represented as
aiming to overthrow the Church, Ministry, Gospel, and all. He hag
plainly & vehemently (how hard is it to smother indignation in such
a case) denied that that was a Church of Christ which excused slave-
holding & slave trading, with all their horrible accompaniments...,
which apologised for these, nay which claimed for them the sanction
of the Old Testament, and the permission at least of the New!"
Samuel May, Jr. to J. B. Estlin, December 29, 1845, May Papers, Boston
Public Library. See also Liberator, July 30, 1841.

173

championed standing armies and were as much in favor of "extermina-
ting enemies" as was the soldier. After making further allegations,
he declared that if either of his major charges were true it would

be "sufficient reason" for Christians to come out from among such
men and be filled with the spirit of Christ. In early 1844 he told
another audience that "the true church and the kingdom" were to be
found within and not outside of man. This genuine Christian church
was not "a creature of human device." To become a member it was not
necessary to endorse a particular creed or to perform certain rites
and ceremonies. All that was required was "regeneration and a living
faith." This being the case, the "odious and detestable" assertions
of those clergymen who claimed that it was the Christian's solemn
duty to became a church member had to be "trampled in the dust."

The "great truth" had to be proclaimed that "every soul, in Christ
Jesus, is independent of every outward association." Not only was
the American Church a false church, but it was also "a cage of un-
clean birds--the very bulwark of slavery, and the stout defender of
war." Surely, said Garrison, all true Christians could see the ne-
cessity of "coming out" from such a body before they became partakers
of its sins and co-recipients of its justly-deserved "plagues."8

Garrison was afforded another opportunity to discuss the

 

8Speech at Boston, January 23, 1840, in Liberator,
February 28, 1840; Speech at Lynn, Massachusetts, December 17, 1843,
in Liberator, Janu"ry 12, 1844; Liberator, February 16, 1844. See
also Revelation 18:4. In 1845 Garrison wrote: "We deny that what
is called the Apostolic church was intended, or enjoined, as a model
organization, to be perpetuated, or is of any binding force what-
ever. It was a temporary institution, adapted to a special emer-
gency, and expired long ago by its own limitation. Every church now
claiming the authority or sanction of the primitive church, is
thereby convicted of gross imposture." Liberator, January 17, 1845.
See also Liberator, February 16, 1844.

174

"true Church" at the convention which was held in Chardon Street
Chapel in late October, 1841. The resolutions which he submitted
for discussion held that this Church was independent of all man-
made organizations, creeds, and compacts. It was "not in the prov-
ince of any man, or any body of men," to admit to or exclude from
the "true Church" any one who was "created in the divine image."
Moreover, it was "nowhere enjoined as a religious duty" by Christ

or His apostles that men should connect themselves with "any asso-
ciation, by whatever name known." All men, said the abolitionist,
were "left to act singly, or in conjunction with others, according
to their own free choice." As was the case with the Sabbath Con-
vention, no attempt was made to bring the resolutions to a vote.
Likewise, the Church Convention was similar to its predecessor in
that it remained open to "every variety of religious opinion." The
editor of The Liberator defended this practice even though it gave
his enemies another opportunity to besmerch his character. Who was
the greatest sinner, he asked, the supposed infidel or the man who
would "forcibly put a gag into the mouth of an infidel"? Was it not
to be expected that some "very crude, or very heretical, or very ab-
surd notions" would be uttered whenever men were allowed to speak
freely? Would this freedom of thought and speech prove injurious

to "Truth and Right?" Nonsense, he said. The good which the Chardon
Street Conventions had done for "the cause of Christianity and of
freedom" could not easily be exaggerated. The terror with which they
had been viewed by "those twin-monsters of the pit, priestcraft and

..9

sectarianism" was “full demonstration of their utility.

 

9Garrison and Garrison, Life, III, 7-8; Liberator, October 29,
1841. A second convention had been held in March, 1841 to discuss
the origin and the authority of the ministry. Garrison did not ad-
dress the convention.

175

During the 1840's Garrison not only became critical of the
religious press for ridiculing the conventions and for allowing "only
one side to be heard," but he also extended his belief in the cor-
rectness of free inquiry to theological matters. According to the
Boston abolitionist, there was "no safer, higher, or better" way to
discover Truth than to leave the mind "perfectly untrammelled"--to
contend for unlimited investigation, to vindicate the supremacy of
reason, and to repudiate all arbitrary authority. The fact that men
were "more or less ignorant" demonstrated both the need for freedom
of conscience and the absurdity of "affixing pains and penalties to
heretical opinions." "Who," he asked, ”shall dogmatically assume
to decide what is heresy, or inflict vengeance upon the heretic?"lo

In an 1846 editorial, Garrison declared that he was “against
that religion which discountenances free inquiry, and in favor of
that infidelity which is for it." He asked his readers whether it
was worthy of man, as a rational being, to be "stultified by ghostly
authority"--to be "intimidated from hearing, searching, trying all
things." Was it impossible for men to be mistaken? Had they never
detected themselves in error or changed an opinion? Could they grow
no more? As for himself, he would hold to the belief that whatever
could not bear the test of "the closest scrutiny" had no claim to
human respect or confidence. If he could teach his children no other
precept--if he could leave them no other example, it would be "a
fearless, impartial, thorough investigation of every subject to which
their attention may be called, and a hearty adoption of the principles

which to them may seem true...." The abolitionist vowed that he would

 

10Liberator, January 30, 1846, April 16, 1847.

176

not arbitrarily determine for them what was the "orthodox" or the
"heretical" views on any subject. "I have no wish, no authority,
no right to do so," he wrote. As an example, he expressed his de-
sire that they examine "whatever may be advanced in derogation of
the divine inspiration and authenticity of the Bible, as freely as
they do whatever they may find in support of the same," that they
read both the generally accepted and the opposing views relative to
the doctrines, precepts, and miracles of Christ, and that they "see
what proofs are adduced for a belief in the non-existence of a God,
as unreservedly as they do the evidence in favor of his existence."
Garrison would urge them to pursue such a course because he believed
free inquiry to be essential to "the life of truth." Right would
prevail over wrong, he wrote--"and all the sooner in a fair conflict."11

Garrison's opinions on the credulity of "priest-ridden"
Christians and on freedom of inquiry were set forth in the columns
of his weekly on a number of occasions during the 1840's. In taking
a largely favorable view of those two "arch enemies of orthodoxy,"
Theodore Parker and Thomas Paine, the editor of 222 Liberator gave
his readers cause to fear that he was becoming wholly estranged from
evangelical Christianity. In 1841, after hearing Parker's famous
sermon, ”The Transient and Permanent in Christianity," Garrison re-
marked to his friend,Johnson, "Infidelity, Oliver, infidelity!"

By 1845, however, he was accustomed to the controversial clergyman's

 

11Liberator, January 30, 1846. Garrison noted that the apos-
tle Paul was a "free inquirer," having exhorted the Thessalonians
to "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." See also
I Thessalonians 5:21; Garrison to Elizabeth Pease, June 20, 1849,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library; Garrison to William Lloyd
Garrison, Jr., January 7, 1858, Garrison Family Papers, Sophia Smith
Collection, Smith College.

177
"heresies” and had himself begun to minimize the importance of the
supernatural elements of the Christian faith in comparison with the
moral ones. In an article which appeared in April of that year,
Garrison stated that the "uproar" raised by the clergy against
Parker proceeded from "a state of mind in reality no more concerned
for the true character of God and for genuine piety, than was that
of their Jewish predecessors, the Scribes and Pharisees." The min-
isters of Boston were shocked and appalled not at the "entire over-
throw of the gospel" and the "planting of heathenism in its place,"
as in the case of Southern slavery--not at the rejection of Christ's
kingdom of peace, as in the case of war--not at the "popular denial
of human brotherhood"--but at the "candid confession of a disbelief

in the miraculous, by one confessedly pure and excellent in his walk

 

and conversation,..." Surely, he wrote, the obligations and duties
of man to his fellow man and to God were not affected by the question
of "whether miracles were wrought in Judea or not."12
Later in the year, the Boston editor reviewed a new edition
of Thomas Paine's theological works. Admitting that he had been
brought up to believe that the author of Th2 Agg 2: Reason was a
"monster of iniquity" whose "opinions and doctrines" were too per-
nicious to be examined, Garrison told his readers that he had never
before "perused a single page or paragraph" of Paine's writings.
Since he now considered himself to be "delivered from the thraldom

of tradition and authority," the abolitionist felt that he could

give the deistic republican's religious sentiments a "candid and

 

12Swift, Garrison, p. 299. See also Garrison to editor Zion's
Herald, August 27, 1842, in Liberator, September 9, 1842; Liberator,
January 22, 1847.

178

careful perusal." Garrison found Paine to be a remarkably intel-
lectual man, a close reasoner, and a powerful writer. It was cer-
tain that he was an honest man, at least in the sense that he was
not a hypocrite. Endowed with "an uncommon share of mental and moral
intrepidy," Paine was one of the very few men throughout history "who
have dared to think for themselves, to utter their own convictions,
...and to enter into a fearless investigation of forbidden subjects,
without regard to consequences." He knew that in expressing his un-
orthodox views on religion, he was inviting "obloquy and a fiery per-
secution." He realized that "a ravening priesthood" would combine
to hunt him down as one who ought to be destroyed "in the name of
the Lord" and for the safety of the Church. Yet he did not cower,
but chose to be "covered with infamy" rather than suppress what he
considered to be essential to ”the freedom and welfare of the people."
For this, said Garrison, Paine deserved the thanks of "every lover
of progress."1

The editor of Th3 Liberator found it admirable that Paine
"went for the utmost freedom of the mind"--that he made his appeals
to the reason of men and not to their "fears or selfishness." Cer-
tainly it was a "lamentable truth” that most men were not governed
by reason in their consideration of religious matters. "Wholly in-
fluenced" by imitation, education, and customgand taught by their
"crafty leaders" to be afraid of reason, they came to hold certain
beliefs, not as a result of their own independent investigation, but
because it was the fashion to do so in the community or nation in

which they happened to live. In view of this situation, Garrison

 

leiberator, November 21, 1845.

179

did not find it surprising that mankind was "groaning under the do-
minion of religious and political tyranny" or that the earth was
"covered with mental darkness, and crowded with all forms of super-
stition."ll+

In 1847, Garrison further attacked "Christian superstition"
by criticizing what he called "mystical religion.” If the "pure and
undefiled religion" of Christ was what the apostle claimed it to be
in the Book of James, he wrote, then there could be nothing ”intri-
cate or mysterious" in it except "that which commends itself to all

rational beings."15 If

religion was not "a sensible thing" then it
had to be "a very foolish thing." If it was supernatural, it could
not be natural and therefore, "though it may possibly answer for
another world,” it was clearly "of no advantage to the present."
Garrison noted that, while he would not quarrel with any man "whose
taste is strongly for the marvellous," he would nevertheless continue
to believe that, "in proportion as that passion shall take possession
of him," such an individual would undoubtedly find himself "less and
less inclined to labor in a practical, common sense manner, for the
extirpation of wrong from the earth." To an ardent reformer like
Garrison, there was simply too much that was "tangible and plain" in
the world to "feel any inducement to plunge headlong into the regions
of mystery."16

During the spring of 1847, Garrison once again lashed out

against "Christian temple worship." As he had noted in his earlier

 

1l’lbid.

15James 1:27 reads "Pure religion and undefiled before God
and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their
affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world."

16Liberator, April 9, 1847.

18o
strictures on the subject, a "holy building" was as great an ab-
surdity as a "holy steam-boat, or a sanctified grist-mill." On this
occasion, however, his emphasis was clearly on the superstition in-
herent in consecrating a man-made building, by "rites and ceremonies,"
to "what is called public worship." Being diametrically opposed to
”the genius of Christianity," such an act was merely an imitation of
Judaism, Mohammedanism, and Paganism. Religious incantations could
not sanctify bricks, stones, mortar, or any other material substance.
However sincere, every attempt at such a sanctification was, in "the
eye of reason," equally "ludicrous and impossible"--a ”sure proof
of religious infatuation." The idea that there was a "house of God"
was an absurd one, yet it continued to hold millions of believers
in "the bondage of superstition." Surely it could not be ”right or
useful" to make mankind believe that a particular structure suddenly
became holy as a consequence of the religious ceremonies which were
performed at the laying of its cornerstone. "Away with all such
mummeries and incantations!" wrote Garrison, "As Protestants, as
Christians, be it ours to show a superstitious and priest-ridden
world a better way--a more rational faith--a nobler consecration of
the religious element."17

In the same article, he criticized the credulity with which

 

17Liberator, May 7, 1847. In his sonnet entitled "Worship,"
Garrison noted:

No worldly sanctuary now may claim

Man's reverence, as a consecrated pile;
Mosque, synagogue, cathedral, are the same,

Differing in nought but architectural style:--
Avaunt, then, Superstition! in GOD's name,

Nor longer thy blind devotees beguile!

Liberator, November 19, 1841.

181

most professors of religion treated public worship--that ”distinct,
special religious act or performance...to be done, statedly, under
clerical guidance." Garrison denied its utility, discarded it as
a religious obligation, and protested against it on "the ground of
reason and humanity.” According to the abolitionist, public worship
"inevitably, necessarily, uniformly" led its votaries into spiritual
bondage. It was "a mere religious performance" which proved nothing
as to moral character or Christian benevolence. It neither fed the
hungry, clothed the naked, gave relief to the prisoner, broke the
chain of the slave, nor subverted popular iniquity. Truly, it could
be said that public worship was "ostensibly, all for God, who lacks
nothing; but nothing for man, universally who needs almost every
thing." To give such worship a "special sanctity" was definitely
wrong. In Garrison's opinion, it was imperative that religious
meetings be conducted in a rational manner and be "divested of all
sorcery." They should always be ”purely voluntary" and not "effected
through a fear of the displeasure of God, or the flames of hell."18

By the mid-1840's, Garrison's reexamination of the beliefs
of his youth, spurred on by his devotion to free inquiry, had led
him to modify his views on the supernatural sanction of the Bible.
In the course of the debate over slavery, both the pro and the anti-
slavery forces had sought to justify their positions by reference
to Scripture. This being the case, it was almost inevitable that
some of those in the antislavery camp would be led to repudiate the
texts used by the proslavery polemicists as being contrary to the

true meaning and intent of God's Word. It was but a short step from

 

18Liberator’ May 7’ 1847e

182
this view to the belief that not all of the Bible was divinely in-
19

spired. This was the direction in which Garrison's mind was moving.

In January, 1841 the abolitionist had defended himself
against charges of infidelity by noting that "in a true estimate of
the divine authority of the scriptures, no one can go beyond me.
They are my text-book, and worth all other books in the universe."
In early November he penned a sonnet which graphically exhibited his
orthodoxy on the question of divine revelation:

0 Book of Books! though skepticism flout

Thy sacred origin, thy worth decry;

Though transcendental folly give the lie
To what thou teachest; though the critic doubt
This fact, that miracle, and raise a shout

Of triumph o'er each incongruity,

He in thy pages may perchance espy;
As in his strength th' effulgent sun shines out,
Hiding innumerous stars, so dost thou shine

With heavenly light, all human works excelling:
Thy oracles are holy and divine,

Of free salvation, through a SAVIOUR, telling:
All truth, all excellence, dost thou enshrine--2O

The mists of sin and ignorance dispelling.

Nevertheless, by November 1843, Edmund Quincy could write
that Garrison's opinions had been "greatly modified of late with re-
gard to the Bible." It seemed that he was now "pretty well satis-

fied" that God had not "grown wiser by experience"--that the Supreme

 

19See Kraditor, Means and Ends, pp. 91-92; Johnson, Garrison
£29 Elé Times, p. 364; Lydia Maria Child, "William Lloyd Garrison,"
Atlantic Monthl , XLIV (August, 1879), 236; John Jay Chapman, William
Llo d Garrison ?Boston: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1921), p. 166. In
1 3 Garrison declared that "he who pertinaciously clings to a par-
ticular passage of scripture to uphold a favorite theory, and is al-
ways dwelling upon it, and refuses to compare scripture with scrip-
ture...does virtually acknowledge that the mass of evidence is
against him.... In this manner do the advocates of slavery run to
the passage, 'And they shall be your bondmen and bond-maids for
ever,‘ to justify that atrocious system." Liberator, December 7,
1838. See also Leviticus 25:46.

aoéihsgezgz. January 29. 1841, November 5, 1841.

183

Being had not commanded people to "cut their brothers' throats a
thousand years before he commanded them to love one another." Quincy
feared that this change in Garrison's religious beliefs would com-
plicate the work of the abolitionists. "It was so convenient," he
wrote, "to be able to reply to those who were calling him infidel,
that he believed as much as anybody, and swallowed the whole Bible
in a lump, from Genesis to Revelation, both included." Having long
judged the sins of the world by Truth and Right as revealed in the
Scriptures, Garrison was beginning to judge the Scriptures by Truth
and Right as revealed by his own reason.21

In his article on Thomas Paine, the editor of The Liberator
gave his readers a clear picture of his new views. He lamented the
fact that, of the millions who professed to believe in the Bible as
the inspired Word of God, there were few who had "the wish or the
courage" to know upon what basis they had formed their opinions.
Speaking to those who had been taught to believe that their salva-
tion would be "put in peril" if they ever came to doubt the plenary
inspiration of the Bible, Garrison wrote that there could be nothing
"more consonant to reason" than the proposition that "the more valua-
ble a thing is, the more it will bear to be examined." If the Bible,

"from Genesis to Revelations," was divinely inspired, its "warmest

 

21Edmund Quincy to R. D. Webb, November 27, 1843, in Garrison
and Garrison, Life, III, 95; Kraditor, Means and Ends, p. 92.
Garrison's sons wrote that it ”would not be easy" to name the exact
date upon which their father relinquished his belief in the "super-
natural sanction of the Bible." According to them, this "radical
change" made "no difference in his regard for the Scriptures, or in
his use of them, as a moral engine, and he never failed to urge the
reading of them upon his children." Wendell Phillips Garrison and
Francis Jackson Garrison, William Lloyd Garrison, 1865-1872: Th3
Star 2; gig Life Told by His Children, IV (New York: Century Co.,
1 9 . 33 .

184

partisans" had nothing to fear. It was to be examined with the same
freedom as any other book and then "taken precisely for what it is
worth." To insist that every thing contained in the Scriptures was
inspired of God required "the suspension of the reasoning faculties."
To say that all Biblical assertions had to be believed simply because
they were found in that volume was "equally absurd and pernicious."
It was the "province of reason" to ”search the scriptures" and dis-
tinguish the true from the false--to determine "what is probable,
and what incredible--what is historically true, and what fabulous...
--what is the letter that killeth, and what the spirit that maketh
alive." According to Garrison, "no man living" could tell when the
various books of the Bible were written or by whom they were authored.
This was "purely a matter of conjecture" and, since conjecture was
not certainty, it ceased to be authoritative. Nor was it of "vast
consequence," in the "eye of reason," whether Paul was the real
author of Hebrews or whether Moses actually wrote the Pentateuch.
"What is writ, is writ, and it must stand or fall by the test of
just criticism...."22

Garrison found it "proverbial" that one extreme was very
likely to give birth to another. The clergy had long taught their
congregations that "every chapter and verse" in the Bible was divinely
inspired; that the Scriptures were to be their master, not their ser-
vant; that whatever the Bible taught or allowed "must be from God,
and therefore right." Blindly adhering to these precepts, men had
searched the Bible and found, on the strength of a single text or a

number of texts, that it was lawful to make war, to sustain

 

22Liberator, November 21, 1845.

185

"governments of brute force," and to enslave human beings. "What
can be more monstrous than this?" asked the abolitionist. On the
other hand, Thomas Paine and his followers had discarded the Bible
as a pious imposture. Not being satisfied to refute the "foolish
dogma of priestcraft" as to the plenary inspiration of the volume,
they "manifested toward it exceeding bitterness and contempt of
spirit"--closing their eyes to its real character and to "the esti-
mate in which it should be justly held." Finding historical inaccur-
acies and "things incredible" in the Bible, they condemned the entire
work as fiction. Usually having "very little acquaintance" with the
book, the followers of Paine seldom referred to those portions of
Scripture which "inculcate the most stringent morality, the noblest
sentiments, the most expansive benevolence, the purest life." They
took no pleasure in "selecting the wheat from the chaff." To avoid
Scylla they "perished on Charybdis." As for himself, Garrison be-
lieved that to discard a portion of Scripture was "not necessarily
to reject the truth, but may be the highest evidence that one can
give of his love of truth."23

During the 1840's Garrison also continued to criticize the
more orthodox Christians for believing in the efficaciousness of
"forms and ceremonies." He told the readers of his weekly that he
knew of no "sacred rite" to be performed under the new covenant dis-
pensation. Those who continued to "derive religious sustenance" from
"rituals, temple worship, a priesthood, and holy days" were said to
be ensnared in "spiritual leading-strings." Garrison believed it

imperative for all men to learn and understand that Christianity had

 

bid.

 

186

no other forms or ceremonies, times or seasons, than those of "love
and good-will to all the human race"--that the only true and accept-
able worship was practiced by those who worshipped God "in spirit
and in truth." He held that if these views were accepted by American
Christians, the power of "religious sorcerers" and the tyranny of
"religious despots" would come to a "perpetual end."2l+

Garrison's strictures on the Sabbath likewise remained po-
tent. The observance of the first day of the week as "holy time"
was said to be the "stronghold of Priestcraft." It was the day which
brought the American people directly under the "priests'" control
and kept their ”reasoning faculties...in abeyance, to be moulded and
guided to the promotion of the craft." Certainly the Pope of Rome
did not possess a more sanctimonious air or a more ”cat-like tread"
than Rev. Justin Edwards, principal agent of that "clique" known as
the American and Foreign Sabbath Union. Most assuredly, all reason-
able men could see that priestcraft, in league with ”political des-

potism," laid heavy burdens upon men's shoulders and then, in order

to justify its rapacity and hide its guilt, "imprudently descants

 

2hLiberator, September 9, 1842, May 5, 1843. In 1843
Garrison spoke out against the custom of opening reform meetings
with a formal prayer. After an abolition gathering at Northampton,
Massachusetts he wrote: "As usual, at the opening of the meeting,
an opportunity was given for vocal prayer; but no one was moved to
improve it.... The omission of a religious formality, which has so
long enslaved the human mind, and which is the product of any thing
but the true spirit of prayer, is another hopeful sign, though it
will cause formalists and pharisees to groan in spirit. and to lift
up their hands in holy horror. It also shows how purely mechanical
and ceremonial this mode of extorting vocal prayer has been, and
is, as generally adopted; for when reliance on the priest ceases,
and no one is urged to go through with the performance, the result
is usually silence, though many devout souls are present." Garrison
to Th2 Liberator, August 2, 1843, in Liberator, August 18, 1843.

For his strictures on fast days see Liberator, May 28, 1841,
March 28, 1845. For his criticism of Quaker formalism see Liberator,
September 9, 1842.

187

on the merciful arrangement of Providence, by which these bowed
down laborers are enabled to obtain rest for their bodies one day
in seven!"25

Angered by the pronouncements of a pro-Sabbath convention
held in Rochester during the summer of{1842,}garrison offered a
ghgusandidollar reward to anyone who could prove that either Christ
arissxleflhis disciples had ever alluded to "the sin of Sabbath-
brggking,f_thaththe apostlesmhad ever enjoined,mflinmthe_name of the
Lord," the religious observance of any day of the week as the "holy
Sabbath," that Christ had ever commanded his disciples to observe
the first day of the week either as the Sabbath or in commemoration
of His resurrection and ascension, or that the first day of the week
was "declared by Jehovah, to be substituted for the seventh day as
a Sabbath." Since he was confident that the observance of Sunday
as a holy day was a "trick of priestcraft," without any foundation
in Scripture, and hostile to ”the spirit and design of Christianity,"
Garrison felt that there was little risk in offering the rewards.
He knew that it was "not in the power of any human being to bring

26

forward any such proof."

 

25Liberator, September 30, 1842, June 25, 1847. See also
Liberator, July 12, 1844, February 28, 1845, November 27, 1846,
February 26, 1847. In an 1835 letter to Samuel J. May, Garrison noted
his aversion to travelling on Sunday. By 1844, however, he could
write: "Believing that there is no sabbatical observance under the
Christian dispensation--or, if there be, that the seventh, and not
the first day of the week, is the sabbath, according to the Decalogue--
I felt as free, of course, to pursue my journey on Sunday, as on any
other day of the week." Garrison to Samuel J. May, December 26, 1835,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library; Liberator, August 23, 1844.

26Liberator, August 19, 1842. For Garrison's reaction to an
attempt to claim the reward see Liberator, September 30, 1842. Th;
Liberator of November 12, 1841 contained a Garrisonian sonnet which
expressed his hope that men would obey God's will by observing all
days as "holy time."

188'

Despite a break in friendly relations with John Humphrey
Noyes over how abolitionism and abolitionists should operate within
the pantheon of Christian reform, the editor of THE Liberator con-
tinued to adhere to perfectionist tenets. Asgardinzwinmfiarrifion,
ip_wasufl§ssentialwto,salvationfiwfor men to receive and accept the
doctringgghich taught_that they could obtain "immediate, uncondi-
tionalyweyerlasting emancipation from the bondage of Satan,"_through
Jesus Christ. It was because so few endeavored to rebut the "Calvin-
istic dogma" which held that men could not be perfect in this life
that the "nominal Christianity" of the United States was so spurious.
Of the millions who professed to have ”passed from death unto life"
scarcely a fraction could be regarded as having a just claim to the
name "Christian." While claiming to be free, they acknowledged that
they were in bondage. Declaring that no one could live without sin,
they made provision for sin in the flesh. "If Christ cannot cleanse
me from all sin here," wrote the abolitionist, "he cannot do it any
where. If he cannot save me in this world, then it is because the
devil is mightier than he."27

Garrison was strengthened in his beliefs by the fact that

orthodox churchmen "all over the country" were adopting strong

 

27Garrison to Elizabeth Pease, June 1, 1841, Houghton Library,
Harvard University; Garrison to Elizabeth Pease, July 2, 1842,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library. See also Kraditor, Means
and Ends, p. 103; Merrill, Wind and Tide, pp. 182-183; Liberator,
November 19, 1841, August 19, 1842: In “1843 Edmund Quincy described
Garrison's perfectionism, noting that the perfectionists were "a
sect whose general doctrines he receives though he does not belong
to it or any." One of Noyestsdoctrines which the abolitionist re-
fused to accept was the Vermont radical's concept of marriage.
Lindsay Swift has written that in setting himself in opposition to
Noyes's "elastic conception of the sexual relation" Garrison showed
that he was ”not of the right temper for a disciple." Edmund Quincy
to R. D. Webb, June 27, 1843, Massachusetts Historical Society;
Swift, Garrison, pp. 171-172. See also Liberator, November 26, 1841.

189

resolutions and taking "decisive action" against perfectionism. He
was not surprised by their actions because he knew that there was
no doctrine which the "priesthood" hated more bitterly--none which
they were more anxious to keep their "dupes and captives" from be-
lieving--than the "rational, scriptural, glorious, and only truly
reformatory doctrine of salvation from sin in this life." Garrison
considered these proceedings to be "admonitory 'signs of the times'"
which pointed to the fact that "a frightful state of corruption and
impiety" existed within the nation's churches. To argue against the
doctrine of holiness was to open the "floodgates of unrighteousness,"
to lower the standard of Christianity, and to "unblushingly" become
the devil's advocate. Those who denied the ability of men to live
without sin were themselves the "servants of sin."28

Ever eager to denounce what he considered to be half-
heartedness, Garrison did not hesitate to reprove those whose brand
of perfectionism was somewhat less exacting than his own. During
the lSfiO's, he criticized Charles Grandison Finney and Asa Mahan
for not going "far enough" in their religious profession. They had
written and published "many valuable articles respecting the New
Covenant" in the Oberlin Evangelist, but they still seemed to be
"in legal darkness" on many points. Considering how far they had
advanced in "the theory of spiritual life," he found it surprising
to find them so "trammelled" by "times and seasons, holy days, and
fastings and penances, and worldly sanctuaries, and ordinances of

divine service, and forms and ceremonies which gender to bondage."29

 

28Liberator, October 15, 1841, May 5, 1843.

29Liberator, October 15, 18hl. Aileen Kraditor has written
that Garrison's slogan of the duty to struggle to free oneself of

190

According to Garrison, the two clergymen did not lack "light"
as much as they did moral courage and firmness. Sometimes they were
as “bold as a lion," shocking and startling the ungodly and the hypo-
critical by their Christian radicalism. On other occasions they
quickly lowered their strident tone and hoisted the flag of conser-
vatism in order to save themselves from being put "beyond the pale
of sectarian fellowship." In Garrison's opinion, they either had to
"advance or retreat"--to carry on "an exterminating war" against the
whole system of legality or ”surrender at discretion." Finding their
views on the necessity of making a "public profession of religion,"
on non-resistance, on government, and on the Sabbath to be out of
tune with his own, the Boston editor characterized "Oberlin theology"
as being neither Judaism nor Christianity, but "a mixture of both."30

One doctrine of the early 1840's which Garrison thought to
be wholly "pernicious and untenable" rather than a "mixture” of
right and wrong was Millerism--the belief in the imminence of a pre-
millennial advent. Along with Noyes, the abolitionist held that
Christ had returned to earth around the year 60 A.D. His coming
marked the end of the apostolic church and ministry while the new dis-
pensation set men wholly free to follow the Savior in righteousness

and truth. According to Garrison, a correct view of the second advent

 

all sin, "Be ye perfect even as your heavenly Father is perfect," did
not imply confusion between what was in principle obligatory and what
was immediately realizable. On the contrary, he insisted that "to
refrain from propagating the full truth or from struggling to do what
he believed was the Christian's duty, because perfection was not re-
alizable, would be to refrain from taking the first step toward its
realization." Kraditor, Means and Ends, p. 29.

30Liberator, September 17, 18Hl, August 26, 1842. See also
Garrison to Helen E. Garrison, August 28, 1847, Garrison Papers,
Boston Public Library; Liberator, November 10, 1848.

 

191
was essential to a clear perception and a just appreciation of the
rights, privileges, and requirements of the new covenant dispensa-
tion. Such a view exalted Christ as a "Prince and a Saviour" in the
most impressive and glorious manner while it gave a "death-blow to
priestcraft, and all its train of pious impostures." It was the
"consummation of all shadows, types, figures, ceremonies, and observ-
ances," whether under the "patriarchal, levitical, prophetical, or
apostolical administration." Basing his views on Christ's words in
Luke 21:32, "Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass
away, till all be fulfilled," Garrison declared that, just as the
French Revolution was the "legitimate product" of the "false religion"
of France, the "Miller mania" was to be traced to the "false teach-
ings of a dumb and blind priesthood,..." Could it be denied that
generation upon generation of Christians had been taught to believe
that the heavens and the earth were to be destroyed by fire and that
Christ was to come in "a literal outward presence" to "sweep away
the wicked with the besom of destruction"? Why then, he asked, should
anyone be surprised to find that the theory which held that these
events would come to pass during the year 18%} was being "so readily
and extensively embraced"? As long as the "spiritual teachers" of
Christendom continued to "inculcate the dogma" that the second advent
was a future, and not a past event, there would be ample opportunity
given for the formulation of "any conceivable number of impostures

on this subject."31

 

31Liberator, February 10, 1843, February 17, 18“}; Thomas,
Liberator, pp. 316-317. See also speech at Lynn, Massachusetts,
December 17, 18k} in Liberator, January 12, 18AM; Liberator,
February 16, 18h“, January 17, 18h5. In a letter which he wrote to
his wife from New Ipswich, New Hampshire early in 18h4, Garrison
noted: "There are a number here, who embrace the views of Mr. Miller,

192

 

and continue steadfast in his doctrine.... Such persons must have
veneration and marvellousness to a great degree, and while they are
under such excitement, reason and argument are of very little avail
in convincing them of their delusion." Garrison to Helen E. Garrison,
January 12, lohk, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library.

CHAPTER VII
CONFRONTATION
He who has God and conscience on his side,
has a majority against the universe.
--Frederick Douglass
August 11, 1852
Influenced greatly by Garrison, Frederick Douglass began
his abolitionist career as an enthusiastic critic of organized reli-
gion, political parties, and the American Union with slaveholders.
Although he quickly broadened his platform repertoire beyond that
of a mere recitation of his slave experiences, Douglass' speeches
were not noticeably original. He was seemingly content to say what
the other abolitionists had said many times before. Nevertheless,
as he developed poise and self-confidence on the lecture circuit,
Douglass became aware of the somewhat paternalistic attitude which
occasionally surfaced among the white abolitionists. During the
late 1840‘s and early 1850's, he came into contact with the less

benevolent, more authoritarian side of the Garrisonian movement.1

 

1Earl E. Thorpe, "Frederick Douglass, w. E. B. DuBois and
Booker T. Washington," Negro Histor Bulletin, XX (November, 1956),
39; Foner, Frederick Douglass, pp. 8-59. See also Douglass, Bonda e,
p. xxii. In 1850, Elizabeth Cady Stanton recalled how Garrison had
influenced her life. "My own experience is, no doubt, that of many
others," she noted. "In the darkness and gloom of a false theology,
I was slowly sawing off the chains of my spiritual bondage, when,
for the first time, I met Garrison in London. A few bold strokes
from the hammer of his truth, I was free! Only those who have lived
all their lives under the dark clouds of vague, undefined fears can
appreciate the joy of a doubting soul suddenly born into the kingdom

193

l9h

As early as 1891, Stephen S. Foster had warned Douglass
that audiences would cease to believe that he was ever a slave if he
sounded "too learned." Garrison, too, urged him to "tell his story"
and let the other lecturers speak on the more complex issues. De-
spite such injunctions from his white friends, Douglass refused to
be stereotyped and stunted. As he wrote in his autobiography, "I was
now reading and thinking. New views...were presented to my mind. It
did not entirely satisfy me to narrate wrongs; I felt like denouncing
them." Thus it was, that the stage was set for the 18“? confrontation
between the ex-slave who had developed "a mind of his own" and the
Garrisonian abolitionists, some of whom felt that the Negro was not
yet ready to chart his own course in the antislavery world.2

The first sign of an open breach between Douglass and Garrison
occurred after the harried pace of their 18“? western tour had proven
to be too strenuous for the elder abolitionist. Garrison became ill
in Cleveland and urged Douglass to carry on with the lecture tour
while he recuperated. Not considering his friend's illness to be of
a serious nature, Douglass traveled to Buffalo for the next scheduled
engagement. Later that week, however, he received word that the
Boston abolitionist's condition was critical. This unexpected news

made Douglass wish that he had not left Garrison‘s bedside.3 His

 

of reason and free thought.... To Garrison we owe, more than to any
other one man of our day, all that we have of religious freedom."
Speech at New York City, May 8, 1860, in Liberator, May 18, 1860.
See also Swift, Garrison, pp. 37H-377.

ZFoner, Frederick Douglass, p. 59; Douglass, Bonda e,
pp. xxii, 361-362, 398-399. See also Quarles, Black Abolitionists,
pp. 47-54.

3Benjamin Quarles, "The Breach Between Douglass and Garrison,"
Journal 2; Negro Histor , XXIII (April, 1938), 1&6; Douglass to
Sydney Howard Gay, September 26, 1847, in National Anti-Slavery

195

concern over his companion's health was explained to Garrison by
Samuel J. May. In an October 8 letter, May wrote, "Frederick Douglass
was very much troubled that he did not get any tidings from you when
he reached Syracuse on the 24th of September. He left you reluctantly,
yet thinking that you would follow on in a day or two;...he was al-
most sure he should meet you at my house. His countenance fell, and
his heart failed him, when he found me likewise in sad suspense about
you." This message seems to have made little impression upon Garrison
because, in a letter to Helen a few days later, he expressed surprise
that his co—worker had "not written a single line to me, or to any
one, in this place, inquiring after my health, since he left me on a
bed of illness."“

Douglass' apparent lack of solicitude was not the sole rea-
son for Garrison's annoyance. He was greatly aggravated by Douglass'
decision to go forward with his plans to publish an independent anti-
slavery weekly. This project had originated when a number of British
friends established a testimonial fund for the ex-slave. On Douglass'

suggestion, this money was to be applied to the cost of establishing

 

Standard, October 7, l8k7. During the summer of 1847, the two aboli-
tionists had nothing but praise for each other. Garrison looked for—
ward to visiting the western regions with his "eloquent friend,"
Douglass, while the ex-slave noted that his companion's "conversa-
tional powers" were seemingly inexhaustible. Garrison was "as fresh
at midnight as at midday.... When he opens his mouth, and pours forth
his truthful voice, the dark and foul spirit of slander falls before
him, like Dagon before the ark." Garrison to John B. Vashon, July 27,
l8k7, in Journal of Negro Histor , XII (January, 1927), #0; Douglass
to Sydney Howard Gay, August 20, l8h7, in National Anti-Slavery
Standard, September 2, l8k7. See also Liberator, March 26, 18E7.

 

“Samuel J. May to William Lloyd Garrison, October 8, 1847,
Antidflavery Letters to William Lloyd Garrison and Others, Boston
Public Library; Garrison to Helen Garrison, October 20, l8h7,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library.

196

a "well-conducted," Negro-run newspaper which would disprove the
black man's supposed inferiority and demonstrate "his capacity for
a more exalted civilization than slavery and prejudice had assigned
him." Expecting to find his Boston associates favorably disposed to
the new enterprise, he instead encountered opposition. Garrison be—
lieved that if Douglass remained true to his abolition principles he
would be able to find few subscribers for his new paper. "It would
not be in the power of Gabriel himself," he wrote, "to obtain much
patronage or applause as an editor, if he were faithful to his trust,
and utterly indifferent to the length of his subscription list." For
Douglass to devote his precious time to cultivating such a limited
audience would be wasteful since the large crowds which attended the
various antislavery lectures were "every where eager to hear his elo-
quent and triumphant appeals." Despite the fact that his own career
followed this very pattern, Garrison asserted that it would be "quite
impracticable to combine the editor with the lecturer, without either
causing the paper to be more or less neglected, or the sphere of lec-
turing to be seriously circumscribed."5

Initially, Douglass followed his mentor's advice. He tem-
porarily abandoned his plan to publish a weekly paper, basing his de-
cision on the fact that several Negro-owned journals had come into
existence during the past year. Noting that "these will be sufficient
to accomplish the good which I sought," he acquiesced in the wishes

of the Garrisonians. The editor of The Liberator was pleased with

 

this decision and joined his black friend in publicly denying that

 

5Douglass, Life, pp. 257-259; Liberator, July 23, 18h7. See
also Liberator, July 16, 1847.

197
the Boston abolitionists had pressured Douglass into abandoning the
project.

Nevertheless, the independent strain that was growing ever
more prominent in Douglass' character became visible to all in late
15%? when he issued a prospectus for an antislavery paper to be called
The Nehhh §£2£' In a letter to J. D. Carr, Douglass wrote, "I had
not decided against the publication of a paper one month before I be-
came satisfied that I had made a mistake, and each subsequent month's
experience has confirmed me in the conviction." The new desire to
publish a weekly did not result from any "ungrateful want of appre-
ciation" for the zeal, integrity, or ability shown by the Garrisonian
editors, but emanated from a "sincere and settled conviction" that
such a journal, if conducted with moderate skill and ability, "would
do a most important and indispensable work, which it would be wholly
impossible for our white friends to do for us." Douglass considered
it to be neither a reflection on the fidelity, nor a disparagement
of the ability of his white fellow-laborers to assert that "the man
who has suffered hhe 25225 is the man to demand redress,--that the
man STRUCK is the man to CRY 0UT--and that he who has endured hhe
£522} pehge eh Slavery is the man to advocate liberty."7

Garrison's initial reaction to the revival of his co-worker's

publishing scheme was scarcely charitable. He said that Douglass'

 

6Booker T. Washington, Frederick Douglass (Philadelphia:
George W. Jacobs & Company, 19067, p. 121; Douglass to editor of the
Boston Daily Whig, June 27, 18H7, in Liberator, July 9, 1847; Douglass
to William Lloyd Garrison, July 18, 18h7, in Liberator, July 23,18k7;
Liberator, June 25, l8h7.

7Douglass to J. D. Carr, November 1, 18h7, in National Anti-
Slavery Standard, January 27, 1848; North Star, December 3, l8h7.
See also North Star, December 22, 18 .

198

action was "impulsive” and "inconsiderate." Douglass ”never opened
to me his lips on the subject, nor asked my advice in any particular
whatever! Such conduct grieves me to the heart."8 Nevertheless,
Garrison's anger cooled rapidly. Soon he was complimenting Douglass
on the high quality of The North Star and criticizing the free Negroes
for not more enthusiastically supporting the new, Rochester-based pa-
per. Overall, relations between the two abolitionists remained fairly
cordial during Douglass' first three years in Rochester. They con-
tinued to meet at the annual conventions of the American Anti-Slavery
Society. Their platform references to each other were courteous, if
sparing. Nevertheless, the old amity was absent.

A return to their pre-1847 relationship was made almost im-
possible by Douglass' 1851 announcement of a fundamental change in
his political tenets. {At the eighteenth annual meeting of the society,
a resolution was introduced which denied the Garrisonian abolition-
ists' endorsement to any paper which did not assume the United States
Constitution to be a proslavery documentJ JDouglass thereupon an-
nounced that his Nehhh She; was no longer eligible for their approval.
After considerable thought and a "careful study”of the writings of
Lysander Spooner, of Gerrit Smith, and of William Goodell, he had

come to the conclusion that the Constitution, construed in the light

 

Garrison to Helen Garrison, October 20, l8h7, Garrison Papers,
Boston Public Library. In March, 18k8, Samuel May, Jr., noted that
Douglass considered this imputation to be false-~"that, on the con-
trary, he did speak to Mr. G. about it just before he was taken ill
at Cleveland. Mr. Garrison, however, has no recollection whatever of
it." Samuel May, Jr., to Mary Carpenter, March h, 18h8, Anti-Slavery
Letters to William Lloyd Garrison and Others, Boston Public Library.

9Liberator, January 28, 18A8, January 5, 18h9; Quarles,
"Breach," p. lh9; Foner, Frederick Douglass, pp. 136-137. See also
North Star, January 14, 18L8.

199

of well established rules of legal interpretation, "might be made
consistent in its details with the noble purpose avowed in its pre-
amble." As a corollary, it became his duty to use political as well
as moral means for the overthrow of the slave system.10

The Boston editor was thunderstruck at this disavowal of
Garrisonian tenets. "There is roguery somewhere!" he exclaimed, and
angrily asked that The North Star be removed from the "approved” list
of the society. Later, the Massachusetts abolitionist claimed that
he merely meant that, since the slaveholders of the South, as well
as all of the nation's political parties, were professing the same
ardent attachment to the Union and the Constitution, there must be
roguery somewhere--"there must be deception either on one side or
the other in the use of terms, for they did not and could not all mean
the same thing by those terms, but something diametrically opposite."
If Douglass could "satisfy his understanding and his conscience" by
assuming that, under the Constitution, chattel labor had always been
illegal, he had "no reproach to fling" and could'bnly marvel."11

Despite this explanation, Douglass never forgot Garrison's
harsh accusation. Indeed, he expected to receive even more abuse

from the Garrisonians. He knew the temper of his old companions too

well to hope that he would escape punishment. The leaders of the

 

10Quarles, "Breach," pp. lh9-150; Foner, Frederick Dou lass,
pp. 136-lh2; Liberator, May 23, 1851; Douglass, Life, pp. 261-262.
In 1889, Douglass wrote, "I was a non-voter in 18:8: though deeply
interested in the free soil movement inaugurated at the Buffalo con-
vention in that year. Before 1852 I became a sound convert to the
doctrine of the unconstitutionality of slavery, and to the duty of
voting against slavery." Douglass to Frederic May Holland, August 3,
1889, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

11Foner, Frederick Dou lass, p. lh2; Liberator, May 23, 1851,

July h, 1851; F. M. Holland, "Frederick Douglass," Open Court, IX
(March 7, 1895), 4415.

 

200

American Anti-Slavery Society were strong men, noble champions in
the cause of human freedom, but unfortunately they were not "the
most charitable in construing the motives of those who see matters
in a different light from themselves."12

The expected verbal assault did not come immediately. During
the remainder of 1851 and the first few months of 1852 the conflict
between Douglass and the Garrisonians lay dormant. The editor of
The Nehhh She; continued to publish the speeches of leading Garrisonian
abolitionists and even praised the Society for doing "a great and
good work." The editor of The Liberator graciously noted that, how-
ever widely he dissented from Douglass' present interpretation of the
Constitution, he continued to hold "the same desire for the success
of his paper, the same personal attachment, and the same confidence
in his wish and determination to do all that in him lies for the
speedy abolition of slavery, that we have felt from the beginning."
But all this was only the proverbial calm before the storm. In May,
1852 the feud flared up again at the annual meeting of the American
Anti-Slavery Society. 50 intense was the hostility between the two
camps that Douglass could complain of being assailed "with more
bitterness" by the Garrisonian school of abolitionists than "from any
other quarter." He wrote that he was often tempted to strike back,
but was striving to ”maintain silence under whatever Mr. Garrison
may say." The ex-slave claimed that, despite Garrison's efforts to
"undermine and destroy" his paper, he still stood in relation to his

mentor like "a child to a parent," but "not so in relation to any

 

12Quarles, "Breach," p. 150; Douglass to Gerrit Smith,
May 21, 1851, in Philip S. Foner, ed., The Life and Writings 2:
Frederick Dou lass, II (New York: International Publishers, 1950),
156; Liberator, May 23, 1851.

201

other man of the party.” It is not surprising, therefore, that
Douglass was less reticent in attacking Garrison's associates than
he was in taking on Garrison himself.13

By the fall of 1853, the conflict reached a stage of vitu-
peration unparalleled in the history of the antislavery movement.
At this point, Douglass, in reporting the 1853 convention of the
American Anti-Slavery Society, threw out the remark that Parker
Pillsbury, Henry C. Wright, and Stephen Foster had been "induced to
absent themselves" from the meetings because their presence might
have given "new force to the charge of infidelity which is brought
against the Society." This remark went unanswered until, at the
August 2, 1853 celebration of West India Emancipation at Framingham,
Massachusetts, Wendell Phillips publicly criticized Douglass for dar-
ing to attend the ceremonies after making such a statement. He de-
manded that the black abolitionist justify his slur "upon the inte-
grity of the American Anti-Slavery Society." Frederick replied to
the demand rather halfheartedly, reserving his best defense for pub-
lication in his own weekly. In the columns of Frederick Douglass'
Pa er, the weekly born of the 1851 union between The Nehhh She; and
Gerrit Smith's Liberty £2221 Pa er, he wrote that there was a time
when he would have denied the charge that he had made against the
three Garrisonians. That he did not do so was "owing to an altered
state of the case." The abolitionists in question simply "do not
stand where they once did." If the charge of infidelity had been

solely the invention of the proslavery church, he would have given

 

13Foner, Frederick Douglass, pp. lh2-lh3; Frederick Douglass:
Paper, February 5, 1852, February 26, 1852; Douglass to Charles
Sumner, September 2, 1852, in Foner, Life and Writin a, II, 210-211.

202

it no credence since such a charge would probably have been the di-
rect result of the abolitionists' faithfulness to the antislavery
cause. Unfortunately, evidence existed which showed that Pillsbury,
Wright, and Foster not only did not believe in the inspiration of the
Holy Bible, but also gloried in this disbelief. They laughed at the
absurdity of recognizing any book as being of divine authority.
Douglass felt that it would have been "either the utmost folly, or
the grossest dishonesty" to have pursued the course recommended by
Phillips and to have defended the three from the charge of infidelity.
He could not retract or deny the charge because he felt that he could
not do so truthfully. Thus, along with his close friendship with the
Garrisonians and his belief in several of their major doctrines,
Douglass now abandoned his unquestioning faith in the supreme Spiri-
tual purity of the Garrisonian movement. No longer could he say with
the same conviction that the ”hated and despised” abolitionists were
the only men and women in the land who did not "hold the truth of God
in unrighteousness."lu

The Garrisonian press was not long in replying. Douglass had
finally removed his mask and "mingled his voice" with that of the
nation's proslavery press and pulpit-~a "beautiful addition,...to a
very familiar, though very execrable chorus!" Garrison, too, now
joined in the attack. Supporting Wendell Phillips' conduct in the
Framingham controversy, the editor of The Liberator proclaimed it to be
idle and false for Douglass to think that he was being persecuted be-

cause of his views on the morality of political action and the character

 

l“Foner, Frederick Douglass, pp. 143-1hh; National Anti-
Slavery Standard, September 3, 1853, September 24, 1853; Frederick
Douglass' Pa er, August 12, 1853, August 19, 1853; North Star,
January 28, l 8.

203

of the Constitution. Any difficulty that he experienced could be
attributed to the fact that he had become ”alienated in spirit" from
his old friends and no longer treated them with fairness or courtesy.
"He is an altered man in his temper and spirit;" Garrison wrote, "the
success of his paper he makes paramount to principle; and the curse
of worldly ambition is evidently the secret of his alienation." It
was not long before extracts from Douglass' articles were being pub-
lished in The Liberator's "Refuge of Oppression" column, a section of
the paper usually reserved for material from anti-abolitionist jour-
nals. By the end of the year, Garrison could write that his former
co-worker stood "self-unmasked," his features flushed with passion,
his air scornful and defiant, his language ”bitter as wormwood," his
pen dipped in poison; "as thoroughly changed in his spirit as was
ever 'arch-angel ruined,‘ and as artful and unscrupulous a schismatic
as has yet appeared in the abolition ranks.” Beneath ”the blackness
of his skin" Douglass was attempting to hide "the blackness of his
treachery."15

Tertiary issues and personal recriminations aside, the basic
fact remains that, however much the Garrisonians protested that their
hostility did not originate in Douglass' conversion to new antislavery
principles, their words and actions during this period revealed how
bitterly they resented his independent thinking. The ex-slave's
proof of the contribution that the Negro could make as a major figure
in the abolition movement was a major cause of the Garrisonian unrest

and, to a large extent, explained why the Garrisonians were a good

 

lSNational Anti-Slavery Standard, September 3, 1853;
Liberator, September 23, 1853, November 18, 1853, December 16, 1853;
Foner, Frederick Douglass, pp. 14h~147.

 

/— Fl

204

deal kinder to others who lefttheir ranks than they were to Douglass.16

In spite of the various tumultuous events which occurred
throughout this period, Douglass retained many of the same attitudes
toward the American Church and the "true" Christianity that he had
held during the early 1840's. Although he had severed most of his
ties with the Methodist Church, the ex-slave still considered himself
to be a believer in that higher form of religion given to man by a
just and merciful Creator. To be sure, Douglass' God was still a
figure of eternal justice. Presiding over the highest court in the
universe, God adjudged America's slaveholders to be guilty of griev-
ous wrongs. He told them that they could have "no peace" until they
truly repented of their sins. As Creator and Lawgiver, God had, in
times past, "stood and measured the earth," establishing the laws of
man and nature, and instituting the penalties for their violation.
"The earth is the Lord's, and righteousness should cover it," wrote
Douglass, "and he who concedes any part of it to the introduction of
slavery, is an enemy to God, an invader of his dominion, and a rebel
against his government."17

This all-wise, "everywhere present" Eternal Being was also

a God of love and mercy. Surely He would not permit twelve million

 

16Foner, Frederick Dou lass, pp. 150-151. See also Richard T.
Greener, "Reminiscences of Frederick Douglass," Champion Ma azine,
I (February, 1917), 29%.

17Speech at New York City, May, 1853, in Foner, LLfe and
Writings, II, 251; Speech at Rochester, December 8,1850, in Foner,
Life and Writings, II, 1H8; Frederick Douglass' Paper, June 2, l85h;
Speech at Pittsburgh, August 11, 1852, in Foner, Life and Writings,
II, 206; North Star, January 28, 18h8, November 17, 18h8, February 8,
1850. Louis Filler has written that the Garrisonian attack on Douglass
was unjustified because the black abolitionist's conversion to the use
of the ballot box and his new respect for the Constitution "did not
change his views or actions" in other areas. "He had not shifted his
orbit; he had enlarged it." Filler, Crusade, p. 206.

205

of his creatures to continue forever in a state of degradation and
misery. "All things are possible with God,” Douglass asserted. "Let
not the colored man despair.... Greater is He that is for us, than
they that are against us." The abolition of slavery would require
time, energy, perseverance, and patience on the part of the anti-
slavery forces. It would also necessitate ”a martyr-like spirit of
self-sacrifice, and a firm reliance on Him who has declared Himself
to be 'hhe gee hi the oppressed.'" Indeed, the “all—pervading love
of God" had the power to "reach, melt and fuse the souls of men into
a sense of common kinship, brotherhood and destiny."18

Douglass also continued to feel a deep love for those aspects
of religious feeling which urged man to minister to the physical, as
well as the spiritual, needs of his fellow man. In April, 18h9 he
visited an orphan's asylum in New York City. Here he found religion
in its appropriate sphere, "taking care of the fatherless, and light-
ening the burdens of the lonely widow.” He felt like lifting his
voice in the hymn "Praise God," as he beheld the scores of small chil-
dren who had been rescued from damp and gloomy cellars, deserted and
desolate garrets, ”from the abodes of vice and crime," and placed in

such a "delightful abode of virtue and intelligence."19

 

18Frederick Douglass' Pa er, June 2, 185%; Speech at Chicago,
November, 185“, in Foner, Life and Writings, II, 332; Speech at
Rochester, December 8, 1850, in Foner, Life ehd Writings, II, 140;
Ihxrth Star, February 2, 18h9; Speech at Rochester, December 1, 1850,
:in North Star, December 5, 1850; Speech at New York City, May 11, 1853,
JDouglass Papers, Library of Congress; Speech before the American Anti-
.Slavery Society, 18H8, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

19North Star, May a, 18kg. In an 18u8 letter to Thomas Auld,
Douglass expressed his happiness in the fact that his children were
ruyt doomed to a life in slavery. They were "not to work up into rice,
sugar and tobacco, but to watch over, regard, and protect, and to
rear them up in the nurture and admonition of the gospel-~to train
them up in the paths of wisdom and virtue." Indeed, Douglass' children

 

206

Still another carry-over from the earlier period was
Douglass' refusal to concede that the American clergy would never be-
come more of a help than a hindrance to the antislavery crusade. It
was the "faithless and recreant priesthood" that he wished to hold
up to censure, not the "true servants of an impartial God." he vowed
that he would never be "driven off the platform" of the Christian re-
ligion in fighting slavery and hoped that the nation's ministers would
become ever more willing to join him on that platform. He appealed
to the clergy to "buckle on the armor of their master, and heartily
strive with their immense power, to arrest the nation in its downward
progress, and save it from the deep damnation to which it is sinking."20
Douglass was always grateful to those religious bodies which
opened their meetinghouse doors to the touring abolitionists. On

one occasion, he described such a congregation as "friends of human

freedom and Christian purity," who, though worshipping in comparatively

 

were not completely estranged from the gospel because of their
father's alienation from the Church. Daughter Rosetta wrote that,
although there was no family altar in the Douglass home, it was their
custom ”to read a chapter in the Bible around the table, each reading
a verse in turn until the chapter was completed." Anna Douglass was
said to be a mother who strove to inculcate in the minds of her chil-
dren "the highest principles of morality and virtue both by precept
and example." Douglass to Thomas Auld, September 3, l8h8, in Anti-
Slavery Bu 1e, September 29, 1888; Rosetta Douglass Sprague, h;
Mother he T Recall Her (pamphlet, Washington, D. C., 1923, Reprint

of the 1900 edition), pp. 18, 24.

20Holland, Colored Orator, p. 203; Frederick Douglass' Paper,
May 26, 185“. Philip Foner has written that, unlike the Garrisonians,
Douglass saw a ray of hope in the church schisms of the 1840's. The
split between the northern and southern churches showed the ex-slave
that the former were not as reprobate and willing to serve the south-
ern slaveholders as the Garrisonians had charged. Thus, while cri-
ticizing every manifestation of proslavery and anti-Negro tendencies
in the churches, he also let it be known that he was prepared to co-
operate with the antislavery groups in the northern churches. Foner,
Frederick Douglass, pp. 1h8-l49.

 

207

small quarters, were "nevertheless a broad light to the whole town."
He often expressed amazement at finding believers who combined "an
orthodox faith" with a Christian life, living in communities other-
wise bereft of genuine Christian feeling. In meeting with clergy-
men of this type, Douglass was afforded an all too rare experience.
In their manners, the abolitionist found "an absence of all priestly
assumption and domination." They conversed with him ”in a manly way,
on common ground, and on equal terms-oa thing rather unusual for
ministers to do." He was greatly encouraged by these talks with the
type of minister who "nobly stood by the cause of the slave." Let
their spirit spread, he noted, and "the jubilee will not be far off3"21
The reaction of the American clergy to several major events
of the late 1840's and early 1850's did not allow Douglass to be-
come overly optimistic as to the possibility of a national revival
of the true Christianity. He considered the Mexican War to be both
a diabolical "slaveholding crusade" and a foul blot upon the American
profession of religion. While traveling near Rochester one day,
Douglass chanced to overhear a conversation between two people of
"apparent gentility and intelligence." One of the men believed that
the "cup of Mexican iniquity was full" and that God was using the
American troops to punish the people of Mexico. The black abolition-
ist was outraged that anyone could see the hand of the Lord in such
bloodshed and slaughter. To couple religion with the ”murderous de-
signs" of the warmongers was outright blasphemy. What did the
American clergy say to such charges? In Douglass' opinion, the min-

isters had simply linked hands with the guilty and attempted to

 

ZIEEEEE §Efl£fi March 9: 1889. September 28, 1849; Frederick
Douglass' Pa er, September 23, 1853.

208

"float down with the multitude in the filthy current of crime."
Had they been faithful to their Christian duty and preached the gos-
pel of peace, the land might have been spared the "withering curse"
of war, but this was not to be. The clergy seemed as "silent as the
graveJ' Their silence was truly the "greatest sanction of the
crime."22

Douglass' outrage over the "indifference” of the American
Church was certainly not assuaged by the passage of the Fugitive
Slave Act of 1850. He had long been sympathetic with the plight of
fellow fugitives and, on at least one occasion, lashed out at the
"professed Christians" of Boston for not offering fleeing slaves
better protection from the "white fanged blood-hounds" which fol-
lowed close upon their "blood-stained trackEsJ." He believed the
law to be one of the greatest infringements of "Christian liberty"
ever enacted. It did not interfere with the singing of psalms or
the rite of baptism, but only with the weightier matters of judg-
ment, mercy, and faith. The law_mademit a criminal act to carry out
the_pzinciplss of the true Christianity. It forbade Americans "to
do right," to show mercy, or to follow the example of the good
Samaritan. If the nation's churches and ministers were not "stu-
pidly blind, or most wickedly indifferent," they too would recognize
the true character of this portion of the Compromise of 1850. Un-

fortunately, according to the ex-slave, they were once again "utterly

 

22North Star, January 21, 1848, March 17, 1848. Douglass was
not entirely correct in his assertion that the American Church was
wholly silent. The Congregational, Unitarian, and Quaker Churches
opposed the war. During the 1848 Presidential campaign, he also con-
demned the American clergy for "rallying to the support" of the "Slave—
holding Warrior," Zachary Taylor. See Clayton Sumner Ellsworth, "The
American Churches and the Mexican War," American Historical Review,
XLV (January, 19uo), 301-326; North Star, July 21, 1oh8, June 1. 18kg.

 

209

silent" in respect to this unjust act which robbed religion of its
chief significance and made it "utterly worthless to a world lying
in wickedneb‘sN' Enseiiaetfhstwthe..American Chur0,h...did- .n.o§-,,se.em-. to
EggggqmfihgmfigsiEiyem§lave law asva declaration of war against reli-
gieggmliberty proved that the bulk of the churchmen regarded reli-
gion simpLywasfa_form of worship, an empty ceremony, and not a vital
principlewrequiring active benevolence, justice, love, and good will
towards man. The Church seemed to value ”sacrifice above mercy,
psalm-singing above right doing; solemn meetings above practical
righteousness." Such a religion was surely more of a curse than a
blessing to mankind. For his part, Douglass would "welcome infidel-
ity! welcome atheism! welcome anything!" in preference to this
sort of religion. Indeed, the.-._mini.sterswointhis..1'.cold-_and.-flinty-
heeggedfl_greedmhadMconveizegmlghe_zery name of religionWNinto an
"engine_of_tyranny and barbarous cruelty" and had served to "confirm
92££mifi£igfifiaminmthis age, than all the infidel writings of Thomas
Paine, Voltaire, and Bolingbroke put together have'donel"23

During these trying years, Douglass not only felt that the
Church was indifferent to the sorrowful cries of the slave, but he
also believed that the American religious establishment actually
took sides with the southern oppressor. It had made itself "the
bulwark" of slavery and "the shield" of the slave-hunter. Hemfound.<}-W'
that mgflllgi_i£§lggstmeloquent divines had_willingly given the sanc-

tign °£r{3;i§§92l§9 the slave system and had taught that the relation

 

 

 

23Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison, November 8, 1842, in
Liberator, November 18, 1842; Speech at Rochester, July 5, 1852,
in Foner, Life ehe Writings, II, 196-198; Speech at Pittsburgh,
August 11, 1852, in Foner, Life ehe Writin 3, II, 207-208. See also
North Star, June 2, 1848.

210

of master and slave was ordained of God. Some, like the "shameless"
Dr. Lord of Buffalo even preached that to return an escaped bondsman
to his master was the clear duty of all who professed to follow the
Lord Jesus Christ. .Douglass believed these men to be "wolves in
sheep's clothing--thieves and liars" who tortured the pages of the
Holy Bible into sanctifying criminal acts. They were capable of
doing more in one hour to undermine man's reverence for the Bible
"than the most skillful infidel could effect in ages."28

The black abolitionist's personal experiences during this
period were also calculated to make him despair of any hope for an
improvement in the moral character of the American people. Despite
the instances of clerical kindness which he occasionally found on
the antislavery lecturing circuit, a more common occurrence was that
which took place in 1849 at Oswego, New York. When his Oswego friends
heard of his plans to speak there, they attempted to obtain the use
of one of the city's church buildings, but were turned down by every
congregation on the grounds that the ex-slave would speak against
the Church. The meetings were finally held in the town hall, giving
Douglass yet another example of the patently uncharitable nature of
"professed Christians." When a similar situation occurred a few
weeks later, forcing the abolitionists to meet in a hotel ballroom,
Douglass wrote: "Thus it is, and thus it has ever been. The cause
of God is received more gladly by the world than by a corrupt and
hollow church."25

At Bath, that ”dark corner of the State of New York with

 

ahSpeech at Rochester, July 5, 1852, in Foner, Life and
Writin 8, II, 197; North Star, January 16, 1851.

25North Star, September 21, 18h9, October 5, 18A9.

211

respect to the subject of American slavery," Douglass met a
Methodist preacher who further decreased his respect for the minis-
try. Rev. Aldin hailed the abolition party, which on this occasion
also included Charles Lenox Remond and Joseph C. Hathaway, and pro-
ceeded to start an argument. In answering the cleric's charge that
the church had no more right to abolish slavery than to abolish
whiggery, Douglass asked why this opinion was not given at the recent
public antislavery gathering. Aldin replied hotly that he did not
speak out at the meeting because he would not put himself "on a
level with a nigger"--and then walked away. The editor of The hehhh
fiheg told his readers that such ministers "steal the livery of the
court of heaven to serve the devil in." They were hypocrites, pro-
fessing to love God "while they despise God's children."26

Incidents of this nature did not dissuade Douglass from con-
tinuing to rely upon certain Garrisonian doctrines and rhetorical
techniques in mounting his anti-clerical attacks, but only served to
broaden the scope of his campaign.27 (Between 1847 and 1850, the
black abolitionist tried to convince Negro Christians to follow his
example and "come out" from the "pro-slavery" churches. Douglass'
"come-outerism" was composed of two different, but complementary as-
pects, the first of which was rooted in his experience at Thomas
James's church in New Bedford, while the second evidenced his hatred
of "complexional institutions."

Within James's small group of believers, as well as in the

 

26N0rth Star, April 7’ 18"}8’ April 11+, 181+8, I'iarCh 9, 181+90

27For further examples of Douglass' impassioned criticism
of the American church and clergy during these years see North Star,
January 7, 18A8, February 18, 1848, March 2#, l8h8, October 12, 1859,
November 2, 18h9, April 26, 1850, June 27, 1850.

212
much larger, more influential black congregations of the North,
Douglass had hoped to witness the birth of a strong antislavery
spirit. Such an occurrence would have evidenced the willingness of
the black Christians to make important personal sacrifices in order
to facilitate the liberation of those fellow countrymen still held
captive in the house of bondage. Unfortunately, he found that, on
the whole, "those who have the ear of our people on Sundays, have
little sympathy with the anti-slavery cause, or the cause of prog-
ress in any of its phases." The black ministers were too frequently
disposed to ”follow the beaten paths" of their predecessors and to
reason that if their fathers "got along pretty well" without med-
dling in abolitionism, they could do the same. The most that they
"aim at," said Douglass, was to "get to heaven when they die"--and
this was not enough to satisfy a believer in the true religion of
love to God ehe man.

In May, 18Q9, at a meeting of the New England Anti-Slavery
Society, Douglass commented on a resolution urging the assembled
abolitionists to leave the Church. Noting that he had faced the
same problem of conscience when he first discovered the "sinful posi-
tion" of American religion, the black abolitionist told the audience
that the only way to convert the Church to the abolition position was
to come out and stand aloof from it. Antislavery men should feel
that a religious organization which fellowshipped with or counten-
anced slavery in any of its aspects was not a Christian body, but a
sinful body and, hence, should not receive their support. Although

he had once considered the Methodist Church to be the purest in the

 

28Speech at Troy, New York, October 6, 18k? in North Star,
jDecember 3, 1847; North Star, July 14, 1848.

213

world, Douglass never regretted leaving the communion to which he
had adhered for "some dozen years.” At first he had been afraid
that he would not be able to live a Christian life without the en-
couragement of agChristian Church, but he eventually came to the
conclusion that a v££22.E22" must have such confidence in principle
endusuch.an "attachment for righteousness" as to be able to stand
alone, and upright, in any situation. Douglass was fully convinced
that those antislavery advocates who remained within the Church soon
became so interested in religious affairs that they neglected the
antislavery cause "almost entirely." For himself, he could no longer
worship in any of the so-called Christian churches of the land any
more than he could in the hold of a pirate ship. When he attended
any of them, he went as a spy, in order that he might more clearly
exhibit their hypocrisy and inconsistency to his abolition audiences?9

During this period, Douglass' anti-clerical remarks were of-
ten aimed at several of Philadelphia's black congregations. He was
especially critical of St. Thomas' Protestant Episcopal Church,

which barred its doors against the cause of the slave, but "welcomed

 

29Liberator, June 8, 18A9. Later in the year, Douglass
showed that his opposition to the American Church did not stem from
any fervent anti-institutionalism on his part. In the August 10, l8h9
issue of his paper, he urged the creation of a "National League" which
would unite the free colored people in a "general organization for
opposing slavery and improving their own condition." When he saw
that his proposal was generating little interest, he promptly at-
tacked the black Christians. "We have reason to believe," he wrote,
"that sectarianism is not among the least of the causes of the hesi-
tation and coldness with which the movement has been received." The
"bigotry of sect” was so narrow and near-sighted that it could "see
good nowhere beyond the limits of its own particular communion."
This "ignorance and intolerance," championed by those "little Popes
and Bishops, who claim and assume to decide for the colored people
what shall be the religious opinions of those who undertake to in-
struct them," stood "directly in the way of that union 'so devoutly
to be wished' for." North Star, August 10, 1849, October 26, 18H9.

21h

Episcopalian slaveholders and slavery defenders" to its pulpit. The
black Episcopalians excused themselves for not opening their church
to the abolitionists on the ground that to do so would be to misuse
a building dedicated to the worship of God. Douglass did not accept
their reasoning. Instead, he compared their belief in the sanctity
of church buildings to the "temple worship” of the ancient Jews. The
Jewish religion sanctified times and places, setting them apart for
certain forms and ceremonies, but Christ placed mercy above sacri-
fice, man above the Sabbath, and worship above time or place. To
regard the house of God as a place too holy to ”plead the cause of
injured man" was to make clean "the outside of the cups and the
platter, whilst disregarding the uncleanness within." Indeed, the
whole notion of regarding church buildings with peculiar reverence
and thinking that the Almighty regarded them with special favor was
"diametrically opposed to the very genius of Christianity" and had
no sanction in the New Testament scriptures. "Houses are for men,"
Douglass wrote, “they need them--God does not."30

The second aspect of the black abolitionist's "come-outerism"
was revealed in a series of articles which appeared in The hehhh
ghee during the early months of 1848. If the black man must attend

a church, he seemed to say, why could he not do some good by asserting

 

30North Star, October 13, 1848. See also North Star,
December 8, 1858, December 29, 18h8. In l8k9 Douglass also criti-
cized the trustees of New York's Zion Church for opening their large
building to the abolitionists only after demanding and receiving a
rental fee of thirteen dollars per evening. This incident made
Douglass hang his head and "blush to think myself associated with
such a people." He found that, like many white religionists, these
Negroes placed "sacrifice above mercy, and getting religion above
doing the will of God." How strange it was, the black abolitionist
marvelled, that ”even colored men, themselves under the ban of pro-
scription and oppression, can adopt the detestable airs of the very
men who are oppressing them!" North Star, April 27, l8h9.

215

several important human rights while doing 50. Thus, Douglass
launched a campaign to convince the black religionists that it would
be in their best interests to abandon their Negro churches and to
attach themselves to predominantly white congregations. Separate
religious organizations were merely Theghe 22323 eh.e_higher 2E.

larger scale." As such, they were at variance with ”the glorious

 

 

cause of liberty and human equality" and diametrically opposed to
the spirit and precepts of the gospel of Christ. Black churches,
like black temperance societies, fraternal organizations, and
schools had been encouraged ”by the very men who hate us, and wish
to get rid of us." Negroes had long considered these institutions
to be necessary because of the proscription they met when attempting
to join white organizations; but now the time had come to withdraw
from all complexional institutions, to "go for equal and universal
brotherhood, and demand admission to all institutions enjoyed by
other men." If, on "the very next Sabbath," every black church
could be abandoned, their members flocking to the doors of the nation's
white churches and demanding admission on equal terms with white
people, the dramatic scene which would be offered to the nation
"would do more to open the eyes of the public to the character of
our wrongs, than any other which we can now think of." "Come, bre-
thren," Douglass implored, ”let us be men, equal men--Christians and
equal Christians; let us show that we know our rights, and mean to

31

assert them."

 

31North Star, February 25, 18h8. See also North Star,
March 2#, 18K8. Perhaps reflecting on his own experiences in New
Bedford, Douglass wrote that, due to the poor "mental qualifications"
of most black ministers, Negro Christians would have gained much more
"in point of elevation and improvement" by remaining in white churches
than they had in forming their own separate religious bodies. he also

 

216

Just as he sought to have black Christians become aware of
the "true nature" of the American Church, Douglass tried to convince
the readers of The North Star that the religious revivals of the day
were divorced from the true spirit of Christ. 0n the lecturing cir-
cuit, he often found the attendance at abolition meetings to be sub-
stantially reduced if a revival was in progress nearby. In such
cases, he charged the local ministers with telling their congrega-
tions that abolitionism was injurious to the cause of religion--that
it would retard the progress of the revival. These encounters, as
well as his "whole experience as a slave, and as a freeman at the
South and at the North" served to confirm for him that "the high
claims of outraged humanity" were never more disregarded than "in
times of what are popularly called religious revivals." To Douglass'
mind, "an out-pouring of the spirit of God” in the days of Christ
and the apostles was of a much higher, holier character. A "revival"
in those times was "in perfect keeping" with seeking to do good, to
relieve distress, and to improve the mental and physical condition
of mankind. Indeed, the abolitionist's critical attitude toward re-
vivals was not meant to be confused with a criticism of Christianity
itself. It was only a condemnation of those revivals which went
"hand in hand with the slave trade" and of those revivalists who
were "loud in their zeal for God," but "heartless and indifferent
about the welfare of man." Against men and events of this character

Douglass vowed to "hurl the most pointed rebukes, and brand them

 

criticized the Negro churches for the "countenance and support"

which they gave to colored schools "and indeed to every other insti-
tution founded on complexion." Douglass further noted that separate
churches were an unnecessary drain on the scarce economic resources
0% ghe northern black community. North Star, March 3, 1848, March 10,
1 k .

217
with the deepest condemnation."32
Not surprisingly, the impact on Douglass of the break with
Garrison, the Mexican War, the Fugitive Slave Act, and the continued
"indifference” of the American Church to the plight of the slave pro-
duced in him a brief period of spiritual depression. Shortly after
the passage of the Compromise of 1850, Rev. Henry Ward Beecher vis-
ited the abolitionist in his Rochester office. Beecher's inquiry
as to the state of Douglass' health brought an unexpected, but under-
standable response from the black editor. "I am all broken up," he
sighed, "done with your church, your Christianity, and your hypo-
crisy. You have given your country over to slavery, and to slave
catchers, and your church sanctions it, as authorized by the Bible."
Seeing that Douglass was in need of some spiritual encouragement,
Beecher promptly sat down with the worried and discouraged abolition-
ist. Taking Revelation 19:6 as his text, he ministered to Douglass'

33

wounded spirit. ”When I arose," Douglass later noted, "I arose

a changed and delivered man. Now, I am in the trade winds of the

"3‘"

Almighty. Subsequent events were to show that the ex-slave was

 

32North Star, March 3, 1848, March 31, 18A8, March 9, 18A9.
Douglass had criticized the Millerites, those advocates of "the doc-
trine of the speedy destruction of the world by fire" because their
doctrines had impeded the antislavery movement. "Instead of labor-
ing to reform the world," he wrote, ”they are laboring to convince
the world that it cannot be reformed. Instead of looking for Christ
as the regenerator of the world, they are looking for him as the de-
stroyer of the world. The consequence of all this is, a virtual
abandonment of all moral and religious reform on their part."
Douglass to William Lloyd Garrison, March 6, 18hh, in Liberator,
March 15, 1844.

 

3'3Revelation 19:6 reads: "And I heard as it were the voice
of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the
voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God
omnipotent reigneth."

EuDouglass, Th Memoriam, p. 27; Holland, Colored Orator,
pp. 256-257; Washington Evening Star, February 25, 1895.

218
indeed becoming somewhat of a changed man--but in ways which Rev.

Beecher, and perhaps Douglass himself, did not yet fully understand.

BOOK FOUR

CHAPTER VIII

STUDENT OF INFIDELITY

The term "infidel" is a surer proof of honesty
of purpose and goodness of heart, in this de-
generate age and country, than that of Christian.
--William Lloyd Garrison
March 20, 1857
During the late 18h0's, William Lloyd Garrison again infuri-

ated his critics by writing and circulating a call for a convention

to oppose the laws punishing Sabbath-breakers. The Boston Evening

 

Transcript believed that those who signed the call were attempting
to replace "orthodoxy" with "Parkerism, or some other Tee." The edi-
tor of the Boston Trumpet declared that he would not be surprised to
find the antisabbatarians launching a campaign "to have all the
meeting-houses closed perpetually, except those they assemble in
themselves." The Christian Watchman denounced the "movers in this
piece of folly and wickedness" and compared the forthcoming meeting
to the Chardon Street Convention of 18h0--that "bootless convention
of ill-starred visages, long heads, long noses, and flat pates."1
Undisturbed by such "priestly clamor and bigoted uproar,"
Garrison asserted that the time had come/to "lay bare imposture, to
expose falsehood, to tear off masks." The anti-Sabbath movement

could no more be suppressed than the earth could be kept from turning

 

1Swift, Garrison, p. 293; Liberator, January 21, 1848,
February 11,.18H .

220

221

on its axis. Even though virulently assailed by ”a corrupt and ar-
rogant priesthood," the "righteous cause" was supported by the exam-
ple of Jesus and by those followers of the Savior who proclaimed
"entire deliverance from the bondage of the law.fl' Its "universal
triumph" was certain.2

The Anti-Sabbath Convention, held at Theodore Parker's
Melodeon on March 23 and 2M, 1848, accomplished little of importance
beyond a series of lengthy resolutions; but the mere fact that it
was held seemed reason enough for one Boston paper to label Garrison
the "Prince of New England infidelity." The Boston Recorder noted
that the most influential speaker, "whose dictates, whether opposed
or not, swayed the whole course of things, was the redoubtable
Garrison.... At every turn in the business, his hand grasped the
steering car; and let his galley-slaves row with what intent they
would, he guided all things at his will."3

According to the abolitionist editor, sabbatical enactments
were similar to those "tyrannical" laws which had, in times past, sent
men to the stake ”in the name of God and for his glory." They were
animated by the same spirit which, in all ages, had persecuted those
who sought to be loyal to God and to their consciences. "Let the
first day of the week stand on its own basis, as the second or third
day stands," he told the Melodeon audience, "and I am satisfied that

it will be much more rationally observed...." As long as the mass

 

2Liberator, January 21, 1848. See also Liberator, March 17,
l8#8; Garrison to Elizabeth Pease, June 20, 1849, Garrison Papers,
Boston Public Library.

3Garrison and Garrison, Life, III, 226; Liberator, April 7,
18h8. Garrison supported the call for another Anti-Sabbath Conven-
tion in l8h9, but was unable to attend. See Liberator, March 16,
18H9, April 20, 18Q9.

222

of Americans held to the observance of a "holy Sabbath” they would
continue to make a "show" of religion on Sunday while behaving in a
decidedly irreligious manner during the rest of the week. In
Garrison's opinion, to "tie men up" to the idea that one day was

- more holy than another and to enforce that idea by the infliction

of penalties in cases of disobedience was to make them religious
hypocrites rather than genuine Christians. Certainly God was able

to give men the strength to consecrate their entire lives to the work
of "doing good continually" without any regard to days, times, or
seasons.

Linking Sabbatical laws with superstition, Garrison urged
working men and women to "hold on to this day of rest, not supersti-
tiously, not as a peculiarly holy day, but intelligently and right-
fully." If they would only put away the vices, crimes, and sins
which so heavily taxed their time and labor and earnestly seek peace,
knowledge, and "true piety," they would be able to "redeem all days
from servile toil," and enjoy a "perpetual Sabbath." Many were the
"terrific stories" which the "priesthood” told about the inflictions
which an allegedly angry God brought upon Sabbath breakers, but,
asked the abolitionist, why did we never hear of the idolatrous, the
covetous, or the adulterous being visited in this manner? Was the
fourth commandment the only one in the Decalogue whose violation ex-
cited the special displeasure of Heaven? According to Garrison, the
answer to these questions was "apparent to all who have any vision."

Since the Sabbath was "the day eT the priesthood"--the day on which

 

“Proceedings of the Anti-Sabbath Convention, Held in the
Melodeon, March 23_ and 25» (Boston, l8k8), pp. 25-26, 28-30, 137.
See also Liberator, March 31, 1848, April 21,18h8.

223

the ministry promoted and perpetuated their craft-~it was to be ex-
pected that they would "bring in God" to smite those who would not
"hallow their harvest day, nor recognize as valid their spurious
credentials.”5

During the afternoon session of March 2}, Garrison moved that
the officers of the convention prepare a memorial to be circulated
throughout the state, signed, and then presented to the next session
of the Massachusetts legislature. Later, in commenting upon this
memorial for the repeal of all laws enforcing the observance of the
Sabbath day, he showed how closely his antisabbatarianism was tied
to his advocacy of freedom of conscience. Noting that there was a
time when the rights of conscience were much more trammelled by legal
prohibitions and penalties than at present, he nevertheless asserted
that at least one yoke remained unbroken-~the compulsory observance
of Sunday as "the Lord's day." To Garrison's mind, the Massachusetts
legislature, in passing the Sabbath laws, had mistaken its powers
and duties. Conscience was not to be governed by political majori-
ties and therefore it was imperative that the government ”be made to
repeal what it has had no right to enjoin." Such a wholesale repeal
would mean that the legislature had finally come to recognize "the sa—

credness of conscience" in matters of religious faith and practice.

 

5Speech at Boston, March 23, 1848, in Liberator, June 2, l8ho;
Speech at Boston, March 23, 18h8, in Liberator, June 13, l8k8. In a
letter to Joseph Congdon, Garrison wrote: ”You are aware that the
prevalent superstition in regard to the holiness of the first day of
the week has been found a mighty obstacle in the path of every reform,
and that it is the stronghold of priestcraft, and of a pharisaical
religion. The most vigorous and systematic measures are in operation
to strengthen that superstition, and to make its yoke heavier upon
the necks of the people." Garrison to Joseph Congdon, December 15,
18k8, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library.

6Speech at Boston, March 23, 1848, in Liberator, March 31,
18h8; Liberator, November 2, lBfig.

22%

During the late ISHO's and throughout the following decade,
Garrison continued both to lash out against "Christian superstition"
and to champion freedom of thought. In November,18h8, he met a young
lady who had been an invalid from childhood as the result of a fall.
Upon learning the identity of the abolitionist, the young woman asked
him to "write a piece in her Album." ‘As Garrison leafed through the
book, his eyes were drawn to an article which had been written by
"an aged and much respected Doctor of Divinity, of the Calvinistic
stamp." The minister had urged the crippled girl to remember that
"her illness did not spring out of the ground"--the inference being,
at least in Garrison's interpretation, that her condition was the
result of a special divine visitation rather than the natural conse-
quence of her fall. Apparently this act of God was designed to teach
the seemingly unfortunate victim humility, to induce her to pray, to
bring her to repentance, and to lead her to Christ. The abolitionist
recoiled at such an inference. He thought it to be "bad logic, and
worse theology.” Certainly there was nothing "miraculous, marvellous,
or uncommon" in being prostrated by sickness. An imparied constitu-
tion was neither the condition nor the product of humility. Emanating
"neither from above, nor from beneath," illness, if curable, was to be
cured by natural processes without regard to any of the "Christian
graces." A resigned and humble spirit, though desirable at all times,
could not straighten a curved spine or mend a fractured limb.7

Early the next year, the Boston editor reviewed a book en-
titled Golden gggg $25 the Christian. In it, the author recounted

one of the "several striking instances" in which the prayers of

 

7Liberator, November 17, 1848, December 29, 1848.

225

Rev. John Flavel were miraculously answered. On one occasion, when
the English fleet was engaged in a fierce naval war with France, the
British minister had called his people to a solemn fast and had
”wrestled in agony with God for the church and nation, but especially
for the poor seamen of Dartmouth, that they might obtain mercy."
According to the account, the Lord apparently heard Flavel and an-
swered him for "not one of that town was killed in the fight, though
many were in the engagement." To assert that a miracle was performed
for the special benefit of the Dartmouth seamen--and to claim that
it was done "at the pious request of Mr. Flavel, who does not appear
to have felt any concern for the poor seamen of France, whether they
were slaughtered or otherwise" was, to Garrison, the height of imbe-
cility. "This," he wrote, ”surely, is not very Christ-like, but it
is very superstitious and absurd."8

By 1849 Garrison had also come to hold some decidedly unor-
thodox views on the divine nature and atoning mission of Christ. In
discussing the atonement, the abolitionist noted that he did not be-
lieve that the righteousness of any being, however ”exalted and
holy," could become a substitute for the unrighteousness of any
other being. Finding it just as paradoxical to talk of the super-
erogatory merits of "any of the Romish saints," he asserted that one
man's intemperance could neVer be cancelled by the strict abstinence
of another-ono man could be morally or religiously good for another
any more than, by eating an extra quantity of food, he could "appease
the appetite of one who is dying from hunger."

Garrison was of the opinion that American Christians tended

 

8Liberator, January 19, 18h9.

226

to engage in a ”great deal of pious sentimentalism" about the atone-
ment of Christ. In many instances their wrongheaded views served
as a "cloak for iniquity." In other cases this "sentimentalism" had
"begotten a most pernicious superstition." Surely, he told his
readers, Christ was "no better than he should have been.” He ful-
filled, but could not surpass the righteousness of the law. Jesus
laid down his life for his enemies. He was obedient even unto the
death of the cross. he was holy, harmless, undefiled. Endeavoring
to promote peace on earth and good will among men, he exemplified
that "spirit by which alone the human race can be reconciled to each
other and to God." In all of these "noble characteristics" Christ
was worthy of imitation, but, according to Garrison, "for what he did
and suffered, the credit is his alone, and can never rationally be
put to the account of another, who is a transgressor."9

Garrison also believed that the "forms and ceremonies" which
were held so dear by many evangelical Christians tended to support
"superstitious beliefs." A loss of "religious vitality" was clearly
evident in any denomination which practiced liturgical or ritual
forms in their worship services. "The more of forms, the more of
formality;" he wrote, "the more of formality, the less of real spiri-
tuality." To Garrison it seemed both a lamentable and damning fact
that while Christians viewed times, seasons, and ordinances as sacred,
they invariably forgot to "remember who man is, and what he is."
American Christians were taught to regard "external things" as "sanc-
tified and holy," but had never learned to treat man in the same man-

ner-~and men were created in the Divine image. According to Garrison,

 

9Ibid.

227

the churches "must reverse the whole of this." There should, he
noted, be nothing sacred under heaven but man. Forms, seasons, and
times were not of heaven, but of man. If they were of any use at
all it was only to elevate man. If such "forms" did not tend to
promote his freedom and happiness, he concluded, they ought to be
"trampled under foot or cast aside."10

Given the nature of Garrison's religious evolution, it was
not too surprising to find that the former Baptist choir boy had
abandoned his early zeal for the "ceremony" of baptism. As early as
1839 he had described a group of believers in Greenfield, Indiana by
noting that they held to "baptism by immersion, and the breaking of
bread every first day of the week." By adhering to these “rites"
they showed that they were "a sect...in legal bondage." Four years
later he asserted that the "religious hopes and reliances" of those
Christians who believed in "ordinances of divine service, and a
worldly sanctuary"--who adhered to "outward baptism, and to the for-
mal observance of the eucharist" were "as frail and as worthless as
the spider's web." By the 1850's, therefore, it was quite under-
standable that Garrison, when asked by his daughter, Fanny, whether
she had ever been baptised, could reply, "No, my darling, you have
had a good bath every morning and that is a great deal better."11

Garrison believed that the "creed" of a "model religious
organization" need be no more complex than that approved by Christ

in Luke 10:27: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart,

...and thy neighbor as thyself." No ”discipline" for such a body

 

loLiberator, June 1, 1849, January 7, 1853.

llGarrison to Samuel J. May, June 22,1839, in Ruchames,
Letters, II, #9R-495; Liberator, February 10, 1843; Villard, Non-
Resistance, p. 7.

228

would work as effectively, or keep the association "so pure and
vital" as'hntrammelled speech" and the "largest liberty of discussion"
since these precious rights were wholly incompatible with supersti-
tion, tyranny, corruption, and phariseeism.12

During the late 1840's and continuing throughout the 1850's,
the abolitionist championed this freedom of thought and expression.
In 18h8, he complained that laws still existed in several of the
states which forbade atheists to testify in court. "Every man," said
Garrison, "must decide for himself, and no one decide for him, as to
the Deity he shall recognise.... Let us be careful how we trample on
human liberty or human conscience." Three years later, in saluting
the appearance of an American edition of Henry George Atkinson and
mggt-—a work which had been condemned by the clergy as "an atheisti-
cal production," Garrison noted that there was no investigation
which an honest mind feared or which an enlightened mind condemned.
The "evil that is in the world" was not that men spent too much time
in reflection or that they refused to be "fettered by traditional
teaching." On the contrary, it was that men were generally disposed
to take things upon trust, to blindly reverence the past, and to
"believe in the existence of a God as they accept of any other pOpu-
lar notion." Certainly, the man who "honestly doubts" was not neces-
sarily a "dangerous member of society." Surely an "inquiring Spirit"

13

was not an inherently irreverent one.

 

12Garrison to Joseph A. Dugdale, May 19, 1853, in Liberator,
July 1, 1853.

13Proceedings of the Anti-Sabbath Convention, pp. 29-30;
Liberator, August 8, 1331.

229

Resting his case on ”the grand fundamental Protestant doc-
trine of the right of private judgment and individual conscience,"
Garrison sought to justify what the more orthodox Christians termed
his "heresies" in regard to the Scriptures. "Concede the right to
every soul to decide for itself what is true, or what is inspired,"
he wrote, "and no man can be an infidel, except he be false to his
own standard." Those Protestants who raised the cry of "infidelity"
against him because he did not accept their view of the Bible were
actually Papists in disguise who greatly enjoyed wearing "the robes
of Infallibility." Upon close examination such men were invariably
found to be "swollen with conceit, stultified through superstition,"
and "contracted by ignorance." Refusing to "heed their fulminations"
or "submit to their rule, for one moment," the Boston abolitionist
asserted that when he was willing to give up his own independent
judgment and to pin his faith upon a mortal "sleeve," he would "re-
pudiate Protestantism, turn Catholic, and kiss the great toe of the
genuine, unadulterated Pope at Rome."14

In Garrison's opinion, much of the confusion and controversy
over the question of biblical interpretation arose from the ”common
error" of regarding the Bible as a unit--a work prepared by a sin-
gle, divine mind. In actuality,it was a compilation of Jewish and
Christian manuscripts, written in different parts of the world, in
ages more or less remote from one another. As to its genuine author-

ship, no book was involved in more obscurity. Therefore, inasmuch

 

L.Garrison to editor London Anti-Slavery Advocate, March 18,
1856, in Liberator, March 21, 1856; Liberator, September 20, 1850,
January 13, 1855. See also speech at Providence, January 11, 1855,
in Liberator, January 19, 1855; Speech at Rochester, February 11,
1857, in Liberator, February 27, 1857.

 

230

as the Bible was "not one production, but many productions,"
Garrison found it easy to understand why, when theologians treated
it as a unit, every portion of which was deemed to be equally sacred,
they were able to justify so many "jarring sentiments" and "con-
flicting practices" by referring to different portions of Scripture.
A "dextrous theologian" found it an easy matter to cull out such
passages as would seem to substantiate a doctrine or defend a prac-
tice which he was zealous to maintain.15

Since the Bible was the product of many different minds and
had never been "designed to be a single volume," it was obvious to
Garrison that the book was not to be received "as of infallible auth-
ority or divine origin." Already, during the first four decades of
the nineteenth century,many ”enlightened minds" had rejected the
"dogma" of plenary inspiration as a "monstrous absurdity." What
"miraculous endowment" was needed to record the fact that unto Job
were born seven sons and three daughters, asked Garrison-~or that
Paul left his cloak at Troas; or that Soloman had six hundred wives
and concubines? Likewise, the abolitionist questioned the assump-
tion that the Scriptures were the "only rule of faith and practice."
Who except "an idolator, a bigot, or an ignoramus" would pretend that

the rights of man originated in or depended upon a piece of parchment?

 

lsLiberator, November 2k, 18h8. See also Liberator, May 25,
1849. In March 18:9, Garrison told his readers that the Bible was
"nothing more than the popular interpretation of it; and that inter-
pretation is ever carefully made to conform to the state of public
opinion, by its clerical expounders.... Once, in this country, it
set forth the divine right of kings; now it is made to conform to
the Declaration of Independence,.... Once it went for the Union of
Church and State; now it teaches no such duty, but the opposite, ac-
cording to the American mode of reading it.... In the hands of the
spirit of Progress, then, the Bible is plastic as clay in the hands
of the potter." Liberator, March 23, 1849. See also Liberator,
February 25, 18h8.

231

Was it not widely held to be a "self-evident truth" that all men
were created equal and endowed by their Creator with inalienable
rights to liberty? Certainly no contempt was cast upon the Bible
by the affirmation that man was "before all books."16

Although Garrison admitted that he had abandoned his "tradi-
tional and educational notions of the holiness of the Bible," he
claimed that he still believed it to embody an "excellence so great"
as to make it "THE BOOK OF BOOKS." Those orthodox believers who
read the accounts of the 1853 Hartford Bible Convention undoubtedly
had much difficulty in believing his latter claim.17 The resolutions
which Garrison offered at this meeting, which had been called for
the purpose of "freely and fully canvassing the origin, authority,
and influence of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures," were greeted
with stamping and hissing from the galleries--a portion of the con-

vention hall occupied largely by divinity students from nearby

Trinity College. While admitting that it would be "as absurd as

 

16Liberator, November 24, 1848, September 20, 1850. See also
Liberator, January 12, 1849; Garrison to Theobald Matthew, n.d., in
Liberator, October 5, 1849. In 1849, Garrison asked, "What has
orthodoxy gained by its belief in the doctrine of plenary inspira-
tion? Has it thereby been rendered more humane, more virtuous, more
honest, more regardful of the rights and interests of mankind, than
the party rejecting it? What light does such a belief throw on any
subject, or how has it aided the cause of science or human eleva-
tion? Let an honest and truthful answer be given to these inquiries,
and it will be seen that the doctrine alluded to is of no practical
utility whatever. To make it a test, therefore, of religious char-
acter is sheer effrontery. It is merely a theological shuttlecock."
Liberator, March 2, 18k9.

17Liberator, November 29, 1848. In discussing the Bible,

Garrison also noted: "As a divine book, we never could understand
it; as a human composition, we can fathom it to the bottom. Whoever
receives it as his master, will necessarily be in bondage to it; but
he who makes it his servant, under the guidance of truth, will find
it truly serviceable.... Whatever excellence there is in it will be
fire-proof; and if any portion of it be antiquated or worthless, let
that portion be treated accordingly."

232

untrue" to deny that the Bible embodied ”a large amount of truth,"
he nevertheless asserted that it was not less absurd and untrue to
deny that it also contained many "fallacious contradictions, mis-
conceptions, misrepresentations, fabulous stories, incredible asser-
tions, and hurtful errors." Instead of being, "as a book," the pure,
unchangeable Word of God given by divine inspiration, the Bible was
merely a ”mixture of good and evil, light and darkness, truth and
error" which was to be read with discrimination and neither "accepted
nor rejected in the gross." This being the case, it was obvious
that the doctrines of the "American church and priesthood" which
held the Bible to be God's Holy Word and the "only rule of faith and
practice" were "self-evidently absurd, exceedingly injurious both to
the intellect and soul, highly pernicious in its application, and a
stumbling-block in the way of human redemption."18

Following the June convention, the abolitionist once again
found it necessary to defend his radically unorthodox beliefs. In
mid-December he noted that any characterization of the Hartford gath-
ering as an "Anti-Bible Convention" would be a "gross departure from
the truth." It had simply been an occasion for "a free and kind
interchange of opinion on an important subject.” Later that month,
in responding to Harriet Beecher Stowe's charge that his paper
tended to "rob 'Uncle Tom' of his Bible," Garrison told the readers

of The Liberator that the more the "anti-slavery coin" was rubbed,

 

18Garrison and Garrison, Life, III, 583; Liberator, April 22,
1853; Proceedings gf the Hartford Bible Convention (New York, 1854),
pp. 142, 559. See also Liberator, July 1, 1853, July 22, 1855.
Garrison defined the term ”human redemption" as a "progression in
knowledge, in wisdom, and in truth; thus perfecting ourselves; sim-
ply a matter of progression--redemption from a low and fallen state,
bringing us up to a high and exalted one." Hartford Bible Conven-
tion, p. 20“.

 

233

the brighter it shines, the more Uncle Tom's Cabin was assailed, the

 

more impregnable it was seen to be, and the more the Bible was
"sifted” the more highly it would be prized-~"if it be all holy and
true." Garrison found it hard to believe that a "full discussion
of the merits of the Bible, pro and con," would induce "Uncle Tom"
to cast the Scriptures aside when even the "infernal cruelty” of
Simon Legree could not shake his trust in God and Christ.19
During the remaining years of the decade, the abolitionist
editor had numerous opportunities to reaffirm and restate his belief
in the maxim which held that if there was truth in the Scriptures
men should receive it, if error, they should discard it. To judge
matters independently, to try them by the "eternal rule of right"
and not by appealing to a certain book as the absolute and conclu-
sive authority was to behave rationally and wisely. While rejecting
the "absurd idea" of the Bible's plenary inspiration, Garrison found
so much truth, so much of the "prophetic spirit," and such "burning
denunciations of oppression" in the Bible that he could call it a
"wonderful book" and note that his pulse quickened whenever he read
its "solemn warnings and stern rebukes." At an antislavery gather-
ing held in 1858, Garrison said that for the past BC years he had
gone to the Bible, quoting and using it in support of justice and
freedom more than any other man in the land. During that same period
of time, the American clergy had gone to the same book in order to
find support and sanction for the institution of slavery. Reflect-
ing on these two diametrically opposed usages of Scripture, he could

not help but conclude that the man who best honored the Bible was

 

lggibgggtgr, December 16, 1853; Garrison to Harriet Beecher
Stowe, November 30, 1853, in Liberator, December 23, 1855.

23%

the one who used it for the most worthy purposes and ends.20

Garrison was both supported and influenced in his religious
beliefs during the 1840's and 1850's by several of the nineteenth
century's more liberal religionists. In l8k9 he told the readers of
his weekly that, when still believing the Bible to be "an inspired
volume, from Genesis to Revelation,” he had entered into a conversa-
tion with Lucretia Mott on the subject of war. Startled by her de-
claration that God had not "authorized or sanctioned war, in any age
or nation," the abolitionist realized that, while having no doubt as
to the prohibition of all war in the New Testament, he had never be-
fore thought of questioning the integrity of the "Jewish record."
He then asked her how she could dispose of those portions of the Old
Testament which said that the Lord had commanded Moses, Joshua, and
others to "wage even wars of extermination." In answering Garrison's
question, Mrs. Mott asserted that she could "more easily believe
that man is fallible, than that God is changeable"--meaning that it
was more likely that the "unknown writers of the Jewish Scriptures"
erred in their impressions of the Lord's requirements than that
"God himself had changed in his moral attributes." Garrison told his
readers that in this reply "so full of good sense and true wisdom,"

he had since found an "easy solution" to many "scriptural difficulties."

 

ZOSpeech at Philadelphia, October 20, 185u, in Liberator,
January 12, 1855; Speech at Worcester, Massachusetts, January 15,
1857, in Liberator, January 23, 1857; Liberator, September 3, 1858.
See also Liberator, April 21, 185k, June 18, 1858. At an 1855 anti-
slavery gathering at Providence, Rhode Island, Garrison urged his
listeners to plant their feet firmly on that eternal principle of
right inherent in the soul of man which was above, before, and super-
ior to all books, parchments, and institutions. He nevertheless de-
clared that the Bible did not sanction slavery, but rather contained
the most abundant and powerful testimonies against it. Speech at
Providence, January 11, 1855, in Liberator, January 19, 1855.

235
Instead of being "killed by the letter" he had been "made alive by

the spirit." During the 1850's the abolitionist continued to'bherish
almost a filial love and the most profound veneration" for Lucretia
Mott and her husband, James.21

Another formative influence on Garrison's religious evolu-
tion was his loyal associate in reform, Henry C. Wright. The Boston
abolitionist had welcomed the former Congregationalist minister to
the New England Anti-Slavery Society in 1835 by noting that he was
a "valuable acquisition to our cause--a fearless, uncompromising and
zealous christian." Since that time Garrison had ably ”taught"
Wright the tenets of radical reform while the ex-Andover seminarian
"instructed" the abolitionist in matters of theology.22

During the l8h0's Garrison not only permitted Wright to intro-
duce and to carry on the "Bible controversy" in the pages of his
weekly, but also showed considerably more sympathy with the views of
the ”heretical” Wright than he did with those of William Goodell,
Henry Grew, and others who sought to defend the doctrine of a divinely
inspired Bible. In 1845, noting that "he's true to God who is true
to man," the editor of The Liberator offered the "hand of fellowship"
to Wright "as a modern 'infidel' of the right stamp.” According to
Garrison, his fellow reformer's views on the nature, spirit, and de-

sign of Christianity, on the brotherhood of the human race, and on

 

21£i2££2£2£a November 9, 1849, November 26, 1852. See also
Romans 7:6 and II Corinthians 3:6.

22Garrison to Henry E. Benson, December 5, 1835, in Merrill,
Letters, I, 569. Lindsay Swift has noted that Wright and Noyes
"preached their own heresies with less force than Garrison, though
he was in theological matters but their pupil." Swift, Garrison,
p. 375. See also Merrill, Wind and Tide, pp. 18h-186; Child,
"Garrison," p. 2350

236

the corruption of existing political, religious, and governmental
institutions were more nearly identical to his own than those of
"almost any other individual." Expressing his deepest sentiments,
he wrote in 1844 that there was "no one, on the wide earth, among
the great circle of my friends, for whom I entertain greater love
and respect" than Henry C. Wright.23

Garrison also continued to be influenced by the ministry of
Theodore Parker. In the controversial divine the abolitionist found
a preacher whose discourses gave him both moral and intellectual
satisfaction. "You have touched, quickened, inspired thousands of
minds," he wrote Parker in early 1859, "which in their turn shall
impregnate other minds with generous and noble sentiments...."
Garrison so greatly admired the clergyman because he felt him to be
somewhat of a kindred spirit. Parker was neither "spell-bound by
tradition," "stultified by ghostly authority," nor "victimized by
pious credulity." He was a bold, indefatigable seeker after the
truth-—a man who dared to do his own thinking, to speak his own
thoughts, and to put into practice the apostolic injunction, "Prove

all things; hold fast that which is good."28

 

23Garrison and Garrison, Life, III, 266; Liberator, October 3,
1845; Garrison to Henry C. Wright, October 1, 1844, Garrison Papers,
Boston Public Library.

“Garrison and Garrison, Life, III, 243; Garrison to Theodore
Parker, January 15, 1859, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library;
Liberator, January 21, 1859. See also speech at Boston, January 23,
1859, in Liberator, January 28, 1859; I Thessalonians 5:21. Russel
Nye has noted that the abolitionist "read Theodore Parker's liberal
Unitarian tracts avidly and held interminable discussions with
Parker." In their biography, Garrison's sons wrote: ”We were en-
couraged also to go to Sunday-school, at the Warren-Street Chapel and
afterwards with Theodore Parker's congregation." They asserted that
"without theological profession or attachment," their father "virtu-
ally became a member” of Parker's "slender congregation." In 1851,
Garrison himself asked a critic: "Surrounded as I am by pro-slavery
churches and a pro-slavery clergy, where would you have me attend

237

Garrison's landing of Parker for espousing ”the cause of
the weak against the strong, the persecuted against the persecutors,
the oppressed against the tyrannical" gave evidence of the fact that
those men and women who most importantly influenced the Boston edi-
tor's religious views during the ante-bellum period also tended to
be sympathetic to the abolition cause. While not in agreement with
everything a Parker, a Wright, or a Mott believed, Garrison found
that the "fruits" which such reform-minded people bore were ample
proof of their'PRACTICAL RIGHTEOUSNESS." To set an upright example
of "manly courage and conscientious integrity" not only showed that
a person was spiritually liberated from the "corrupt and wrong-
headed" notions forwarded by the nation's "time-serving" clergymen,
but it also gave one access to Garrison's mind.25

Just as he believed that there could be "no affinity between
the God who goes for slavery and the God who goes for freedom," he
felt that there could be no affinity between himself and those who
failed to meet his standards of righteousness in regard to the suf-
fering bondsmen. Convinced that antislavery was "of God," he refused

to "walk with those who believe it to be of the devil." Holding

slavery up to condemnation both as an inhuman and an anti-Christian

 

public worship? There is one occupant of a pulpit in this city,
THEODORE PARKER, who bears a bold and unfaltering testimony against
slavery and its abettors; but, religiously, he is branded as a here-
tic. If I listen to his ministration, will you recognize me as
'attending a place of Christian worship'?" Nye, Humanitarian
Reformers, p. 137; Garrison and Garrison, Life, III, 245; Garrison
and Garrison, Life, IV. 336; Garrison to editor London Morning
Advertiser, n.d., in Liberator, September 19, 1851.

2sLiberator, January 21, 1859, January 28, 1859. Garrison
also continued to laud Thomas Paine for ”laying the axe at the root
of the tree of popular superstition, and unmasking religious impos-
ture, whatever may have been his short-comings in other matters."
See Liberator, March 28, 1856, January 28, 1859.

238

institution, Garrison would not receive religious instruction from
those whose conduct was made "thoroughly atheistical" by their re-
fusal to oppose the slave system. He would, instead, fellowship
with those who agreed with him that, "since the advent of the Founder
of Christianity, no effort for the melioration of the condition of
man has been more largely imbued with the religious element, in its
purest and most vital form, than the Anti-Slavery movement."2

In Garrison's opinion, a truly religious man regarded prin—
ciples more than persons, the present more than the past, truth more
than tradition, and humanity more than parchment. He was the man
who refused to go along with the multitude "in any evil way." Re-
turning good for evil and living above that "fear of man which
bringeth a snare," such an individual was ever willing to "be made
of no reputation, and to suffer the loss of all things, for righ-
teousness' sake." The object of Christianity, as taught by its foun-
der, was to "undo the heavy burdens of suffering humanity," not to
increase those burdens. It was to "diminish the hours of toil," not
to multiply them. Could the majority of the nation's churchmen
truthfully say that their adherence to these high moral standards
was perfect enough to make them suitable models for the conduct of
others? Garrison's answer was a resounding, "No!" From one end of
the country to the other, "with honorable exceptions," those who
claimed to be the "authorized expounders of the Word of God" had
undertaken to prove that slavery was in accord with the Old and the

New Testaments, that it was consistent with both natural and revealed

 

26Liberator, December 27, 1850, October 20, 1854. See also
speech at New York City, May 7, 1850, in Liberator, May 24, 1850;
Speech at Syracuse, May 7, 1851, in Liberator, May 25, 1851.

239

religion, and "as a logical deduction," that the antislavery move-
ment was an infidel movement which conflicted with "the will and
word of God." Therefore, said the abolitionist, it was up to the
antislavery "infidels" to vindicate the Christianity of Jesus and to
affirm the non-Christian character of those who would claim that
Christ "winked at slavery, connived at it, or sanctioned it."27

Garrison "would not, for the world" want to be considered a
Christian "in the popular sense." Eighteen hundred years ago the
question ”Do you believe in Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah?" was
"a test question to the Jewish nation." It "proved all classes,"

from the chiefludests, scribes, and Pharisees to the lowly "rabble,"

because whoever answered the question in the affirmative did so "at

 

27Liberator, December 27, 1850; Anti-Sabbath Convention,
p. 155; Speech at New York City, May 9, 1855, in Liberator, May 25,
1855. See also Garrison to editor Christian Witness, n.d., in
Liberator, December 4, 1846; Liberator, March 30, 1849; Speech at
Abington, Massachusetts, July 4, 1853. in Liberator, July 15, 1855;
Speech at Boston, January 27, 1854, in Liberator, February 5, 1854.
Garrison spared few denominations or benevolent organizations in
his denunciation of Christian apostasy. While he felt a "special
attachment” to "progressive Quakerism," the abolitionist believed
the main body of Friends to be "fearfully degenerated, through a
ceremonial, bigoted and time serving spirit." Garrison to James
Miller McKim, September 11, 1858, Garrison Papers, Boston Public
Library; Liberator, December 24, 1852. See also Swift, Garrison,
p. 208; Liberator, December 3, 1852; Garrison to Oliver Johnson,
May 5, 1863, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library. Garrison be-
lieved that Roman Catholics and Protestants agreed "most harmoniously
in principle and practice as to their views of slavery." In 1849 he
wrote: "Not a Catholic priest, not a Catholic journal, can be found
in this great country, pleading for the liberation of the enslaved;
on the contrary, they most heartily stigmatize the abolitionists and
all their movements." Garrison to Theobald Mathew, n.d., in
Liberator, September 14, 1849. See also speech at New York City,
May 7, 1850, in Liberator, May 17, 1850; Garrison to editor Boston
Transcript, n.d., in Liberator, May 31, 1850. For a discussion of
Garrison's quarrel with Father Mathew over fidelity to the anti-
slavery cause see Thomas, Liberator, pp. 369-570; Merrill, Wind 222
Tide, pp. 253-254. For his strictures on the various missionary and
tract societies see Liberator, January 21, 1855; Speech at Boston,
January 26, 1854, in Liberator, February 3, 1854; Garrison to annual
meeting of the Pennsylvania Anti-Slavery Society, October 20, 1857,
in Liberator, October 23, 1857.

 

240

the certainty of being regarded as the offscouring of all things."
In the 1850's, however, this question was of no value as a test of
character. The Christian name had long since ceased to be odious and
had become ”respectable and popular." From being a ”badge of infamy,
and decisive evidence of heresy" which cost those who assumed it
their "reputation, ease, wealth, personal safety, and life itself,"
it had degenerated into a "fashionable appendage." The Christ re-
cognized by the modern-day believer was not the same one who bore
the cross and the crown of thorns. Instead of being buffeted, out-
lawed, and rejected by the rulers and abhorred by the priests, he was
"exalted to the'skies" and "evangelically deified." Those men who
were proud, wealthy, ambitious, and reputable—~"scribes, pharisees,
priests, lawyers, judges, governors, presidents, emperors" were now
the foremost among those claiming the discipleship of Christ.28

What did this "popular faith" indicate as to love of God or
concern for man? asked the abolitionist. "Nothing," was his reply.
The bold and faithful support of "unpopular reform" was now the true
test of love to God and man that the profession of faith in Christ
and His gospel had once been. Garrison believed that if Christianity
was to be considered a faith worthy of acceptance it had to hold all
human beings equally precious in the sight of God. It had to teach
that all men were to be redeemed by the same blood under the same
eternal law, and that they would eventually be judged at "the same
common tribunal." According to Garrison, it was the failure of

American Christians to put these basic tenets into practice which

 

28Speech at Boston, January 28, 1859, in Liberator, February 11,
1859; Garrison to editor London Morning Advertiser, n.d., in Liberator,
September 19, 1851; Speech at Hartford, June 5, 1855, in Liberator,
July 22, 1853. See also Liberator, January 5, 1849.

241

had resulted in."the enslavement of every seventh person in our land,
to be owned, and bought, and sold, and treated as a beast of burden.29

Since he considered it to be ”the effect of true religion to
undo the heavy burdens and let the oppressed go free," it was not
surprising to find Garrison speaking out against those revivals of
religion which did not strike a direct blow at the slave system.
During the Spring of 1858, he viewed the revivals which were then
spreading "like an epidemic in all directions, over a wide extent of
country" as an "emotional contagion without principle," an "imposi-
tion upon weak and unenlightened minds." The revival ferver was a
diversion from the field of reform and the work of "practical righ-
teousness" to the furtherance of "a pharisaical piety and sectarian
narrowness." It was "not of heaven," but "of men"--of men, moreover,
who were known to be "enemies of progress, in all its unpopular mani-
festations." While the abolitionist granted that some "incidental
good" might come from a national revival of religion, he felt that
it would be more likely to promote meanness and delusion than human-
ity and genuine piety. Garrison believed that the rapidity with
which the revival spirit had spread without encountering any opposi-
tion from "popular wickedness and organized villany" was conclusive
evidence of its "spurious and worthless" character. Since it was

viewed with complacency and approbation by "all who are hostile or

 

29Speech at Hartford, June 5, 1853, in Liberator, July 22,
1853; Speech at Philadelphia, December 4, 1853, in Liberator,
December 9, 1853; Speech at Abington Massachusetts, July 30, 1859,
in Liberator, August 5, 1859; Speech at Boston, May 26, 1857, in
Liberator, June 12, 1857. See also speech at New York City, May 7,
1850, in Liberator, May 17, 1850; Garrison to editor Boston Transcript,
May 17, 1850, in Liberator, May 24, 1850; Speech at New York City,
May 10, 1854, in Liberator, May 19, 1854; Speech at Boston, May 27,
1857, in Liberator, June 5, 1857.

242

indifferent to the cause of down-trodden humanity," he was certain
that the revival would give no alarm to ”the corruption, the dema-
gogueism, or the demon spirit of slavery in the land." According
to the Boston editor, the appearance of a genuine religious revival
would "scare James Buchanan so that he could not sleep o'nights."
The entire South would then be "up in arms" attempting to resist
the "invading spirit," and, "if possible, to lynch it.”30
Garrison greatly lamented the fact that, after some twenty-
five years of unrelenting antislavery labor, an "overwhelming pro-
portion” of the nation's church members were still disposed "not
merely to 'apologize for the sin of slavery,‘ but to deny that hold-
ing slaves is necessarily a sin at all." From the beginning, he
said, the antislavery movement had sought the cooperation and help
of all men, parties, and religious bodies. The abolitionists them-
selves were members of these various denominations and parties and
had remained in them until all hope of their joining the antislavery
crusade was extinguished. When the reformers saw that the churches
were "arraying themselves on the side of slavery," they abandoned
their pews and stood by the side of the slave. Immediately the
churchmen tried to discredit their testimony by calling them ”fana-
tics" and "infidels." ”Were it not for the position of the clergy
and the churches every where," wrote Garrison, "how speedily would
the Anti-Slavery cause be triumphant in all the North!" For their
numerous acts of consummate wickedness the American church and

clergy had been, and would continue to be censured by the abolition

 

30Liberator, January 10, 1840, April 30, 1858; Speech at
New York City, May 11, 1858, in Liberator, May 21, 1858. See also
speech at Boston, May 50, 1855, in Liberator, June 8, 1855.

245
party. "Surely, Garrison noted, "a fearful responsibility is rest-
ing upon them; and to them is applicable all the righteous denuncia-

tions of the prophets to the oppressive and obdurate Jews."31

 

31Liberator, May 7, 1858, September 3, 1858; Garrison to
Helen E. Garrison, October 29, 1858, Garrison Papers, Boston Public
Library. See also Liberator, August 8, 1851; Speech at Philadelphia,
December 5, 1853, in Liberator, December 9, 1853; William Lloyd
Garrison, No Compromise with Slavegy: An Address Delivered in the
Broadway Tabernacle, New York, February 14, 1854 (New York: American
Anti—Slavery Society, 18547, pp. 3- 4.

CHAPTER IX
REJECTION OF THE CHRISTIAN'S GOD

Our worship abounds with honor for God, and
contempt for man. Away with all such wor-
ship; the sooner the world is rid of it, the
better.
--Frederick Douglass
October 13, 1848
When Frederick Douglass rejected the slaveholding ”servants
obey your masters" theology, broke his bonds, and fled to the North
in 1838, he bore witness not only to the fact that he had been strug-
gling with the complex problem of personal liberty, but also that
he had begun to formulate a concept of the relationship between
God's spiritual power and man's physical presence in working out
solutions to the problems of a sinful world. Uncle Lawson had
taught him both to trust in the Lord for deliverance from bondage
and to prepare himself for and to work toward the day of freedom.
Heeding this advice, the young slave prayed to God while eagerly
seeking the knowledge and skills necessary to live the life of a free
man. If, as he later noted, the Holy Bible was ”peculiarly the com-
panion of liberty," then surely the process of learning to read the

Sacred Book was an important stepping stone on the path toward that

liberty.l

 

1Douglass, "Bibles for the Slaves," p. 125. At an American
Anti-Slavery Society meeting in 1853, Henry hard Beecher made the
comment that he would rather wait 75 years for slavery to be abol-
ished by Christianity than have emancipation be decreed in only 50

2m.

2h5

At midcentury, Douglass continued to believe that ”all
things are possible with God," but that man must himself play a
major role in alleviating the world's problems. By this time he had
become alienated from the American profession of religion and the
Church of his youth. He had witnessed too much prejudice, proscrip-
tion, and hypocrisy in the religious bodies of the land to ally him—
self with such a pharasaical faith. The ex-slave would, instead,
cling to the true Christianity of his Savior and to those men and
organizations which evidenced a love for this "pure, peaceable, and
gentle" creed. The change which occurred in Douglass' religious
views after 1850 was more in the nature of a shift in emphasis than
in a wholesale abandonment of past beliefs. he had already become
disillusioned with the spiritual character of the earthly church.
Now he appeared to be losing some of his early faith in the power of
the Heavenly Father. The complementary nature of the God-man rela—
tionship in attempting to eradicate the problems of slavery, poverty,
and vice became a relationship weighted on the side of man. During
the 1850's and 1860's, Douglass' love of God was subtly transformed
into a veneration of man and his works while the doctrine of true
Christianity was changed into a personalized social gospel.

In 1848 Douglass had asserted that the anchor of the reform-
er‘s faith must "repose in the bosom of God" rather than in the un-
stable and ever-shifting sands of worldly expediency. There alone

could one find security from the temptations presented by the love

 

years from motives of a selfish commercial interest. To this asser-
tion Douglass replied, "If the reverend gentleman had worked on
plantations where I have been, he would have met with overseers who
would have whipped him in five minutes out of all his willingness to
wait for liberty." Holland, Colored Orator, p. 21%.

2A6

of ease and the desire to ”stand well" with a wicked and perverse
generation. By having this trust in the Supreme Being, mortal man
could go up against the most terrible storms of adversity and still
stand ”as firm as the pillars of heaven.”2 In these sentiments
Douglass evidenced his belief in the vital interaction between God
and man. Through God, the reformer would be supplied with the confi-
dence and courage necessary to wage an all out battle against earthly
wickedness. At a celebration of West India Emancipation in August
of that year, he again demonstrated this belief in the interdepen-
dence of the earthly and heavenly powers. The object of the assem-
bly, Douglass noted, was to congratulate ”our disenthralled breth-
ren" of the West Indies on their peaceful emancipation, to express
“our unfeigned gratitude to Almighty God, their merciful deliverer,”
and to bless the memory of "the noble men through whose free and
faithful labors the grand result was finally brought about." Surely
the liberation of the bondsmen would not have come about unless
there had been a union of purposeful action between God and man.3

At the time of these statements, Douglass had, however, al-
ready begun to shift the emphasis in the God-man equation to the side
of the mortals. In an article entitled ”What are the Colored People
Doing For Themselves?," the editor of Th3 Nggth Stag asserted that
the black man's destiny in America, "for good or for evil, for time
and for eternity, is, by an all-wise God, committed to us." Negroes

would become ”improved and elevated" only as fast as they endeavored

 

2Speech on William Smith O'Brien, 18Q8, Douglass Papers,
Library of Congress.

3Speech at Rochester, August 1, 1848, in North Star,
August 4, 1848.

 

2h?

to effect the changes themselves. They would rise or fall, succeed
or fail, by their own merits. "Get wisdom--get understanding," he
urged his readers. "It is idle, a hollow mockery, for us to pray to
God to break the oppressor's power, while we neglect the means of
knowledge which will give us the ability to break this power." God
would continue to help those who helped themselves, but according to
Douglass, it was imperative that the black man place more emphasis
on the cultivation and development of the human intellect than on
the seeking of divine assistance.

Indeed, not only the human intellect, but also the entire
human form was becoming more and more sacred to the ex-slave. In
discussing the Missouri Compromise and the Kansas-Nebraska Bill in
1854, Douglass told his audience that a person who would enslave a
child of God would not hesitate to disregard even the most sacred of
compacts. Nothing could be properly respected when mankind was de-
spised and trampled upon in this manner. "Beneath the sky," he said,
"there is nothing more sacred than man." By 1861 he was ready to
bridge the gap between earth and heaven and to condemn the American
system of slavery for making deliberate warfare against human nature--

"5

for striking down "the God—like form of man.

 

“North Star, July 14, 1848.

5Speech at Chicago, November, 1854, in Foner, Life and

Writings, II, 32%; Douglass' Monthly, July.l86l. Douglass further
evidenced his belief in the nearness of Humanity to Divinity by writ-
ing, "The man that will go to God, or to the Bible, to look for argu-
ments in support of a desire to work his brother man without wages,
is a hypocrite as well as a scoundrel, and is below the level of ar-
gument. Some things are too evidently wrong to admit of argument or
apology. Humanity instinctively turns from Slavery with a shudder.
he have here the utterance of the voice of God in man, and to its
high and instantaneous teaching we may listen in preference to any

voice for Slavery drawn from the Bible." Douglass‘ Monthl , March,
1861.

 

2&8

The lecture on self—made men, which Douglass wrote in 1855
and delivered many times thereafter is a prime example of the new
God-man relationship which Douglass formulated. These men were "in-
debted to themselves for themselves." If they traveled far, it was
because they had made the road on which they traveled. If they as-
cended to the heights, it was because they had built their own ladder.
Flung overboard in a midnight storm on the "broad and tempest-tossed
ocean of life" without oars, ropes, or life preservers, they never-
theless ”bravely buffeted the frowning billows with their own sinewy
arms" and swam to safety. As architects of their own fortunes, such
men had either shunned or had been prohibited from entering the
world of schools, academies, and other institutions of learning.
Nevertheless, they somehow managed to get an education and to ”hew
out a way for themselves.” The "hewing" was hard work, but the self-
made man realized that ”faith itself does not seem worth much, if
anything, in the absence of work." That Douglass considered himself
to be this type of man is obvious. ”I plead guilty at once to the
implied charge that I am a self made man," he wrote, "--and what is
more, I am not ashamed of that charge."6

In the June, 1861 issue of his new publication, Douglass'
Monthly, the black abolitionist gave another example of his new em-

phasis on the power of man in solving the problems of mankind. On

 

6Holland, Colored Orator, pp. 250-255; Speech on Self-Made
Men, n.d., Douglass Tapers, Library of Congress. See also Douglass'
Monthly, March, 1859; Foner, Frederick Douglass, pp. 175, 405.
Douglass' speech also contained a telling rebuke of the black clergy:
"Our colored ministers are somewhat remarkable for the fervor with
which they pray for knowledge; but, thus far, they are not remarka-
ble for any wonderful success; in fact, they who pray loudest seem
to get least. They are able to give us abundance of sound for desti-
tution of sense." Holland, Colored Orator, p. 252.

 

 

 

249
this occasion he felt that it was necessary to warn the abolition-
ists that their work was not completed while the bondsmen remained
in chains. He accused the antislavery forces of hoping and believ-
ing "that by some means now inscrutable," Providence would bring
freedom to the slaves. Douglass, too, was hopeful, but did not ex-
pect to see ”the waters roll asunder, and give to those now in bond—
age a dry road to freedom, and then roll back again and swallow up
the pursuing hosts of our modern Pharaohs." He did not expect God
to send manna from heaven to satisfy the hunger of the emancipated
bondsmen nor did he hope to see water gush forth from solid rock to
quench their thirst. In saying these things he did not wish to be
understood as casting aside the "consoling support" which came from
the assurance that ”all the Divine powers of the universe" were on
the side of freedom and progress. In fact, no people ever needed to
have faith in this proposition more than those who were contending
against the powerful and insidious system of American slavery. The
important point, however, was that the abolitionists needed this
faith to make them more able to 1935. If they were to fold their
hands and leave the cause of the slave to Providence,they would be
guilty of the same "great and deadly sin" that the American Church
and clergy had committed. The religionists had avoided "every cross
which required of them manly and heroic qualities." By committing
“all" into the hands of the Lord they had created a standing excuse
for inaction-~a perpetual apology for their guilt and complicity in
the crime of slavery. The slaveholder himself was "quite secure"
from Divine wrath if he could only escape the animus of mortals. An
"anti-slavery movement in heaven” gave such tyrants no alarm as long

as it remained divorced from earthly affairs. Indeed, a meeting for

250

prayer was far less alarming to the slaveholder than ”a meeting for
works."7

Just as Douglass placed a new emphasis on man in the God-man
relationship, he also began, more than ever, to focus his concern
on those aSpects of the true Christianity which urged mankind to help
those in need and to "visit the fatherless and the widow in their af-
fliction." The cure for the ills of society was to be found only in
a revival of the genuine, practical Christianity of the New Testa-
ment. The ”grand reason" for the continued existence of slavery in
America was that the nation was too "religious.” It had substituted
a form of godliness, an "outside show," for "the real thing itself."
American Christians had substituted religion for humanity. The phar-
isaical Christians would gladly send Bibles and missionaries "from
the rivers to the ends of the earth," but were not nearly as eager
to take up the cause which was so near to the heart of Christ.8 At
the very outset of His mission among the children of men, Jesus
placed Himself on the side of the enslaved, the oppressed, and the
needy. He preached the gospel to the poor, ministered to the broken-

9

hearted, and "set at liberty them that are bruised." Here, indeed,

 

7Douglass' Monthly, June,l86l. In December, 1868, a friend
urged Douglass to place his trust in God: "I have not lost my faith
and hope for you, but it does seem a solemn serious time, as if you
had now to decide what your future life is to be.... You have much
real strength of character, why will you not use it for your own good--
there is only one safe path, one true unfailing help, they who $51 by
dgy, keep near to God, never fall into eire—-you know it is so. EHJow
very thankful I should be, if I knew, you would try for this. EIJt
makes thousands happy and blessed..., but I never yet heard of any one,
who became better or happier by deserting its protection." E. Peirson
to Frederick Douglass, December 22, 1868, Douglass Papers, Library of
Congress.

Douglass here refers to the Messiah's kingdom as described
in Psalm 72:8 and Zechariah 9:10.

9Douglass here refers to Luke 4:18.

251

was the exemplar of the true Christianity. To Douglass, those
Christians who would reject such a gospel of compassion were un-
worthy of the great name of the Savior. The neglect of the oppressed,
the fatherless, and the widow was incompatible with "acceptable wor-
ship." It changed solemn forms of piety into disgusting shams "to
be denounced both of Heaven and of men." He felt that any religious
skepticism which arose out of a consideration for justice and human-
ity was far less to be dreaded and deplored than ”sound creeds" which
were coupled with a heartless indifference to the rights of the "low-
ly and despised ones of earth." He would always prefer the fellow-
ship of a skeptic who recognized slaves as men to that of a devout
saint who could only regard them as chattels excluded from the dig-
nity of humanity. “Forever commend us to a sound man in preference
to a rotten religionist," he wrote. "The latter is far more danger-
ous to a genuine Christianity than the former."10

The changes in Douglass' conception of the true Christianity
and of God's relationship to man did not signify a radical break
with the past, but rather a shift in thought which was deeply rooted
in his early life. As his reaction to Sandy Jenkinsksherbal magic
had shown, the ex-slave was an early disbeliever in non-Christian
supernaturalism. Thus, it took only a simple mental step for him to

become critical of all forms of supernaturalism, including the

 

1OIt is obvious that Douglass distinguished between the power

of the Creator-Judge God and the example of the Christ who came to
earth "in the likeness of sinful flesh." Douglass' Monthly, April,
1859, June, 1860; North Star, June 1, 1849; Speech at Rochester,
January, 1855, in Foner, Life and Writings, II, 545. In July, 1859
Douglass wrote that Christ's religion ”was for man, as well as for
God, and for the poor mag, especially and peculiarly for the poor
man.... The religion of Jesus is like himself, a copy of himself.
His heart is with the bleeding heart of humanity....” Douglass'
Monthl , July, 1859.

 

252

intervention of God into human affairs. As James McCune Smith noted
in 1855, Douglass possessed "an original breadth of common sense"
which enabled him to see, and weigh and compare whatever passed be-
fore him, but which "never succumbed to the marvelous nor the super-
natural."ll

This “common sense" made Douglass attribute certain character-
istics of the natural world to the workings of the Laws of Nature,
rather than to God, the Creator. In his “Self-Made Man" speech, the
black abolitionist noted that Nature was a great worker, tolerating
no contradictions to her wise example without certain rebuke. She
caused inaction to be followed by stagnation, stagnation by pesti-
lence, and pestilence by death. "General [Benjamin] Butler, busy
with his broom, could sweep yellow-fever out of New Orleans; but this
dread destroyer returned when Butler and his broom were withdrawn,
and the people piously ascribed to Divinity, what was simply due to
dirt."12

On another occasion, the editor of Douglass' Monthly asserted
that, in their support of the slave system, the slaveholders were
fighting against the eternal Laws of Nature. Even if they temporar-
ily succeeded in compelling the North to sue for peace, "Nature with
the aid of free discussion would set her--herself right in the end."
Nature, Truth, and Humanity were great forces and they must prevail.
Douglass told his listeners: "A great man once said it was useless

to re-enact the laws of God, meaning thereby the laws of Nature.

But a greater man than he will yet teach the world that it is useless

 

lDouglass, Bonda e, pp. xviii-xix. See also Mays, Negro's
60d, pp. 124-127 0

12Holland, Colored Orator, p. 255.

253
to re-enact any other laws with any hope of their permanence."13
Douglass' increased reliance on the power and wisdom of man
can also be traced to his early realization that it was not God, but
man who was responsible for the evils of slavery. He had come to this
conclusion after reflecting upon the events which he had experienced
and witnessed both on the plantation and in Baltimore. Surely it
was not God who had chained his forefathers to the hold of a crowded
slave ship. The guilty party was human-~perhaps the same type of hu-
man as Thomas Auld, who could claim to have entered into a close
spiritual relationship with God while continuing to inflict count—
less cruelties upon the slaves. If certain men were alone responsi-
ble for the creation of the slave system, could not a different
group of men be alone responsible for its destruction? The Douglass
of the 1860's answered this question in the affirmative}!+
Later events in the life of the ex-slave also influenced him
toward his new, more liberal beliefs. The shift from being merely
one of the Garrisonian reformers to becoming an editor and an impor-
tant national figure in his own right encouraged him to value more
highly the acts of the individual. By severing his ties with

Garrison he became, more than ever, his own man. The newspaper ca-

reer expanded the scope of his abilities, gave him an increased sense

 

13Speech at New York City, February, 1863, in Dou lass‘
Monthl , March, 1863. See also Douglass' Monthly, January, 1 59;
Speech at Chicago, November, 1854, in Foner, Life and Writings, II,

317.

1+Douglass did not, of course, completely abandon his re-
spect for God and His power. See Douglass to William Still, July 2,
1860, in William Still, The Underground Rail Road (Philadelphia:
Porter & Coates, 1872), p. 598; Speech at hew York City, May 11,
1857, in Foner, Life and Writings, II, 411-412; Speech at Canandaigua,
New York, August 4, 1857, in Foner, Life and Writings, II, 434;
Douglass' Monthly, January, 1859, February, 1859.

 

254
of authority, and made him more aware of his responsibilities as a
spokesman for the poor and needy. For some six years prior to the

launching of The North Star, Douglass had traveled almost exclu-

 

sively in company with white abolitionists and had moved in a white
middle class milieu. In the office of the EEEE: Douglass could con-
cern himself with all problems growing out of the color line instead
of simply concentrating on abolitionism. His attention could reach
out to the question of Negro exclusion from "white" churches, to the
practice of racial segregation in the public schools, and to an anal-
ysis of the principles underlying separate accomodations for the two
races. As Benjamin Quarles has noted, after assuming the editorship
Douglass ”showed a keen awareness of the problems confronting the
rank and file of Negroes...." This awareness helped shape the con-
tours of his new version of the true Christianity.15

Having largely alienated himself from the more orthodox mem-
bers of the clergy by his stand against the American profession of
religion, Douglass came to associate with many of the nation's most
liberal religionists. Indeed, the mere presence of men such as
Henry C. Wright among the Garrisonian ranks was enough to make many
orthodox Christians eschew association with the antislavery move-
ment in any of its aspects. That Douglass did not run from the pre-
sence of several of these men is a significant fact—-one which links
him with the more liberal theology of the day and which bears witness
to another important influence upon his religious views.

Booker T. Washington has written that Douglass was more fully

under the influence of the theological opinions of Theodore Parker

 

15

Quarles, Frederick Douglass, p. 96; Douglass, Life, p. 264.

255

than of any other school of religious thought. "His best friends
and associates were among the Unitarians, the Quakers, and others of
liberal faith." Indeed, when Parker, whose sermons had been wel-
comed into the columns of Douglass' paper, passed away in 1860, the
black abolitionist paid him a glowing tribute. Among all of the
“great and good” people of New England, Douglass recognized none
greater or better than the Unitarian divine. The controversial min-
ister was an honest man-—open, firm, and fearless. Like Christ, his
strong heart beat in sympathy for the oppressed and injured while,
at the same time, it burned with the hottest indignation toward
those oppressors and tyrants who "lorded it over the humble and help-
less." These qualities endeared Parker to the ex-slave's heart and
caused Douglass to include him in the ranks of "genuine" Christians.
"Ten thousand times over” would he prefer the religion of Theodore
Parker, with its downright honesty, its sympathy for the poor, "its
honor to man as man” without respect to "color, class or clime" to
that "miserable trash" which passed as evangelical religion in
America.1

Later in life, on a trip to Florence, Italy, Douglass visited
Parker's burial plot. As the elderly abolitionist looked upon the
grave, he could not help recalling the many services which the minis-
ter had rendered to the cause of freedom-~"freedom not only from
physical chains but the chains of superstition-~those which not only
galled the limbs and tore the flesh--but those which marred and woun-
ded the human soul.” He thought back to the time that he had deliv-

ered an antislavery lecture in Parker's church in West Roxbury,

 

16Washington, Frederick Douglass, p. 321; wuarles, Frederick

Dou lass, p. 85; Douglass' Monthly, July, 1860.

256

Massachusetts. ”That its doors opened to me in that dark period
was due to him,” Douglass noted. "I remember, too, his lovingkind-
ness when I was persecuted for my change of opinion as to political
action. Theodore Parker never joined that warfare upon me.... He
was the large and generous brother of all men."17

Douglass also had great respect for America's most infamous
agnostic, Robert G. Ingersoll. The black abolitionist first met
this "distinguished lawyer and eminent philanthropist" after a friend
had urged him to spend the night at the Ingersoll residence in
Peoria, Illinois. In Ingersoll the abolitionist found a man with
"real living human sunshine in his face, and honest,manly kindness
in his voice." The heartfelt greeting which he received that day
caused Douglass to compare him with those pious Christians who "hate
the Negro while they think they love the Lord." Incidents such as
this, he wrote ”have greatly tended to liberalize my views as to the
value of creeds in estimating the character of men." They brought
him to the conclusion that to be an "infidel" no more proved a man

to be selfish, mean, and wicked than to be an "evangelical" proved

him to be honest, just, and humane.1

 

l7Douglass' Diary, May 11, 1887, Douglass Papers, Library of
Congress; Douglass, Life, pp. 588-589.

18Douglass, Life, pp. 461-462, 540, 566; Quarles, Frederick
Douglass, pp. 293-294; Parker, ”Reminiscences," p. 553. In 1 5
Douglass told an audience in Washington, D.C.: "Well, my friends,
better be an infidel and a so-called blasphemer than a hypocrite who
steals the livery of the court of heaven to serve the devil in. In-
fidel though Mr. Ingersoll may be called, he never turned his back
upon his colored brothers, as did the evangelical Christians of this
city on the occasion of the late visit of Mr. Moody." Of that ear-
lier infidel, Thomas Paine, Douglass wrote in 1859: "EEJven hg,
was not so lost to all that is just, honest and humane, as not to
see and feel that slavery was a great wrong. He not only held sla-
very to be a great wrong, but had the courage and manliness to de-
nounce it as an abomination. Ten thousand times over we prefer the

257

Douglass' new emphasis on the power of man did not cause him
to single out his former companion, killiam Lloyd Garrison, for any
special praise. In fact, during this period, the black abolitionist
seemed to be striving to downgrade Garrison's image as the prime
mover of the antislavery crusade. During January, 1855, in a speech
before the Rochester Ladies' Anti-Slavery Society, Douglass denied
that any man then living had the right to claim the antislavery move-
ment "as a thing of his invention, or of his discovery.” The Spirit
which animated the abolitionists was not a “new thing under the sun,"
but had, like the great forces of the physical world, "slumbered in
the bosom of nature since the world began." While William Lloyd
Garrison had helped to revive the spirit in the United States, it was
due to truth to say that the Boston editor "neither discovered
Eabolitionism's] principles, originated its ideas, nor framed its
arguments." The only new concept that he brought to the movement was
the doctrine of immediatism—-and even this was borrowed from other

19

sources.

 

no-religion of TOM PAINE, with his hatred and denunciation of oppres-
sion, to the miserable, time-serving, hypocritical, and sneaking piety
of the American Tract Society...." Speech at hashington D.C., 1885 in
Philip S. Foner, ed., The Life and Writings of Frederick Douglass, IV
(New York: International Publishers, 1955i 325; Douglass' Monthly,
July, 1859.

19Speech at Rochester, January, 1855, in Foner, Life and Writ-
ings, II, 336, 339, 341. See also speech at Canandaigua, New York,
August 4, 1857, in Foner, Life and writings, II, 428; Douglass to
Charles Sumner, April 24, 1855, Sumner Papers, Harvard University.
In 1860, Douglass explained this shift away from his earlier charac-
terization of Garrison as "the Moses raised up by God to deliver the
black man from bondage”: "I have been very much modified both in feel-
ing and opinion within the last fourteen years. When I escaped from
slavery, and was introduced to the Garrisonians, I adopted very many
of their opinions, and defended them just as long as I deemed them
true. I was young, had read but little, and naturally took some things
on trust. Subsequent experience and reading have led me to examine
for myself. This has brought me to other conclusions. When I was a

258

The boston editor was even less charitable to his former
friend. He characterized Douglass' autobiography as a volume "reek-
ing with the virus of personal malignity" toward the Garrisonians.
Although ably written, it was nevertheless full of ”ingratitude and
baseness." The bitter feeling between the two abolitionists even-
tually became so intense that they refused to speak to each other.

In February, 1857, following an antislavery meeting in Syracuse,
Garrison told Helen that ”Douglass was present at the meetings, but
wisely and fortunately remained dumb throughout. I did not and would
not speak to him." Three years later, in a letter to Samuel J. May,
he asserted that the ex-slave was thoroughly base and selfish. ”In
fact," wrote Garrison, "he reveals himself more and more to me as
destitute of every principle of honor, ungrateful to the last degree,
and malevolent in spirit. He is not worthy of respect, confidence,
or countenance."20

Douglass reacted to this criticism in a fairly Calm, though
far from pacific manner. He noted that a man could not work "in ear-
nest and confiding affection" with a group of his fellows for twelve

or more years without having his "inmost soul" become entwined in a

 

child, I thought and spoke as a child." Speech at Glasgow, Scotland,
March 26, 1860, in Foner, Life and Writin s, II, 479-480.

OGarrison to George Thompson, in Liberator, January 18,
1856; Garrison to Helen Garrison, February 17, 1857. Garrison Papers,
Boston Public Library; Garrison to Samuel J. May, September 28, 1860,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library; kuarles, ”Breach," p. 154.
Both of the abolitionists continued to attend the annual meetings of
the parent society until Garrison's withdrawal in 1865. After an
1863 session Garrison wrote, "Frederick Douglass ventured to show
himself, and participated in the discussions, which created some
little friction. In view of his ungrateful and treacherous course
towards our Society, his assurance seemed to me excessive. 'Confi-
dence is a plant of slow growth,‘ and in his case will be particularly
so with me. Still, I admire and wonder at his ability." Garrison to
Helen Garrison, May 14, 1863, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library.

259

network of "subtle and mysterious cords.” Some of these cords,
though broken, would undoubtedly continue to cling about him through
all the years of his life. Nevertheless, whether this philosophy
was genuinely sound mattered little in this case. It was enough to
mention the "simple truth" about the continued interest which he felt
in ”the life and fortunes" of the "sect" to which he had been, or
‘thought he had been, strongly attached. This interest would not,
however, prevent him from feeling a certain degree of honest satis-
faction over "any little healthy, though disagreeable commotion" that
he might be permitted to witness in the operations of the sect.
Douglass thought that to hold such a feeling toward the Garrisonians
was only right and proper since they were continuing to carry on a
veritable war against him "with no delicate regard to the means."21
The ”war" which was carried on in the columns of Th3 Nggth
S33; and several other papers during these years centered on the
older issue of giving Bibles to the slaves. At the fifteenth annual
meeting of the American Anti-Slavery Society, Douglass denounced
those who thought that the best method of freeing the bondsmen was
to circulate tracts and Bibles among them. Give them freedom first,
he said, and then they will find the Bible for themselves. These re-
marks were in sharp contrast to the address which Henry Bibb gave a
few weeks later at a meeting of the American and Foreign Anti-Slavery
Society in favor of the Bible distribution plan. Douglass found
Bibb's speech to be ”made up of a most illogical display of cant

phrases about the bible" and its power to abolish slavery if given

 

21Douglass' Monthly, July, 1859; Douglass to Secretary of the
Edinburgh New Anti-Slavery Association, July 9, 1857, Douglass Papers,
Library of Congress.

 

260

to the slave. The speech was ”a poor thing," but one which would
undoubtedly satisfy that "namby-pamby” class of persons who cared a
great deal about the souls of men while caring nothing for their
bodies. It was all well and good, Douglass declared, to champion
the slave's right to the Bible and the spelling book, but neither of
these rights should be made to take precedence over the great and
comprehensive assertion of his "right to personality," as the founda-
tion of all other rights.22

Samuel Ringold hard and Henry Highland Garnet soon joined
the controversy on the side of Bibb. Rev. Garnet was not content
to stay on the Bible issue, but instead charged Douglass with sev-
eral heresies against the Christian faith. To the charge that he
was opposed to giving the Holy Scriptures to the slave, Douglass re-
plied that instead of inferring that he regarded the Bible as a "per-
nicious book," Garnet should have noted that he was an ardent advo-
cate of "giving the glgyg himself, gg the only condition upon which
hg could really own 2 B2213." For the minister's charges that he
had denied the inspiration of the Scriptures and had spoken "lightly
and contemptuously" of the religious conviction of the colored peo-
ple, Douglass had only contempt. When accused of deserting the
Methodist Church after once being a preacher of that communion, how-
ever, the ex-slave readily agreed. Those who were acquainted with
the character of that body and who had a spark of self-respect, or
felt a single pulsation of sympathy for the downtrodden slave would

surely commend him for doing so.2

 

22Liberator, May 18, 1849; North Star, May 18, 1849, June 22,

 

1849.

23North Star, June 15, 1849, June 22, 1849, August 17, 1849.
In July, 1849, Douglass announced that he had received 100 Bibles

261

Douglass' opinions on several other issues of the day also
guaranteed charges of infidelity from his detractors. During the
early months of 1859, the editors of the Congregational Herald criti—
cized him for neglecting to offer the customary formal prayers of
thanksgiving to God at an abolition lecture in Chicago. Douglass
quickly responded to this charge by noting that such prayers were
but the ”outside of the cup and the platter"--they were no proof of
genuine Christianity. Surely the Herald could find no special com-
mand or example from the life of Christ to support the belief that
public meetings should be commenced and concluded with a prayer. It
was not formal worship which was acceptable to the Savior, but "wor-
ship in spirit and in truth." Douglass further noted that he had
been raised ”in the midst of such shams" and had no further use for
them. His Christian masters had been fond of praying and singing
hymns, but had been less willing to exhibit a heart filled with jus-
tice, moral honesty, and Christ-like kindness. These observers of
”times and seasons” were the same men who could "sell a babe from
the breast of its mother, and sell a husband from a wife without a
sigh or regret.

Douglass struck out against another "religious form” when in

 

and Testaments from the British and Foreign Bible Society for gratu-
itous distribution to the Rochester black community. Any person who
did not own a copy of the Scriptures would be provided one at the
North Star Office. In May, 1857, he said that it was "no evidence
that the Bible is a bad book, because those who profess to believe
the Bible are bad. The slaveholders of the South, and many of their
wicked allies at the North, claim the Bible for slavery; shall we,
therefore, fling the Bible away as a pro-slavery book? It would be
as reasonable to do so as it would be to fling away the Constitution."
North Star, July 27, 1849; Speech at New York City, May 11, 1857, in
Foner, Life and Writings, II, 423.

2QDouglass' Monthly, April, 1859.

262
September, 1861, he criticized fresident Lincoln's proclamation of
a National Fast Day. He had little faith in the efficacy of this
day of national prayer because, rather than a true repentance of the
"National Sin" of slavery, it appeared to be merely a repentance of
the consequences of that sin. The people of the North deplored the
calamity which slavery had brought upon them, but did not yet deplore
the slave system itself. "Like the criminal in the hands of the of-
ficer of justice," he wrote, "we are less sorry for the theft than
for the blunder of allowing ourselves to be caught. We would fain
have the rebellion abolished, but we would not lift a finger to have
that which causes the rebellion put down and abolished." To honest
men, such an observance could only be "a stench, an abomination, a
solemn mockery.” According to Douglass, the Past Day borrowed much
from the rites of the ancient Hebrews when it should have been mod-
eled after the religious practices "enjoined by the Prophets” in
Isaiah 1:10-17. This more acceptable type of endeavor respected the
rights, duties and responsibilities of individual men toward each
other and stood for practical righteousness ”as against all forms
and ceremonies." Indeed, there could be no doubt of the ”subjective
good influence" of all prayers sincerely uttered for good objects
because men who prayed in this manner usually set about answering
their own prayers. If they really felt that their sins had made them
an abomination in the sight of heaven, they would seek goodness and
endeavor to act in a worthy manner. By ”ceasing to do evil and

25

learning to do well" man could answer his own entreaties to God.

 

25Douglass' Monthly, October, 1861. Isaiah 1:10-17 reads:
”Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law
of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. To what purpose is the multitude
of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord: I am full of the burnt

 

262
September, 1861, he criticized fresident Lincoln's proclamation of
a National Fast Day. He had little faith in the efficacy of this
day of national prayer because, rather than a true repentance of the
"National Sin" of slavery, it appeared to be merely a repentance of
the consequences of that sin. The people of the North deplored the
calamity which slavery had brought upon them, but did not yet deplore
the slave system itself. "Like the criminal in the hands of the of-
ficer of justice," he wrote, "we are less sorry for the theft than
for the blunder of allowing ourselves to be caught. We would fain
have the rebellion abolished, but we would not lift a finger to have
that which causes the rebellion put down and abolished." To honest
men, such an observance could only be ”a stench, an abomination, a
solemn mockery." According to Douglass, the Fast Day borrowed much
from the rites of the ancient Hebrews when it should have been mod-
eled after the religious practices ”enjoined by the Prophets” in
Isaiah 1:10-17. This more acceptable type of endeavor respected the
rights, duties and responsibilities of individual men toward each
other and stood for practical righteousness ”as against all forms
and ceremonies." Indeed, there could be no doubt of the “subjective
good influence" of all prayers sincerely uttered for good objects
because men who prayed in this manner usually set about answering
their own prayers. If they really felt that their sins had made them
an abomination in the sight of heaven, they would seek goodness and
endeavor to act in a worthy manner. By ”ceasing to do evil and

25

learning to do well" man could answer his own entreaties to God.

 

25Douglass' Monthly, October, 1861. Isaiah 1:10-17 reads:
"Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law
of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. To what purpose is the multitude
of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord: I am full of the burnt

262
September, 1861, he criticized fresident Lincoln's proclamation of
a National Past Day. He had little faith in the efficacy of this
day of national prayer because, rather than a true repentance of the
"National Sin" of slavery, it appeared to be merely a repentance of
the consequences of that sin. The people of the North deplored the
calamity which slavery had brought upon them, but did not yet deplore
the slave system itself. "Like the criminal in the hands of the of-
ficer of justice," he wrote, ”we are less sorry for the theft than
for the blunder of allowing ourselves to be caught. We would fain
have the rebellion abolished, but we would not lift a finger to have
that which causes the rebellion put down and abolished." To honest
men, such an observance could only be “a stench, an abomination, a
solemn mockery." According to Douglass, the Past Day borrowed much
from the rites of the ancient Hebrews when it should have been mod-
eled after the religious practices "enjoined by the Prophets” in
Isaiah 1:10-17. This more acceptable type of endeavor respected the
rights, duties and responsibilities of individual men toward each
other and stood for practical righteousness ”as against all forms
and ceremonies." Indeed, there could be no doubt of the "subjective
good influence" of all prayers sincerely uttered for good objects
because men who prayed in this manner usually set about answering
their own prayers. If they really felt that their sins had made them
an abomination in the sight of heaven, they would seek goodness and
endeavor to act in a worthy manner. By ”ceasing to do evil and

25

learning to do well" man could answer his own entreaties to God.

 

25Douglass' Monthly, October, 1861. Isaiah 1:10-17 reads:
"Hear the word of the Lord, ye rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law
of our God, ye people of Gomorrah. To what purpose is the multitude
of your sacrifices unto me? saith the Lord: I am full of the burnt

263

The black abolitionist also continued to believe that reli-
gious revivals were simply hollow pretentions to piety. These so-
called works of regeneration were said to be peculiar signs of
Divine favor and vast steps toward the destruction of the ways and
works of the Devil when, in fact, they merely left the nation's re-
ligionists more at peace with themselves, and with oppression, than
ever before. Indeed, at the conclusion of a revival, Christians
seemed less disposed to exclude slavery from the Christian communion
than they did at its outset. In February, 1860, Douglass urged an
English audience not to give their unqualified approval to the reli-
gious shows and pious demonstrations of faith that were being carried
on in the United States until the revivals brought forth "fruits meet
for repentance"--until they saw a disposition on the part of "revived”
Americans to put away the "foul, haggard, withering, blasting, damn-
ing, hell-black" curse of slavery.26

In like manner, he condemned the work of the nation's mis-
sionary organizations and benevolent societies. If revivals of reli-

gion and revivals of the slave trade went hand in hand, then surely

 

offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in
the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats. When ye come to
appear before me, who hath required this at your hand, to tread my
courts? Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto
me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot
away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons
and your appointed feasts my soul hateth: they are a trouble unto
me; I am weary to bear them. And when ye spread forth your hands,

I will hide mine eyes from you; yea, when ye make many prayers, I
will not hear: your hands are full of blood. Hash ye, make you
clean; put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes; cease
to do evil; Learn to do well; seek judgment, relieve the oppressed,
judge the fatherless, plead for the widow." See also Isaiah 58:3-11.

26Speech in Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England, February 23, 1860,
in Douglass' Monthly, April,l860; Douglass' Monthly, February, 1859.

 

264

the slaveholder and the missionary were also co-partners in crime.
Douglass charged that the men who took the gospel to the Cherokee
Indians also took with them the slave, the chain, and the bloodhound.
They taught the red man how to enslave the black man and to place
him, as a chattel, ”among sheep, and horses, and oxen." Such "reli-
gious influences,” in Douglass' opinion, tended to sink the Cherokees
"lower and lower in the gulf of barbarism" rather than to ”refine,
embellish, and elevate" them. It was to be expected that mission
boards would acquiesce in these practices since they had long been
silent, time-serving, and compromising on the subject of slavery.
Apparently greatly concerned about the religious enlightenment and
salvation of heathens living in foreign lands, they annually raised
hundreds of thousands of dollars to forward that work, but "never
raised one cent" for the enlightenment and salVation of the black
millions who lived in a state of forced heathenism in the American
South. To put one's faith in such missions was to assume that a reli-
gious organization could be ”steeped to the lips” in the guilt of
slaveholding and yet be profoundly concerned for the salvation of
souls; that men could serve both God and mammon at the same time;
that God would be "pleased to see their uplifted hands, though they
be stained with blood."27

In criticizing the nation's benevolent organizations, Douglass

 

27Frederick Douglass' Paper, February 1, 1856; Douglass'

Monthl , February, 1859, October, 1859. In attacking plans to col-
onize Negroes in Liberia, Douglass wrote, "My heart can never be in-
different to any legitimate movement for spreading the blessings of
Christianity and civilization in that country. But the effort must
not be to get the Negroes out of this country but to get Christianity
into that." Douglass to Benjamin Coates, April 17, 1856, William M.
' Coates Papers, Historical Society of Pennsylvania; Foner, Frederick
Dou lass, p. 393.

265
reserved his most pointed barbs for the American Tract Society.
Here was an organization which stood before the world as a prominent
representative of the evangelical religion of the United States.
Its mission was to carry the light of the Gospel to the poor, to the
wretched, and to those who sat in spiritual darkness. It was formed
to reflect the loving-kindness of Jesus Christ toward ”the helpless
and woe-smitten children of men." Lofty purpose, however, did not
always lead to sound and meaningful action. Douglass found the Tract
Society to be in a ”peaceful, harmonious, kind and brotherly" rela-
tionship with slavery. It practiced that type of religion which,
“while professing to save our soul from hell, would not move a fin-
ger to save our body from stripes." Refusing to bear testimony
against the infamous slave institution, the Society instead sought
to hide its treachery and hypocrisy behind a finely woven net of
sophistries, subterfuges, and falsehoods. Its "dears" and “beloveds"
were bestowed upon pious man-thieves and their supporters while the
bleeding slave was left unnoticed. Its many publications flooded
the land and filled the air with ”attenuated leaves of hot-bed
piety," but offered not a word of earnest rebuke to the slaveholder.
Indeed, its “vital godliness and sound morality" was actually more
of a hideous devilishness which sprang from the same dark roots as
slavery. According to Douglass, people who allied themselves with
such an organization were joined in spirit with ”the smooth-faced
hypocrites who murdered the son of God.” They were the true succes-
sors of the ancient scribes and Pharisees.2

During this period, the ex-slave's campaign against such

 

28Douglass' Monthly, June, 1859, June, 1860.

266

pharisaical Christians was once again carried to the very doors of
the American Church. Prior to 1860, Douglass sometimes commented
favorably on apparent changes in the tone of the northern press and
pulpit. ”Times have changed very much of late,..." he noted in
April, 1859. "The public sentiment has been gradually rising, the
distance between the people and the Reformer has been steadily de-
creasing." He found new hope for the slave in the formation of a
Church Anti-Slavery Association in Worcester, Massachusetts, and
gloried in the antislavery ministry of Rev. George B. Cheever, pastor
of New York's Church of the Puritans. Nevertheless, he soon came to
the conclusion that this new movement among the nation's religionists
had been "chilled in its very birth, by the icy indifferences of the
great mass of American evangelical churches and ministers.” The
American people still had no earnest wish to destroy slavery or the
slave trade. By October, 1860, the only visible effect of the aboli-
tionists' words upon the nation's conscience was the creation of a
widespread ”Sentimental Abolitionism" in the North. Antislavery
sentimentalists such as Henry Ward Beecher made fine speeches when
spurred on by a sudden crusading impulse, but gave ground when
pressed by stern opposition. The editors of the New York Indepen-
H223 occasionally struck a heavy blow against "some outwork of the
citadel of oppression," but then turned almost as fiercely against
those abolitionists who would level the citadel into rubble. There
were many ardent antislavery Presbyterians and Methodists, but they
continued to remain in voluntary communion with "man-stealers and

cradle-plunderers."29

 

agspeech delivered before various antislavery bodies, 1855,
in Douglass, Bonda e, p. 458; Speech at Rochester, January, 1855,

267

By 1862, antislavery sentiments seemed to be more visible
than ever throughout the North, but Douglass was not to be deceived.
He knew that a desire for national self-preservation and national
safety, rather than any regard for the bondsman as a man and a broth-
er was the root cause of the new humanitarian trend. To Douglass'
mind, northern hostility toward the southern institution was less
the outgrowth of a high moral conviction against slavery than a pro-
test against the troubles which the slaveholders had brought upon
the country. He would have the southern institution condemned for
that and more. Douglass believed that a person who hated slavery
only for what it did to the white man stood ready to embrace it the
moment its injuries became confined to the black man. To the ex-
slave, the existence of this feeling meant that White Christian
America was not yet ready to make a full and frank acknowledgment

30

of the Negro's manhood.

 

in Foner, Life and Writings, II, 335; Douglass' Monthly, April, 1859,
May, 1859, July, 1859, November, 1859, June, 1860; October, 1860.
William Lloyd Garrison believed that Rev. Cheever was less consistent
and vigilant in antislavery matters than in "heresy hunting." In
1859 the Boston editor told those assembled at the annual meeting of
the American Anti-Slavery Society that Cheever must either ”continue
to advance to our position, or else 'beat a retreat.‘ If he goes
backward, he is lost; but if forward, his salvation is sure. 'I be-
lieve he is conscientiously working out the problem for himself,

that we have long since clearly solved in our own minds; and he is
learning a new lesson every day in this matter, by the treatment
which he is receiving at the hands of his Orthodox clerical brethren
generally, who either strongly condemn or timidly stand aloof from
him." Speech at Boston, May 26, 1859, in Liberator, June 3, 1859;
Speech at New York City, May 11, 1859, in Liberator, Ma ay 27, 1859.
See also Liberator, December 17, 1858.

3OSpeech at Boston, February 12, 1862, in Douglass' Monthly,
March, 1862; Speech at New York City, February, 1863, in Douglass'
Monthl , March, 1863. See also Douglass' Monthl , June, ldol. In
view of Douglass' continuing condemnation of the American profession
of religion, it seemed somewhat strange to his contemporaries that
he would willingly attend Sunday worship services in Rochester's
Plymouth Church while its doors remained barred against antislavery

 

268

 

lecturers. In response to criticism of his attendance Douglass re-
plied, "We go to hear Mr. Edwards preach, just as we go to Corinthian
Hall to hear a lecture, responsible for our own convictions and con-
duct, and for those of no other hearer, free to receive what we may
regard as true and valuable, and equally so to reject what may be
erroneous and hurtful. We hardly see how we are to live in this coun-
try on any other principle than this....each man must determine for
himself as to the best mode of testifying against the position of the
church, and we shall certainly choose ours, whether denounced or
commended." Douglass' Monthly, April, 1861. See also Rochester Post
Ex ress, February 25, 1895.

BOOK FIVE

CHAPTER X
A SPIRTUALIST'S HEAVEN

I believe in immortal life,--not as a matter
of logic or of metaphysics, for it does not
come within the scope of these,--but I feel it
in every fibre and nerve of my system, in every
drop of my blood, in the very instincts, neces-
sities and desires of my nature.
--William Lloyd Garrison
May 31, 1860
Despite his longstanding disapproval of "Christian supersti-
tion," William Lloyd Garrison nevertheless developed what one of his
associates described as "a ready credulity on all subjects pertain-
ing to Spiritualism." In their biographical study of Garrison, the
abolitionist's sons also "freely admitted" that their father was "too
credulous in regard to marvels, such as the 'spirit photographs,'..."
and noted that his standing with the clergy was certainly not improved
by his belief in the reality of "the so-called spiritual manifesta-
tions."1
Ever hospitable to new thoughts and facts, from whatever quar-
ter they might come, Garrison became fascinated with the mid-nineteenth
century phenomena of spiritualism, avidly followed the debate over

the "manifestations," and hoped to find proof of their reality. In

 

18amuel May,Jr. to John B. Estlin, March 7, 1848, in Robert w.
Delp, "Andrew Jackson Davis: Prophet of American Spiritualism,"
Journal 2; American History, LIV (June, 1967), 45; Garrison and
Garrison, Life, IV. 33 -339-

270

271

May, 1852 he told the readers oflghg Liberator that he had "heard
the rappings, seen the tables moved and overturned as by an invisi-
ble power, had correct answers given to mental test questions, be-
come acquainted with several estimable 'mediums,‘ and had many as-
tounding statements made to us on the most reliable authority" Find-
ing the idea of carrying on a direct personal correspondence with
his departed friends to be "very pleasant," Garrison could "philoso-
phically,...see nothing of absurdity clinging to it." After a "long
and close" investigation of the subject, he concluded that it was
"more or less practicable" for those who had "left the body" to hold
communion with relatives and friends still in the flesh-~making
their presence known by "signs and tokens in the shape of what are
called 'manifestations."‘2

While asserting that "spirit intercourse" had occurred in all
ages and in all countries of the world, Garrison was not afraid to
admit that the proof of such conversations was often "most unsatis-
factory." In reviewing Isaac Post‘s Voices £325 3h; Spirit Egglg:

being Communications from Many S irits, the editor of The Liberator

 

2Johnson, Garrison and_ His Times, p. 376; Swift, Garrison,
p. 300, Thomas, Liberator, p. 373, Liberator, Kay 7, 1852,
November 26, 1852; Garrison to J. S. Adams, January 31, 1871, in
Garrison and Garrison, Life, IV, 338. Frederick Douglass' reactions
to the claims of spiritualists were quite different from Garrison's.
In 1850 he told the readers of The North Sta a; "firstly, that we have
heard 'the rappings;' secondly, that we have put questions, and re-
ceived what were alleged to he answers to the same, thirdly, that
those answers were sometimes correct, and sometimes incorrect;
fourthly, that the answers returned were always just such as might
be given by a living and moving human being, and needing ’no ghost
to tell us that,‘ fifthly, we have never received any intelligence
from these alleged spirits; they are ‘of the earth, earthy,‘ and
possess no more illumination than we, who are yet in this clod of
oumbrous clay. With this impression, we have contented ourselves
with holding communion with our fellow mortals yet in the flesh, and
have not lately sought to converse with those whose only language is
knocking on the floor." Horth Star, April 5, 1850.

272

noted his dissatisfaction with the idea that "these lucubrations are
from the 'spirits' indicated by name." Garrison could find no sound
reason to explain why it was, for example, that if a man such as the
late John C. Calhoun could communicate his thoughts at all, he could
not do so with "characteristic terseness and strength." It was ob-
vious that the material contained in Post's book bore none of the
”genius and ability" which marked the writings of this most fluent
individual while on earth. Indeed it could be said that the style
of the "communications" contained in the volume resembled one an-
other so closely as to "seem the Product of one mind.”3

Even though he believed that his friend, Post, "would be
among the last persons on earth we should suspect of collusion or

imposture," Garrison felt that Voices from the Spirit World merited

 

 

criticism as a part of the "mass of verbiage" which was bringing
spiritualist beliefs into disrepute. If spiritualism could produce
no stronger evidence to sustain itself than "the general feebleness
or positive imbecility of its literature," it most assuredly de-
served to be "satirimed from one end of Christendom to the other."

Declaring in 1865 that he had "never yet seen a communication

 

W

3Garrison to J. S. Adams, January 31, 1871, in Garrison and
Garrison, Life, IV, 338; Liberator, May 7, 1852, May 28, 1852,
November 7, 1356. Garrison found it much easier to believe in the
existence of those spirits which he could "see." In May, 187“ he
asked Oliver Johnson: "Has Wendell put into your hands a card photo-
graph of me, (taken by Mumler, the "spirit photographer,") on the
negative of which appear the form and features of Charles Sumner,
(nine days after his decease,) be holding a broken chain over my
right breast, symbolical of the slaves' liberation? All who have
examined it have been much impressed by the phenomenon. Humler did
not know who I was at the time of my sitting; and I saw the negative
immediately after it was taken from the camera. Recently, I have
witnessed some extraordinary marvels in the materialization of spirit
hands, utterances by spirit voices, etc., etc." Garrison to Oliver
Johnson, May 25, 187k, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library. See
also Herrill, Wind 222 Tide, p. 325.

273

purporting to come from Socrates or Plato, Milton or Byron,
Swedenborg or Wesley, George Washington or Benjamin Franklin, or any
other distinguished personage" that he could accept as genuine, the
abolitionist editor told his readers that it was only to be marveled
at that more ridicule had not been heaped upon spiritualism as a re-
sult of the drivel which was published "on the authority and in the
names of such luminous minds."u

Although he realized that there were many "discrepancies, in-
congruities, and absurdities" attending the spiritual manifestations
of the day, Garrison found nothing to be "so puerile, or so prepos-
terous," as the various theories which attempted to account for them,
"short of a spiritual origin." Aside from the “pretentious and
common-place communications" recorded by men like Isaac Post, he did
not doubt that a "spiritual agency" was being exhibited in many of
the "multitudinous 'manifestations‘" which were attracting so much
attention and awakening so much curiosity among the citizenry. Even
though he felt that there were all too many "weak-minded and deluded"
spiritualists in the United States--men and women who were easily
imposed upon by unprincipled mediums and who foolishly wasted a great

deal of time in "gratifying a morbid love for the marvellous,"

 

“Liberator, May 28, 1852, August 17, 1855, October 2, 1863.
Garrison was critical of Swedenborgianism even though the members of
the New Church believed in the existence of a very real and tangible
spirit world. In 185“, he noted that Swedenborgianism, like every
other form of religious faith, was to be tested by a practical stan-
dardo-“not by its speculations, but its fruits." In regard to re-
form, Garrison asserted that he knew of nothing "more conservative,
or less inclined to find or bear a cross" than the religion of
Emanuel Swedenborg. "It does not favor freedom for all;" he wrote,
"it gives no countenance to the cause of emancipation; it takes no
interest in the movement for the elevation and enfranchisement of
woman; it is not peaceful in spirit, but warlike as the army and navy
of the United States...." Liber tor, September 29, 185k.

27h

Garrison believed that their follies were no more harmful to spir-
itualism than the "extravagances of professed Christians" were to
Christianity.5

During the same years in which he was engaged in examining
the claims of the spiritualists, Garrison was modifying his views
on non-resistance. Throughout the l8hO's and most of the l850's,he
continued to believe that God, as a "just, beneficent, and unchange-
able being," never did and never could authorize his children to
"kill and exterminate" one another. Anyone who thought differently
was to be justly accused of libelling the Creator's goodness and of
"asserting what everything in nature contradicts." The non-resistance
doctrine was not to be sneered at as inculcating a state of passi-
vity. On the contrary, it was passive only in the sense that its
adherents refused to return evil for evil. Non-resistance was a
"state of activity," ever fighting the good fight of faith and always
prepared to assail "unjust power." Garrison considered it to be
"the blending of the gentleness and innocency of the lamb of God with

the courage and strength of the Lion of the tribe of Judah."6

 

5Garrison to Lydia Naria Child, February 6, 1857, Garrison
Papers, Boston Public Library; Liberator, October 2, 1863, Garrison
toaJ. S. Adams, January 31, 1871, in Garrison and Garrison, Life, IV,
33 ‘3390

6Speech at Boston, December 50, 18h8, in Liberator, January 5,
18h9; Garrison to Elizabeth Pease, June 20, 18k9, in Garrison and
Garrison, Life, III, 270; Liberator, April 27, 18h9. See also
Liberator, December 24,1851, March 30, 1855, March l#, 1856, April A,
1856, November 1%, 1856, July 22, 1859, Speech at Boston, December 30,
1846, in Liberator, January 15, l8k7. At the Hartford Bible Conven-
tion of 1853, Garrison asserted that it was "not in the power of God,
as he is constituted and made, ever to make the lie a truth, or to
make the truth a lie; and so it is not possible for him morally to
be a God of peace, and then at another time to be a God of war, any
more than he can be a God of veracity, and then at some other time
be a God of falsehood." Hartford Bible Convention, p. 261.

275

Declaring that there was "an impassable gulf--a difference
heaven-wide" between worldly patriotism and Christian heroism, the
abolitionist asserted that any form of religion which justified war,
or the use of "carnal weapons," to redress wrongs or to punish ene-
mies was directly "antagonistical to the gospel of Christ." Believ-
ing as he did, it was to be expected that Garrison would question
the Christianity of those churches which did not speak out against
the Mexican War. In 18h6 he asked, "Where are the ministers of the
gospel of peace-~where are the churches which claim for their leader
the Prince of Peace ...? Do they imagine that they can remain dumb,
and not be chargeable with all the blood that may be shed in this
unholy conflict?" To Garrison's mind, the war was a criminal, "all-
crushing pro-slavery movement" which could only result in a further
bloodying of the already terribly soiled "robes" of both the nation
and its churches.7

Three years later the editor of Th3 Liberator rebuked the
Hungarian patriot, Louis Kossuth, for calling upon his countrymen to
"seize the axe, the scythe, the sword, the firebrand, every weapon
of death and destruction within their reach, and wield them with ex-
terminating effect against their Austrian and Russian invaders."
While agreeing that Hungary‘s fight for freedom and independence was
both "laudable and noble," Garrison was disappointed to see "a good
object defended by the same weapons and the same measures as those
which are used to uphold a bad object." Could cruelty be used to

destroy cruelty or sin to abolish sin?, he asked. Surely a belief

 

7Liberator, September 10, 1841; Garrison to Richard Davis
Webb, February 27, l8h2, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library;
Garrison to Charles K. Whipple, June 19. 18k6, in Liberator, August 21,
1846. See also Liberator, August #, 1870.

276
in the ancient, outmoded "eye for eye, tooth for tooth, life for
life" philosophy was no help in diffusing love and good will through-
out the world.8

Garrison felt that such love and good will could best be
disseminated by those who, like Harriet Beecher Stowe's "Uncle Tom,"
exemplified the "nature, tendency, and results of CHRISTIAN NON-
RESISTANCE." In commenting upon this fictional character who, ac.
cording to Mrs. Stowe, was almost robbed of his Bible by the Boston
abolitionist, Garrison noted that no insult or outrage seemed to be
able to disturb the Christ-like meekness of his spirit or to shake
the steadfastness of his faith. Toward his "merciless oppressors"
Tom cherished no animosity and "breathed nothing of retaliation."
Like his Lord and Master, he was willing to be "led as a lamb to the
slaughter," returning blessing for cursing, and anxious only for the
salvation of his enemies.

Garrison was curious to know whether Mrs. Stowe believed in
the duty of non-resistance for the white man as well as for the black.
He felt that her worth as a "religious teacher" would either be
"greatly strengthened or lessened as the inquiry mightimrminate."

In the American South of the 1850's it seemed to be "everywhere taken
for granted" that the bondsmen ought to repudiate all carnal weapons,
be obedient to their masters, abstain from all insurrectionary move-

ments, and wait for a peaceful deliverance. Surely they could not

be animated by a Christian spirit and yet return blow for blow.l The;
were required by the Bible to put away all wrath and to submit to

every conceivable type of outrage without resistance. But for those

 

8Liberator, August 31, 18h9.

277
whose skin happened to be of a slightly lighter color, the case ap-

peared to be materially altered. When white men were spat upon,
buffeted, or outraged, it was not proper to speak of a non-resisting
Savior. To talk of overcoming evil with good in such a case was
deemed fanaticism and madness. "How is this to be explained or re-
conciled?...," asked Garrison, "When it is the whites who are trodden
in the dust, does Christ justify them in taking up arms to vindicate
their rights? And when it is the blacks who are thus treated, does
Christ require them to be patient, harmless, long-suffering, and for-
giving?"9

The shocking and violent events of the 1850's made the aboli-
tionist examine this "double-standard" of non-resistance ever more
closely. After John Brown's October, 1859 raid on Harper's Ferry,
Garrison modified his belief in the inherent wrongness of belliger-
ence by greatly increasing his emphasis on the non-resistance doc-
trine's "state of activity." At a memorial meeting held at Boston‘s
Tremont Temple on the day of Brown‘s execution, he asked how many
nonresistants were present in the audience. When only a single per-
son responded in the affirmative, Garrison paused a moment and then
said that he too was a peace man-can "ultra" peace man who had la-
bored unremittingly to effect the peaceful abolition of slavery.
Nevertheless, he was now prepared to say "Success to every slave in-
surrection at the South, and in every slave country." By making
such a declaration, he did not consider himself to be compromising
his "peace profession." Wherever there existed a contest between

the oppressed and the oppressor his sympathies were always with the

 

9Liberator, Narch- 26, 1852.

278

former and against the latter. Therefore, he noted, "whenever com-
menced, I cannot but wish success to all slave insurrections." "Give
me," said Garrison, "as a non-resistant, Bunker Hill, and Lexington,
and Concord, rather than the cowardice and servility of a Southern
slave plantation." Rather than seeing men wearing their chains in
a "cowardly and servile spirit," Garrison would, "as an advocate of
peace," prefer to see them "breaking the head of the tyrant with
their chains." He asserted that it not only was "an indication of
progress, and a positive moral growth," but it was also one way of
reaching the "sublime platform of non-resistance" for those who be-
lieved in "the right and duty of wielding carnal weapons" to "take
those weapons out of the scale of despotism, and throw them into the
scale of freedom." Surely this was "God's method" of dealing retri-
bution upon the head of a tyrant.10

Having thus in effect sanctioned belligerence in support of
a righteous cause, Garrison was able to support the Civil War as the

instrument needed to free the slaves. Convinced that he was cling-

ing "as tenaciously as ever" to the principles of peace, Garrison

 

10Merrill, Wind and Tide, pp. 269-273; Thomas, Liberator,

pp. 396-398; Speech at Boston, December 2, 1859, in Liberator,
December 16, 1859. Benjamin Quarles has written that as a result of
his l8h8 visit to John Brown's home in Springfield, Massachusetts,
Frederick Douglass also "found it necessary to refashion his think-
ing." Brown's insistence that there was "no possibility of convert-
ing the slaveholders" weakened Douglass' faith in "the Garrisonian
principle of non-resistance." Nevertheless, neither this shift in
thought nor the black abolitionist's reliance upon the power of man
in effecting reform could convince Douglass that he should support
Brown‘s plan to seize the government arsenal at Harper's Ferry.
Quarles, Frederick Dou lass, pp. 171, 176-179. For more comprehen-
sive accounts of Douglass; regationship with John Brown see Quarles,
Frederick Dou lass, pp. 1 9-1 5; Foner, Frederick Dou lass, pp. 137-
139, 175-182; Benjamin Quarles, "Frederick Douglass and John Brown,"
in Rochester Historical Society Publications, Vol. XVII (Rochester:
Rochester Historical Society, 19395, pp. 291-299; Benjamin Quarles,
ed., Blacks 25 John Brown (Urbana: University of Illinois Press,
1972), pp. 7-10, 55-66; Douglass, Life, pp. 271-275, 302-303, 305-325.

279
believed that if the American people had accepted those principles

during the ante-bellum years, there would have been no slavery and
no war. Nevertheless, since the war had come, he would support it
because, while there was relatively little wrong or injustice to be
found on the side of the Union, the secessionist camp contained
countless "'thieves,’ 'robbers,"traitors,' and 'pirates'"--men who
were capable of "committing any crime, violating any pledge, disre-
garding any obligation, and inflicting any outrage, however monstrous
or savage."11

Garrison tended to speak of the war as a judgment of God in-
flicted upon a sinful and decidedly corrupt land. It was a product
of the "natural and inevitable operation of the law of eternal jus-
tice." Due to its citizens' "hardness of heart and blindness of
mind" the United States lay "prostrate in the dust." The nation's
guilt was identical to that of Edom in "the matter of oppression, and
of complicity with oppressors." For too long its people had "laughed
to scorn" all warnings of danger, all accusations of sinfulness, and
all threats of divine retribution. The day of reckoning was at hand.
In the "retributive conflict" of the war, the God of the oppressed
was "signally vindicating his justice" and demonstrating that be had
not been at any time insensible to the tears, the cries, and the
agonies of those who had for so long been "held in the galling fetters
of chattel servitude." At the same time He was showing that, although
the war would fearfully scourge the nation, His judgment was to be

mingled with mercy. After "merited chastisement" the land would have

 

llThomas, Liberator, p. A13; Liberator, June 7, 1861; Merrill,
Wind and Tide, pp. 273-277.

280

rest, a lasting peace would be secured, and universal freedom would
reign triumphant.12

As the war neared its conclusion, Garrison offered his un-
feigned thanks to the God of judgment and mercy. At a February, 1865
gathering held in Music Hall, Boston, he celebrated the long-awaited
appearance of the Thirteenth Amendment by declaring: "I feel to-night
in a thoroughly methodistical state of mind--disposed at the top of
my voice, and to the utmost stretch of my lungs, to shout 'Glory!’
'Alleluial' 'Amen and amenl'" With the Psalmist of old he would ex-
claim: "The Lord hath done great things for us, whereof we are
glad." He would say to both young and old, "0 give thanks unto the
Lord, for He is good; for his mercy endureth forever."l3

While not ignoring the work of the abolitionists, Garrison
was careful to give God a major portion of the credit for the success
of their crusade. The Boston editor considered himself to be "one
only of a multitude of noble men and women" in various parts of the
country whose combined efforts were necessary to bring about the down-
fall of slavery. Early in 1865 he remarked that there had been no
tear shed, prayer offered, pecuniary contribution made, or testimony
borne which had not been "indispensable to the achievement of the
triumph of our cause, as it now stands before our country and the

world." Nevertheless, it could truly be said that slavery was being

destroyed by the "righteous judgment of God" and that it was "not in

 

12Speech at Williamstown, Massachusetts, August h, 1862, in
Liberator, August 29, 1862; Garrison to J. R. W. Leonard, November 25,
186K, in Liberator, December 9, 1864; Garrison to Oliver Johnson,
April 19, 1861, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library. See also
Ezekiel 25:12-1“, Obadiah 1.

13Speech at Boston, February h, 1865, in Liberator,
February 10, 1865. See also Psalms 106:1, 126:3.

281

the power of men or devils" to save the infamous system from extinc-
tion. As he noted in 1870, "it was by the help of God that I was
enabled to stand in the evil day, and by the same Divine strength
and trust were the great body of Abolitionists sustained in every
emergency."1u

Although Garrison's views on non-resistance were altered by
the traumatic events of the late ante-bellum period, his religious
beliefs remained remarkably unchanged. During his later years, the
Boston reformer continued to champion the cause of freedom of con-
science against the forces of "Christian superstition." Believing
that the "worst heresy" was a slavish conformity to the "orthodox
standards of the hour" and that "fruits render all professions super-
fluous," he was proud to have discarded "all human authority" in
matters of religious belief and practice. Holding to the'Yundamental
doctrine of Protestantism," he continued to maintain that it was both

the right and the duty of every Christian to decide for himself what

 

1“Garrison to H. J. Brown, May 15, 1870, in N2! gag, May 26,
1870; Speech at Boston, January 26, 1865, in Liberator, February 17,
1865. See also speech at Charleston, South Carolina, April 1h, 1865,
in Liberator, May 12, 1865; Speech at Charleston, South Carolina,
April 15, 1865, in Liberator, May 5, 1865; Liberator, December 22,
1865; Speech at London, England, June 29, 1867, in Garrison and
Garrison, Life, IV, 213-217. In an address delivered at the 32nd
Annual Meeting of the American Anti-Slavery Society in May, 1865,
Garrison noted: "We are now a united people-~never before. We have
new high hopes of the future. We have decreed the abolition of slav-
ery, our great national transgression; and now we may confidently
look up to God for his blessing upon us, as a people, and He will
not fail us.... Though the South is at present a desolation, and the
North is still wailing for her lost, yet there is in store for us,
because we have resolved to put away the evil thing from among us,
abiding peace and abounding prosperity." Speech at New York City,
May 9, 1865, in Liberator, May 19, 1865. See also Garrison to
Charles Sumner, February 11, 1866, Houghton Library, Harvard Univer-
city; Independent, April 12, 1866.

282
constituted truth and what error.15
In one of the many articles which he wrote for the New York
Independent during the post-war years, Garrison examined "The Rights
of Conscience." By doing so, he showed his readers that he consi-
dered the universal possession of "full liberty of conscience" to be
a sort of supernal panacea which would spell the end of "all wrath
and bitterness, all self-conceit and pharisaical assumption," and
"all oracular anathematizing and sectarian proscription." Freedom
of thought and inquiry was a powerful force for good. It forbade
religious intolerance, furnished "the best soil" for the growth of
mental independence, encouraged moral excellence, and allowed "the
truth to stand upon its own merits, without any adventitious props."
Moreover, such a great liberty precluded the "bandying about" of the
epithets "heresy" and "infidelity" because only "infallibility"
could determine what constituted hermuu Essential to the "just main-
tenance of popular government" and a veritable scourge to the "unbal-
lowed union of church and state," freedom of conscience gave "un-
limited scope to investigation,"--providing man with the opportunity

to "press onward to a higher attainment and a more shining mark."16

 

15Garrison to Mr. Marshall, April 27, 1877, Garrison Papers,
Boston Public Library.

16Independent, November 25, 1869. While Garrison hoped that
William J. Potter's Free Religious Association would prove to be "a
potent instrument in the overthrow of bigotry and superstition, and
the furtherance of civil and religious liberty," he did not choose
to ally himself too closely with this group of "brave independent,
upright souls who are for taking nothing upon trust, and everything
according to its intrinsic value, in matters of religious faith and
practice." In the spring of 1875 he declined to have his name placed
in nomination for the Vice Presidency of the Association due to "per-
sonal reasons." Garrison to William J. Potter, October 11, 1873,
Garrison to William J. Potter, April 15, 1875, Garrison Papers,
Boston Public Library.

283

Opposing the advance of the rights of conscience were those
religionists who continued to honor ecclesiastical authority by he-
lieving in "Papal and Protestant infallibility." According to
Garrison, while it was true that only the "Romish Pope" claimed to
be infallible, there was nevertheless much of the Papal spirit per-
meating Protestantism. Many of the "self-styled" evangelical clergy
were as "bigoted, proscriptive, and self-inflated" as the Pope him-
self. Even though they were obviously "recreant to the fundamental
doctrine of the Reformation," they did not like to be charged with
priestcraft. Instead, they gloried in "putting on the robes of in-
fallibility" and in treating free thought, free inquiry, free speech,
and individual non-conformity as offenses in the sight of heaven.17

Following the Civil War, Garrison continued to criticize the
type of Christianity to which the "Protestant priesthood" invariably
adhered. Declaring that "the cheapest thing in the market is profes-
sional veneration for Christ," he asserted that, "in the present
state of public sentiment," the term "Christian" had no practical
value. It had lost its original significance and, through "utter
perversion" had become worthless as a reliable test of religious
character. "Certainly," wrote Garrison in 1870, "Jesus was not a
Christian, in the modern use of the term; for that implies what is
most respectable--close conformity to what is established and popular--
blind veneration of the past." In Garrison's opinion, those who
claimed to be the followers of the Nazarene had to show that they

were animated by "at least something of his spirit" in a readiness

 

17Garrison to William J. Potter, October 11, 1873, Garrison
to Oliver Johnson, April 9, 1873, Garrison Papers, Boston Public
Library. See also Independent, June 9, 1870.

28A

to "bear testimony to unpopular truth, cost what it may." If a pro-
fession of Christian faith was certain to be followed by persecution,
outlawry, or perhaps even death itself, as in the apostolic age, it
would then be of "vital significance."18

During the year 1868, the former abolitionist published sev-
eral articles in 233 Independent dealing with the shortcomings of
the American pulpit. Noting that there was no surer sign of reli-
gious degeneracy than "constant sermonizing about obsolete tests and
bygone events," Garrison held that ministerial inability and unwil-
lingness to confront the "dangers and trials of the present hour"
could usually be found to exist "in proportion to the disposition to
extol the heroes, saints, martyrs, and saviours of past ages." As
long as the "pulpit homilist" occupied himself in discussing the
"acts and actors of buried ages," he would surely excite no alarm in
the breasts of the wicked. Certainly it could not be denied that
such inspiration was to be gained by studying the lives of the "mar-
tyrs and confessors." Their heroic examples would give strength,
hope, and comfort to those who were endeavoring to battle the sins
of their own day and generation. Nevertheless, it was one thing to
refer to such figures for example and illustration and quite another

to become so enamored with their "continual laudation" that current

 

18Inde endent, July 14, 1870, November 3, 1870. In 1867
Garrison asserted that to talk of "the merits of the Savior" and to
"make everything of his atoning blood" furnished no real evidence of
"religious attainment." He was not interested in knowing "what any
one may say or profess in regard to those of the far distant past,
'of whom the world was not worthy.'" While such opinions were often

"readily accepted as evidence of piety," Garrison felt that they
proved nothing because they cost nothing. Even the Pharisees, he
noted, had made an attempt to prove their regard for true religion by
saying, "If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not
have participated in stoning the prophets." Garrison to Mrs. Arthur
Albright, October 23, 1867, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library.

285

responsibilities and duties were neglected. Garrison claimed that
if the "fifty thousand occupants of pulpits" in the United States
would cease to waste their time in the discussion of "topics worn
threadbare by repetition" and would, instead, give themselves unre-
servedly to the task of testifying against "living transgressors of
the Divine Law," they would "better evince their appreciation of the
prophets of old" and more acceptably demonstrate their reverence for
Christ.19

The modern day "transgressors" of whom Garrison spoke were
adjudged to be those individuals who, despite the fact that the in-
stitution of slavery had been "abolished beyond all hope of re-
establishment," continued to make the color of a man's skin the cri-
terion for deciding whether one was a superior or an inferior being.
To Garrison's mind there was "no atheism worse than this; no rejec-
tion of Christianity more positive than this," yet the disease of
"COLORPHOBIA" seemed to be everywhere present. Upon the banner of
the Democratic party was emblazoned the "heathenish" motto, "Down
with the nigger! This is a white man's government!" If it were in
their power, the men who believed in this motto would instantly re-
duce the black man to a state of bondage--placing him once again
among goods, chattels, and marketable commodities. They would wrest
the elective franchise from the hand of the ex-slave and rob him of
every human right. Could it not then be said, wrote Garrison, that
the existence of this proscriptive spirit proved that an "American

aan-canxsr" was stalking the land?ao

 

19Inde endent, February 27, 1868. See also Inde endent,
September 10, 1 .

20Inde endent, February 27, 1868, September 3, 1868.

286

Garrison was convinced that it was vitally important for the
Christian religion to be "everlastingly divorced from all that is op-
pressive, unjust, partial, and clannish." Those who considered them-
selves to be "witnesses for God" had to speak out against the evils
of color prejudice in "accents loud and clear." What sense did it
make, he asked, for American Christians to seek the abolition of
caste in India while perpetuating an even more unnatural and debasing
caste in their own land? A genuine Christianity never sanctioned any
form of "human degradation," but was ever willing to take the side
of the weak against the strong. If they were ever to be deserving
of the name "Christian," the nation's ministers had to put their re-
ligious teachings into practice by meeting the Great Adversary face
to face--"not in Judea, as an effete sentiment, but in the United
States, as a living principle."21

During his later years, Garrison remained critical of reli-
gious "forms," Sabbath observances, and revivals. In an 1862 letter
to his son, Wendell, he noted that his "aversion to a liturgy, with
its responses, deepens every time I listen to it." The worship of
God as a set, mechanical, stereotyped observance was to him "nothing
better than a solemn mockery." In like manner,he continued to oppose
those laws and social customs which gave Sunday a "moral predominance"
over the other six days of the week. In April 1872, he told his
friend, Oliver Johnson, that Henry Ward Beecher was to be commended
for supporting the opening of the New York Public Libraries on the
Sabbath. Perhaps recalling his own experience as an antisabbatarian,

Garrison noted wryly, "Will he not catch it, though, from his more

 

21Inde endent, January 30, 1868; February 27: 1868; September 3,

1868.

287
evangelical brethren?" That he did not consider himself to be of
the "evangelical stamp" was evidenced by his reaction to the minis-
try of Dwight L. Moody. In 1877 Garrison wrote his daughter, Fanny,
that "Moody and [Ira D.J Sankey are here with their sensational
'revival.‘ Thousands flock to hear them every day--curiosity, no
doubt, being the predominating incentive. I am inclined to think
more people will 'lose their heads' than will save their souls."22

Garrison also retained his "heretical views" on the divine
inspiration of Scripture. Firm in his belief that, rather than
having been inscribed in a "Holy Book," the rights of man were
"written upon the human faculties and powers by the finger of God,"
he hoped that William Lloyd, Jr. would regard the Bible as a "volume
to be studied, criticized, and judged, without prejudice, credulity,
superstition, or regard to any popular or prevailing interpretation
thereof." Since it was not "the Word of God," as many "dogmatically"
assumed it to be, the Bible could be examined with the same freedom
"as any other book or compilation of ancient manuscripts." Never-
theless, Garrison assured his son that even with "reason and conscience
holding mastery over it," the Bible was "deserving of the highest
consideration" because of the "incomparable truths, solemn warnings,
and precious promises" which it contained.23

Despite the strong aversion which he felt toward many of their

 

ZZGarrison to Wendell P. Garrison, August 10, 1862. Garrison
to Oliver Johnson, April 23, 1872, Garrison to Fanny Garrison Villard,
February 8, 1877, Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library. See also
Garrison to Maria W. Chapman, February 16, 1877, Garrison Papers,
Boston Public Library.

23Speech at Philadelphia, December 3, 1863, in Liberator,
December 18, 1863; Garrison to William Lloyd Garrison, Jr.,
January 21, 1875, Garrison Family Papers, Sophia Smith Collection,
Smith College.

288

beliefs and practices, Garrison joined with the nation's more ortho-
dox churchmen in denouncing intemperance. In an 1857 address, the
abolitionist had noted that if he was guilty of devoting less time
and energy to the temperance cause than he had while at the National
Epilanthropist it was not because he had lost interest in the suc-
cess of the movement, but could be attributed to the fact that an
ever increasing number of men and women had discovered that it was
"respectable" to speak out against strong drink. Having had his sym-
pathies "early awakened" to the cause of the slave, it was only natur-
al that he would devote the bulk of his time and energy to the less
popular antislavery crusade.2

After the Civil War, Garrison was once again "free" to ap-
proach the problem of intemperance with something of the same vigor
which he had exhibited prior to 1830. In May, 1868 he referred to
moderate drinking as "that snare and delusion of all snares and de-
lusions." Favoring the reimposition of the recently repealed Massa-
chusetts prohibition law, be damned those foreign-born citizens of
the Commonwealth who seemed to be "easily duped and misled by un-
principled demagogues in any moral contest presented at the polls."
Such men were "to a large extent quite unintelligent and uneducated;
born and reared under the most unfavorable conditions with habits
of drinking never cared for, never sought to be restrained, never
called in question on their own native soil." Largely unaware of the
"responsibilities and duties which attach to freemen in the mainten-
ance of popular institutions" they nevertheless had "votes in their

hands" and were "always prompt at the ballot-box." It was imperative,

 

2“Speech at Boston, May 3, 1857, in Liberator, May 8, 1857.

289

wrote Garrison, for men of this character to understand that a pro-
hibition law was needed "in order that the liberties of the people
may be preserved, their welfare consulted, their moral condition ele-
vated, their material wealth increased, their happiness and security
placed on a sure foundation."25

According to Garrison, alcohol was "the most seductive of
all poisons." Claiming that the widespread use of strong drink ac-
counted for "three-fourths of all the insanity, pauperism, crime, and
wretchedness" in the community, he believed that to prohibit its sale
was "among the first and highest duties of legislation." To Garrison's
mind, if there was "anything left to us worth contending for...as a
principle of society," it was the right not merely to restrain but
to suppress the liquor traffic. To "legislate men into piety" was
one thing, but to destroy the "nurseries of vice and wretchedness" by
statute law was "quite another." In defending the re-enactment of
the Massachusetts prohibition law in 1869, Garrison asserted that a
law which was designed for the good of all could not be prescriptive
of any. "All Legislative enactments should be in conformity with hu-
man needs and the eternal law of right," he wrote, "When they are
otherwise, then it is both wise and patriotic to demand their obli-
teration." Judged by this standard, he believed the Prohibitory Law
to be "worthy of all acceptation.” Any and all attempts to discredit

the statute or impair the strength of its provisions could only "tend

 

251ndependent, May 28, 1868. See also Independent, March 25,
1869. In November, 1870 Garrison declared that as "a teetotaler for
more than forty years, and desirous of seeing the sale of all intox-
icating liquors prohibited for drinking purposes, I am nevertheless
opposed to seeking this end by the formation of a distinct political
party, whether in Massachusetts or elsewhere, believing it will re-
tard rather than advance the cause so dear to all true friends of ten-
perance." Independent, November 2“, 1870.

290

to an increase of immorality in proportion as they shall be crowned
with success."26

Garrison's eminently orthodox manner of attacking the sin of
intemperance did not serve to shelter him from the barbs of critics
who disapproved of the methods which he had used in the fight against
the sin of slavery. Despite the fact that, during the decade of the
Civil War, the national conscience had moved closer to that of the
abolitionists' than at any other time in the history of the anti-
slavery movement, Garrison found it necessary to defend himself
against those charges of his old enemies which were being re-stated
in various post-war accounts of the abolitionist crusade. In his
defense, the elderly reformer denied that he was the protagonist in
the longstanding conflict between the churchmen and the Garrisonians.
"It was the church that was the real assailant all through the pro-
tracted struggle," he wrote, "resisting every appeal of the oppressed
millions for its sympathy and aid, and actively bringing the whole
weight of its tremendous influence to crush abolitionism to the
dust." Those instances where a local church or pastor was outspoken
or uncompromising in the cause of the oppressed were "like angels'

visits, few and far between."

 

2612922222295. July 29. 1869. October 1h, 1869, March 3, 1870,

July 6, 1871. Garrison was also opposed to the use of "that noxious
weed and injurious narcotic--tobacco." In 1865, he noted that it was
a constant source of surprise and regret for him "to find many, who
claim to be in the ranks of reform and progress, and who are really
doing good service in their special field of labor, completely en-
slaved to the hurtful and disgusting use of tobacco; so that all ap-
peals to them on the score of consistency, virtue and exemplary con-
duct are utterly in vain." Including in his charges those who were
"addicted" to tobacco in any of its forms, Garrison believed that a
reformer who smoked, used snuff, or chewed tobacco was "palpably de-
ficient in symmetry of character." Garrison to George Trask, May 27,
1865, in Liberator, June 9, 1865. See also Liberator, August 20, 1831.

291
According to Garrison, the apostasy of the nation's reli-
gious bodies was "well-nigh universal,” but the abolitionists, by
their sacrifices, labors, and testimonies had shown themselves to be
"animated by the deepest religious convictions, and by a vital appre-
ciation of the life and teachings of a compassionate Redeemer." The
cry of "infidelity" raised against the Garrisonians was merely one
of the methods used by the "time-serving, pro-slavery church and
clergy" in their attempt to destroy the work of these courageous men.
By willingly subjecting themselves to "overwhelming contempt and ob-
loquy," the abolitionists had evidenced a rare moral courage, a pro-
found sympathy for human suffering, and an "absolute trust in God."27
Garrison summed up his defense in a sonnet which appeared in
The Independent during the winter of 1867:
It is a good thing to be a heretic--
Disturber of the peace--b1asphemer bold--
When Satan's minions, unto evil sold,
Who at no slanderous accusation stick,
Apply such epithets both fierce and thick--
For so they stigmatized the Christ of old,
Prophets, apostles, martyrs manifold,
And still resort to the same fiendish trick.
It is sure proof of towering rectitude,
Love of truth, and reverence for right,
A soul with godlike principle inbued,
And lofty courage to maintain the fight,
When one is thus maliciously pursued; 28
For darkness hath no fellowship with light.
During his later years, as he contemplated the tumultuous

events of the ante-bellum period, the problems encountered by the

 

27Garrison to George W. Stacy, January 18, 1879, Garrison
Papers, Boston Public Library; Garrison to Samuel Hunt, December 26,
1876, Garrison Family Papers, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College;
p29, endent, December 10,1868. See also William Lloyd Garrison, pp;
:Ipfidelit " of Abolitionism (New York: American Anti-Slavery
Society, 1§6077

 

28Inde endent, January 31, 1867.

292

temperance crusaders, and the puzzling phenomena of spiritualism,
the former abolitionist also became aware of the fact that his old
co-workers were "fast disappearing from this earthly stage" and that,
in accordance with the laws of mortality, he too "must follow them
at no distant day."29

Garrison believed that it would be "unspeakably pleasant"
to greet his companions in reform "on the other side of the line."
In March,l87h he urged James Miller McKim to "hold fast" to the as-
surance that death was no dreadful calamity, but rather a most bene-
ficent arrangement. Although separated for a time from those dear
friends who were yet living, the newly deceased person would undoubt-
edly be surprised at "how quickly the broken links will be reunited,
and how many beloved ones on the other side are waiting to receive
us again to personal communion and visible fellowship." Later in
the year, Garrison told David Lee Child that, "having labored with
you and your dear and noble wife, for so many years, to make this
world better than we found it-- ...I hope to join you in another
sphere, animated by a similar spirit, and consecrating the same fa-
culties and powers to 'the general welfare.'" Should the reformers
find that "the sum of all villany" had managed to gain a foothold in

the after-life, Garrison would, he avowed, join with Child, "as in

 

ZgGarrison to Samuel J. May, February 9, 1871, Garrison
Papers, Boston Public Library. In a letter which he penned in 1858,
Garrison viewed the future life in a thoroughly spiritualist manner.
He considered death to be "a translation--a spiritual birth--one of
the.links in the chain of eternal pregression." He not only believed
in immortality, but also held that "our departed loved ones and
friends are around and with us, though unseen by mortal eyes, endeav-
oring to comfort and strengthen us in the hour of trial, and under
every bereavement." Garrison to Louisa Loring, May 2“, 1858, Garrison
Papers, Boston Public Library.

293
'auld lang syne,‘ in a war of extermination."3O
Regarding death as "simply an exchange of spheres for the
better," Garrison could not understand why any rational being should
be apprehensive or fearful in regard to such a translation. If the
present life was attractive, it necessarily followed, "in accordance
with the law of progress," that the life to come would be "increas-
ingly advantageous and desirable." Wherever one might be in the
universe, and whatever his condition, Divine Love would most assuredly
be "as solicitous for our welfare and happiness as now." Those who
believed otherwise were sadly deluded. Garrison thought it unfor-
tunate that so many men and women considered death to be a cause for
dismay and anguish--as though it were "an awful thing in itself."
In viewing man's "earthly exit" as "a manifestation of Divine dis-
pleasure on account of the alleged misconduct of Adam and Eve in the
Garden of Eden,...tainting and dooming all their posterity to the
end of time," these people showed that they had been greatly influ-
enced both by "unreasoning superstition" and by the "false teachings
of priestcraft." To adhere to such a theory of life and death was
to limit divine compassion and goodness. "Away with all such God-

dishonoring views!" he wrote in an 187“ letter to McKim, "You and I

 

30Garrison to James Miller McKim, March 31, 1874, Garrison
to David Lee Child, May 18, 187k, Garrison Papers, Boston Public
Library; Garrison to Fanny Garrison Villard, April 19, 1872, Houghton
Library, Harvard University. See also Garrison to Samuel J. May,
December 10, 1865, Garrison to Maria W. Chapman, January 18, 1877,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library; Garrison to John G. Anthony,
May 17, 187R, Garrison Family Papers, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith
College. In his letter to Child, Garrison noted: "I expect in the
future life to be governed 'by Shrewsbury clock,' or some other one
not less reliable, and to take cognizance of the procession of the
seasons and the revolutions of the planets, as now in the flesh."
Garrison to David Lee Child, May 18, l87h, Garrison Papers, Boston
Public Library.

29%

were early taught to believe them; but, happily, we have lived to

perceive their folly and impiety."31

 

31Garrison to Wendell P. Garrison, December 12, 1878,
Houghton Library, Harvard University; Garrison to Samuel May, Jr.,
December 19, 1874, Garrison to James Miller McKim, May 29, 187%,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library; Garrison to John G. Anthony,
May 17, 187k, Garrison Family Papers, Sophia Smith Collection, Smith
College.

CHAPTER XI
AN EXPRESSION OF GRATITUDE

I dwell here in no hackneyed cant about thanking
God for this deliverance...my thanks to-night are
to willing hearts and the willing hands that la-
bored in the beginning , amid loss of reputation,
amid insult and martyrdom, and at imminent peril
of life and limb.
--Frederick Douglass
April 26, 1870
However skeptical Frederick Douglass may have been about the
willingness of White Christian America to make a full and frank ac-
knowledgment of the Negro's manhood, he nevertheless hoped that the
blessings of political and civil equality would be granted to men of
all races as a logical consequence of the Union victory. Thus, it
was to be expected that he would raise his voice in thanksgiving at
the ratification of the Fifteenth Amendment in March, 1870. What
came as a rude shock to many of his contemporaries was the fact that
his thanks were offered exclusively to man while the God of the op-
pressed was shunned.1
Douglass' speech at the ratification celebration in Horticul-
tural Hall, Philadelphia, on April 26, was an important milestone in
his theological development, graphically marking the degree to which
he had modified the beliefs of his youth by shifting the emphasis in

the God-man relationship from heaven earthward. He looked upon the

 

1Quarles, Frederick Dou lass, p. 222.
295

296

great revolution which had taken the Negro "from the lowest depths
of bondage to the loftiest heights of citizenship" as having been
accomplished by men, through the spirit of their common humanity,
rather than by any special intervention of Providence. "I dwell
here in no hackneyed cant about thanking God for this deliverance,"
he said, "...my thanks to-night are to willing hearts and the will-
ing hands that labored in the beginning, amid loss of reputation,
amid insult and martyrdom, and at imminent peril of life and limb."
These were the people who, in an evil hour, had the courage and devo-
tion to stand by the cause of liberty and to demand that the bonds-
men be freed. Such men took the "great powers" which God had granted
to man and attempted to work out their own salvation--the salvation
of society. Armed with eternal justice, goodness, mercy, wisdom,
and knowledge, they labored to reform mankind. Those who desired to
take the credit for the slaves' deliverance away from these men and
place it with God were the very people who had hindered the aboli-
tionist cause by "telling us that God would abolish slavery in his
own good time."2

Douglass' remarks greatly angered an important segment of
Philadelphia's black clergy. Not only did they disagree with the ex-
slave, but they were also afraid that his observations would be ac-
cepted as the sentiments of the great mass of the Negro people. Under
the leadership of Bishop Jabez P. Campbell of the Philadelphia
Colored Methodist Episcopal Church, a meeting was called for the
evening of May 18. After the usual devotional exercises, Reverend

James Williams addressed the capacity audience which filled every

 

ZPhiladelphia Press, April 27. 1870.

297
seat in Bethel Church. With an air of sorrow, he gently rebuked the

abolitionist. "We have assembled to-night to give utterance to our
views," he declared, "and while we love Frederick Douglass, we love
truth more. We admire Frederick Douglass, but we love God more."
The next speaker, Reverend J. Frisby Cooper, was somewhat harsher in
his criticism of the Horticultural Hall address. Black men should
not follow Douglass' advice, but should instead thank God for their
deliverance. "We believe in God," he said, "and therefore worship
him. It is our duty to give thanks unto God for the many good gifts
we receive. If we put our trust in man he will deceive us; he will
be with us to-day and against us to-morrow." It was an awful thing
to say that man could not give thanks to the Heavenly Father. Had
it not been for His controlling influence, the slaves would still be
in bondage. Jeremiah Bewley Murray echoed these sentiments by noting
that, just as the children of Israel had been delivered from a ser-
vile bondage, the chattels of America had been rescued from slavery
by "an evident interposition on the part of Heaven." Isaiah C. Weir
then concluded the evening's oratory by asserting that "for all that
we have received and enjoyed, to God alone belongs the praise and
glory."3
Those black religionists who had followed the progression of
Douglass' religious thought throughout the 1850's and 1860's were at

least somewhat aware of the views which he had come to hold by the

 

3Cooper intimated that Douglass' "heresies" may have sprung
from a desire for "notoriety or popularity." Weir noted that, in
expressing such heretical sentiments at Horticultural Hall, Frederick
"made a mistake, and after so much had been said to pamper him, it is
not surprising that he has fallen." Philadelphia Press, May 19, 1870.
See also Foner, Frpderick Douglass, pp. 270-271; Herbert Aptheker,
"An Unpublished Frederick Douglass Letter," Journal 2; Negro History,
XLIV (July, 1959). 280.

298
time of the Horticultural Hall address. While he had offered the
customary thanks to God during several previous celebrations, his
post-bellum veneration of man's power was made clear on April 19,
1870, at the final meeting of the American Anti-Slavery Society.“
On this occasion, he noted that while many gave credit to God for
the successful conclusion of the abolitionist crusade, he would
rather offer his thanks to man. He wanted to express his gratitude
to God by thanking the faithful men and women who had devoted the
great energies of their soulsto the welfare of mankind. "It is only
through such men and such women," he asserted, "that I can get a
glimpse of God anywhere." A few days later in Albany, New York, at
a meeting celebrating the adoption of the Fifteenth Amendment,
Douglass again paid tribute to the people who had contributed most
sacrificially to the great victory. His heartfelt thanks went out
to Wendell Phillips, Thaddeus Stevens, Charles Sumner, and others,
but he did not list God as being among those primarily responsible
for the achievement of equal suffrage. By the time of his April 26
address, rumblings of disapproval had already begun to surface among
the nation's black religionists.5

If the reaction of the Philadelphia clergymen to Douglass'

 

hSee speech at Boston, January 1, 1863, in Boston Journal,
January 2, 1863; Speech at Watkins, New York, August 1, 1867, in
Holland, Colored Orator, pp. 319-320. See also speech at New York
City, February 13, 1865, in Philip S. Foner, ed., The Lifp and
Writings 25 Frederick Dou lass, III (New York: International
Publishers, 19525, 386-387.

5Aptheker, "Letter," p. 280; Foner, Frederick Dou lass,
pp. 266-269. At a May 19, 1870 celebration in Baltimore, Douglass
noted, "I loved everything of Maryland except slavery--it was that
I ran away from thirty-two years ago.... I found that God never began
to hear my prayers for liberty until I began to run. Then you ought
to have seen the dust rise behind me in answer to prayer." Np! Egg,
May 26, 1870.

299
speech was to be expected, the abolitionist's response to their cri-
ticism of his remarks was even more predictable. In a letter to the
Philadelphia 25355, Douglass told his critics that in landing the
works of man he was speaking only for himself and for no one else.
None of his remarks at Horticultural Hall were likely to cast the
least doubt upon the theological soundness of the Bethel Church min-
isters because that church had never been noted for heresy. Such
clerics would undoubtedly continue to "walk scrupulously in the old
clothes of Methodist theology of a half century ago, and indulge in
the same wild worship." Since heresy implied thought, inquiry, and
reflection, they were safe from its corrupting influence. Douglass
believed that instead of calling church meetings to "try distant
heretics like myself," Bishop Campbell should honestly work to re-
form the character, manners, and habits of "the festering thousands
of colored people" who lived in the vicinity of Big Bethel. By doing
so, he would do more to prove his church sound than by making wordy
speeches about thanking God. Lest anyone think that these cutting
remarks were a disavowal of the position which he had taken on
April 26, the ex-slave reaffirmed his stand. The deliverance of
black men from bondage, their elevation to citizenship, and their sub-
sequent enfranchisement did not stem from any miracle or from a spe-
cial interposition of Divine Providence, but was a result of "the
certain operation of natural causes inherent in the very constitution
of human nature." Human society operated under a set of inexorable
laws. Since the American people had continued to violate the eternal
code of justice, love, and liberty, it was understandable that these
laws, which were "written in the human soul," would eventually be

vindicated through war, blood, and pestilence. As slavery was created

300
by human selfishness and greed, so it was abolished by human justice
- and benevolence. Indeed, if the "sin-cursed" earth was ever to be
made better, it would become so through the faithful exertion and wise
application of human energies. "When anything is to be done in this
world," Douglass wrote, "some denizen of this world has got to do it,
or it will go undone."

Douglass declared that he could have escaped the censure of
the religionists by saying that God had abolished slavery in answer
to the prayers of the American Church and clergy, but he had refused
to stultify himself. During the forty years of moral effort to over-
throw slavery in America, the "hell-black" system had found no more
secure shelter than amidst the popular religious cant of the day.
Years ago it had been predicted that the day would come when the na-
tion's churches would claim the honor of abolishing slavery. They
were now doing so. Long aware of their time-serving and cowardly
subservience to the southern institution, and "knowing Bethel to be
like unto the rest," he could not countenance the pretentions of the
American churches. Thus, he had declared what he believed to be the
literal truth--that the abolition of slavery was due to "natural
causes."6

In rebutting the charges of the Philadelphia clergy, Douglass
defended man's right to freedom of thought. At Horticultural Hall
he had asserted his deep respect for this right. "I am a lover of
freedom," he asserted, "I am a Protestant. I believe in a free con-
science, both religiously and politically. I go in for this first,

second, and last,..." Later, in June, 1870, Douglass wrote that he

 

6Philadelphia Press, May 30, 1870; N2! £52, July 1“, 1870.

301

had no doubts that the avowal of his "liberal opinions" would alien-
ate him from many of his former friends and cause him to be excluded
from numerous lecture platforms, but such was the penalty which was
meted out to those who allowed "a new truth" to enter their minds.
The black religionists who were so disturbed over his speech had un-
doubtedly been divested of a love for philosophical inquiry by the
slave experience. Because of their background and training, they had
no desire to engage in such intellectual endeavor and were, in fact,
afraid of it. They could not trust their "natural powers," prefer--
ring to "lean upon authority more like children than grown up men."
As for himself, Douglass declared that he felt perfectly free to
follow his personal convictions wherever they might lead and vowed
that he would bow to no priests "either of faith or of unfaith."
Against men of all persuasions he claimed perfect freedom of thought.7

Douglass' argument for freedom of thought in religious mat-
ters extended to the use of the Bible in the public schools. In his
address of April 26, the ex-slave held that it was unwise to insist

upon the reading of the Scriptures in the public schools and contended

for a complete separation of Church and State as the "true course of

 

7Philade1phia Press, April 27, 1870; Douglass to Mr. Koehler,
June 1“, 1870, in Aptheker, "Letter," p. 278; Douglass to William
Whipper, June 9, 1870, American Negro Historical Society Papers, Leon
Gardiner Collection, Historical Society of Pennsylvania. In the
letter to Koehler, Douglass noted that he had found it "very easy"
to like all of Hoehler's "Free thinking circle." In 187“, be de-
clined an invitation to the Free Religious Convention in Boston, but
noted, "The word 'free' has a charming sound to me. Perhaps, my life
in slavery (only made endurable by the hope of some day being free)
may account for it. At any rate, I find myself without effort in
full accord with every earnest movement for larger freedom to mankind
both of body and mind. I know the works of the good men and women
of the Free religious convention and that they are full of promise
to the spirits in prison." Douglass to Mr. Potter, May 15, 187k,
Douglass Papers, Library of Congress. See also Holland, Colored
Orator, pp. 33k-335.

302
safety" for all institutions. According to Douglass, the schools of
the country were established to teach men "what can be known," not
to instruct them in what could not be known or in what someone else
believed concerning the unknown. Moreover, the question of Bible-
reading in the public schools inevitably brought up the problem of
Protestant infringement of Catholic rights. In his opinion, to im-
pose the reading of the King James Version of the Bible upon Roman
Catholic students was an unjust act. It was therefore preferable to
remove the whole question of religion from the schools and to place
it where it belonged--in the home and in the pulpit. If any man has
a faith, said Douglass, let his teach it to his family, let him teach
it from the pulpit and the press, let him teach it by his life, but
do not allow him to call upon the powers of government to enforce
the use of any one book of religious ideas. "Religious liberty. Oh!
what a liberty it is," he exclaimed. The right to think, to believe,
and to differ with the majority was a precious possession which
should not be compromised. His charge to the Church, whether Catho-
lic or Protestant, was "hands off the Government." Likewise, his

command to the government was "hands off the Church."8

 

8Philadelphia Press, April 27, 1870, May 30, 1870. Of free-
dom of religion in England Douglass wrote, "The religious liberty en-
joyed by the people of Great Britain is another of those old tradi-
tions, and to be sure, one which never was founded on anything but
sham and mockery. The horrid laws, dictated by the very spirit of
cruelty, bigotry, and religious persecution, by which the Irish Cath-
olics were made the Pariahs of society, worthy of the darkest days of
fanaticism, disgraced the very name of England as late as about a half
century ago, and nearly another half century was allowed to elapse
before they were relieved from the intolerable burden of supporting
a State Church,..." As for himself, the editor of 2p: Np! National
E35 asserted that "no man need expect anything from my pen of a sec-
.tarian character. All who labor to lead our people out of the wil-
derness of social, moral, and physical evils, of whatever religious
opinions, will be hailed here as 'countrymen, clansmen, kinsmen, and
bgothers beloved.'" Np! National Egg, August 17, 1871, September 8,
1 70.

303

Those remarks caused no less furor among the black clergy
~than the other portions of Douglass' Horticultural Hall address.
J. F. Cooper told the audience assembled in Bethel Church that the
removal of the Bible from the schools would lead to its removal from
the nation's courts of law and even from the churches. Society would
sink into a moral morass. Theft, murder, and "every crime known"
would run rampant. To prevent this national catastrophe, all men,
both black and white, were duty bound to vote for the retention of
the Scriptures in the educational process. "You have trusted in God
for a final deliverance and it has come," he said. "Let our votes,
then, be for the Bible in the public schools." Jeremiah Murray se-
conded Cooper's remarks and vowed that black Christians would "rally
around the Bible and our God if it costs us our lives."9

The black editor did not let his critics deter him from cham-
pioning a cause which he believed to be just. In January, 1872, be
criticized the expulsion of a number of Catholic students from a
public school in Hunter's Point, New York, for allegedly refusing
to participate in the reading of the King James Version of the Bible
and in the singing of Protestant hymns. According to Douglass, a
flagrant violation of the fundamental laws of the country was unde-
niable in this case. In politics the majority had to rule, but in

matters of religion the smallest minority was entitled to the same

 

9Philadelphia Press, May 19, 1870. Among the resolutions

adopted at the Bethel Church meeting were these: "Resolved, That it
is the duty of every American citizen, especially those of our peo-
ple, to thank God for his interposition in the deliverance and en-
franchisement of our race..."; "Resolved, That we recommend all men
everywhere to vote for the retention of the Bible, the book of God,
in the public schools..."; "Resolved, That we will not acknowledge
any man as a leader of our people who will not thank God for the de-
liverance and enfranchisement of our race, and who will not vote to
retain the Bible, the book of God, in our public schools."

304
rights and considerations as the largest majority. The conviction
of the surpassing excellence of one's own faith was surely no excuse
for compelling others to submit to its forms; "besides everyone thinks
his own the best, if not the only one leading to salvation." The
Protestant school officials involved in this affair apparently never
realized that they were establishing a dangerous precedent by their
actions. By extending the theory of majority rule to religious af-
fairs they had taken hold of "a sword that cuts both ways." The num-
ber of Roman Catholics in the United States was steadily increasing
and it was by no means improbable that they would eventually gain
control of the public schools in some areas. How, asked Douglass,
would the Hunter's Point officials like it if their school opened
each morning with the Ave Maria and the litanies. Under these condi-
tions, perhaps, they would not be such devoted adherents to the an-
cient doctrine: "My doxy is orthodoxy, and your doxy is, hetero-

doxy e "10

Lest it be assumed that Douglass was less critical of Roman
Catholics than of Protestants, it must be noted that be reserved some
of his harshest invective for those Catholics who would "appropriate
Heaven to good papists exclusively" while consigning the members of

all other denominations to perdition. During January, 1871, he

 

1°§23 National p55, January h, 1872. In 1869 William Lloyd
Garrison wrote: "As a matter of principle, may we not as reasonably
insist that only the Protestant religion shall be tolerated in the
land as that our Protestant Bible shall be read in the public
schools;...? We must adhere to what is fundamental in Protestantism
in matters of faith--namely, the right of private judgment;...or we
must go back to Home. There is no half-way stopping-place between.
Any attempt at religious training by the state is the union of church
and state; and that can never be sanctioned by a people who mean to
be free." Independent, November 11, 1869. See also Liberator,
December 17, 1858; Garrison to Oliver Johnson, December 27, 1869,
Garrison Papers, Boston Public Library.

305
struck out against the author of a recent article in The Catholic
florid who insisted "with great vehemency and self-complacency "that
the Protestant Bible was no Bible at all, but merely "a piece of
miserable patchwork" artfully fabricated by Luther and other early
German reformers-~a gross imposture "palmed upon us by bad men at
the beginning of the Reformation." In Douglass’ opinion, to charge
that the Book which the Protestants had received as the Holy Scrip-
tures was actually only an artfully produced scheme of heretics re-
quired an astonishing degree of presumption and more than an ordin-
ary share of bigotry. The King James Bible had been examined by the
world‘s ablest scholars and critics for over 350 years. All had cos-
bined in bearing testimony to ”its general faithfulness and its ex-
traordinary force and beauty." How grandly it compared with the
Douay Version of the Scriptures! Before the "Romish bigot" made
his damning charges he should have remembered the rebuke which Christ
administered to the boasting Pharisee.11 He should have taken heed
lest he and all others who were continually thanking God "from the

street corners and the house tops" that they were "not as other men"

 

118ec Luke 18:9-1k. Of the King James Bible, Douglass wrote,
"That it is the true Word of God, and not man's invention, let its
divine precepts and its influence upon the world be the proof...."
More commonly, however, the black editor was not at all eager to be-
come involved in complex discussions about the plenary inspiration
of the Bible. In an 1886 letter, he wrote that he had neither the
time nor the inclination to discuss the subject of the plenary inspir-
ation of the Bible. Douglass considered it to be far more important
to know "in what sense the Bible is understood" than to know "the
kind of inspiration we shall attribute to it." It was certainly es-
sential to know whether it was "for peace or for war, for love or for
hate, for charity or for bigotry; whether it welcomes men of all races
and colors to the same communion or whether it excludes a part and
compels it to go off in a church by itself,... whether Christianity
is a religion for one race, or for all races; whether it favors li-
berty or slavery; whether free salvation or predestination;..." 23:
National Era, January 5, 1871; Douglass to Theophilus G. Steward,
July 27, $336, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

306

receive the same Just condemnation.12

Far from sparing Catholicism from criticism during the 1870's,
the black editor seemed to be trying his best to convince the readers
of The E2! National £52 that Roman Catholics were especially guilty
of intolerance and were "hourly trampling upon every precept taught
by the Saviour and his disciples when on earth." In commenting upon
the remarks of a St. Louis priest who held that the Catholic Church
was the only religious body which could control the "fiery passions"
of the newly freed Negroes, Douglass noted that those bigots who
considered themselves to be the world's only true Christians some-
times forgot that there was Just as much morality, religion, civili-
nation, and prosperity in the United States, England and Prussia--
all supposed Protestant countrieso-as there was in Mexico, Spain,
and France. Perhaps with a little honest inquiry they could also
discover that there was quite as much virtue and honesty to be found
among Methodists and Baptists as among Catholics. In view of the
statistics which showed that the largest proportion of crime in New
York City was committed by Roman Catholics, Douglass believed that
it would be "but decent modesty" for priests to be somewhat more dis-

criminating in their criticism of Protestantism.13

 

1253! National E52, January 5, 1871. In the following issue
of his paper Douglass noted, "We hardly need say to those who know
our sentiments, that the article published in our columns of last
week, under the ception of Papist Self-Righteousness, should have
been published, if published at all, as a communication; for nothing
is more foreign to the purpose of this Journal than partisanship as
between rival religious denominations.... For aught we know, the
Douay Bible is as perfect a translation as that of the Protestant
version." Egg National £53, January 12, 1871.

l’Douglass' remarks on national morality must be looked upon
in light of the 1870-1871 Franco-German War. g2! National £53,
September 15, 1870, January 5, 1871. See also Egg National Egg,
July 20, 1871, April 18, 1872. The 33: National Egg was also critical

307

During 1872, as he continued editorially to flail the "Romish
bigots," Douglass sounded a warning to Protestant clergymen. Per-
haps, he noted, the Protestant ministers of Washington, D. C., did
not know that a considerable portion of the city's black population
had become attached to the Roman Catholic faith and that the number
was steadily rising. Efforts had been made by the priesthood to con-
vince the Negroes that a warm welcome awaited them within the con-
fines of the Catholic Church. They endeavored to win the black
man's confidence by admitting him on equal terms with the white man--
by exhibiting "practical proofs of anxiety" for the welfare of his
soul. If Protestant clergymen and missionaries would only take a
lesson from these "wise and ever active rivals" and exhibit a bit
more interest in the spiritual welfare of the Negro, the results
would be beneficial both to the Protestant faith and to the black
man. As the situation then stood, however, there were ministers in
Washington who apparently considered Protestantism to be a religion
created exclusively for white people. That these clerics were not
willing for black men to worship in the same church with them on earth
only Justified the Negroes' suspicions that white Christians would
not willingly "sit at the same table" with black Christians in hea-
ven. This "cold, repulsive policy," unless changed, would continue
to drive the colored people "into the embrace" of the Catholic

ChuCh e 1‘.

 

of Mormonism and polygamy during 1871. In November it reJoiced in
the fact that "there seems to be every prospect that the nuisance and
disgrace of Mormonism will soon be abated. What the laws can't do
the Pacific Railroad and the discovery of silver and tin mines will."
New National Era, November 2, 1871. See also N3! National Egg,
October 19, 1871.

luNgw Ngtigggl_§£g, Narch 21, 1872. In 1886 Douglass read
"with some amazement" a letter from a correspondent in Atlanta,

308
Douglass' religious life in Washington, the city in which
he and his family now resided, did not consist entirely of verbal

blasts aimed at the clergy.15

Although not a regular churchgoer, he
numbered several prominent clergymen among his closest acquaintances.
The letters which he received from the former pastor of Washington's
First Congregational Church, Jeremiah E. Rankin, president of Howard
University, testified to a high personal regard. According to
Douglass, "No truer man than he ever ascended a Washington pulpit."
His religion, "like the love of his Redeemer," was not bounded by
race or color, but included the whole human family. The black edio
tor never became a member of Rankin‘s church, but attended services
there often enough to be able to say that he found in it "more sym-
pathy with what I thought the spirit and purpose of Jesus than else-
where." From its pulpit went forth a "high and beneficent influ-

ence," full of Justice, mercy, and truth. There he heard the voice

 

Georgia, who apologised for the race prejudice which prevailed in
that city's religious establishment by noting that the failure of

the two races to unite in worship was not due to any lack of Chris-
tian or brotherly feeling, but rather was inherent "in the nature of
things." Continuing to believe that America's religious profession
and practice did not harmonize, Douglass held that it was a sad con-
fession of the impotency of Christian love if such.1ove could not per-
mit two varieties of the same human family to worship the Son of God
in the same church building. In 1889, Douglass complained that many
black people continued to prefer separate churches and schools. "Our
policy," he said, "should be to unite with the great mass of the
American people in all their activities, and resolve to fall or flour-
ish with our common country. We cannot afford to draw the color-line
in politics, trade, education, manners, religion, fashion, or civil-
ninafiion." Douglass to Jeremiah E. Rankin, May 10, 1886, Douglass
Papers, Library of Congress; Speech at Washington, D. 0., April 16,
1889, in Holland, Colored Orator, p. 376. See also N3! National Era,
October 6,1870; Speech at Louisville, Kentucky, September 25, 1833?
in Foner, Life and 'writin 8, IV, 379; Speech at Washington, D. 6.,
1885,81n gzner, Life and Writings, IV, “25; Holland, Colored Orat r,
PP033’3 o

15The Douglasses moved to Washington in July, 1872 after their
home in Rochester burned to the ground.

309

of the Savior of Mankind preaching deliverance to the captive. There
a black man could attend services "without seriously disturbing
Divine worship." It was this "broad christian spirit" which occa-
sionally led Douglass to "take a back seat in its congregation."16

Douglass was also on good terms with Bishop Daniel A. Payne
of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. He had first heard Payne
speak during the l8h0's in Bethel Church, Philadelphia. Even then,
he was impressed with his method of preaching. "It was not the style
I was accustomed to in [Baltimore]," Douglass recalled. There was
no effort to "raise a shout" or to excite unduly the feelings of his
listeners. Payne addressed himself to the mind and conscience of
the audience, rather than to their "fervid hopes and imagination."
He did not attempt to elicit an immediate expression of enthusiasm,
but sought to bring about permanent results by convincing the members
of the congregation that they should lead a life of truth and up-
rightness. While he gave his heart to the church, he gave a much
needed helping hand to all mankind. One year before his own death,

Douglass noted that age had made his friendship with the recently

 

l6Quarles, Frederick Dou lass, p. 296; Speech at Washington,
D. C., 1885, in Foner, Life gag Writin s, IV, #25; Douglass to Mr.
Deane, November 21, 1890, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress. In
1890, Douglass wrote from Washington, "I speak from experience. I
have set this city in serious commotion by my simple presence at a
morning service in a respectable church. Is it not strange that I
could attend a circus, a theater, a horse race, a ball game, an in-
fidel meeting, and excite no hostile feeling, when I could not attend
Divine worship in a christian church without exciting scorn and in-
dignation among the children of grace?.... I see not how any church
can dare call itself a christian church and yet turn its back upon
any human soul or treat any man with scorn who enters its congrega-
tion to hear or to pray. I have no respect for any religion that
despises my humanity in this world while it promises me a place in
heaven." Douglass to Mr. Deane, November 21, 1890, Douglass Papers,
Library of Congress.

310
departed Payne "as mellow as the morning light."17
The aversion to the "emotional religion" of his youth which
Douglass evidenced in his eulogy to Payne was another indication of
the changes through which he had passed. He believed this type of
worship to be linked closely with superstition and supernaturalism.
A belief in any one of these aspects of "thoughtless religion" marked
a person as being guilty of "wearing the old cast-off theological
hats and coats of fifty years ago." The religion of emotion abounded
in the wildest hopes and fears and in "blind unreasoning faith." In-
stead of adding virtue to faith, it tended to substitute faith for
virtue, and hence, was a deadly enemy to the progress of the Negro.

Scarcely in any direction could there be found a less favorable at-

mosphere for the development of mind or morals than where such a re-

ligion prevailed.l.8

In view of these beliefs, it was not surprising that Douglass
found it commendable that "the old camp-meeting emotional religion"

was subsiding among the black people-othat thought was taking the

17Memorial eulogy to Bishop Daniel A. Payne, Douglass Papers,
Library of Congress; Quarles, Frederick D u lass, p. 296. Some of
Douglass' most orthodox religious comments can be found in his corres-
pondence with Rev. Francis J. Grimke. See Douglass to Francis J.
Grimke, January 19, 1886, in Carter G. Woodson, ed., The Works of
Francis J. Gerke, IV (Washington, D. C.: Associated Publishers, Inc.,
19525, 5; Douglass to Francis J. Grimke, April 2#, 1886, in Woodson,
Gerke, IV, 3-h. See also Henry Richardson to Frederick Douglass,
September 27, 1882, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

18Speech at Elmira, New York, August 1, 1880, in Douglass,
LLfe, pp. 507-508; Frederick Douglass, "The Condition of the Freedmen,"
Harper's sWeekl , XXVII (December 8,1885), 78}. In his LLfe and Tiges,
Douglass wrote, "CAJll the prayers of Christendom cannot stop the
force of a single bullet, divest arsenic of poison, or suspend any
law of nature. In my communication with the colored people I have
endeavored to deliver them from the power of superstition, bigotry,
and priestcraft. In theology I have found them strutting about in'
the old clothes of the masters, Just as the masters strut about in
the old clothes of the past." Douglass, Life, pp. “79-k80.

311
place of feeling. While in slavery, when America held only toil,

stripes, and pain for them, Negroes were easily "wrought into par-
oxysms of momentary joy" by the promised glories of another, more
beneficent world. The "wild incoherent Samba sermons" had undoubtedly
been a help to many of the bondsmen. It was something to be told
that their suffering would soon be over and that for stripes on
earth they would receive stars in heaven. Nevertheless, "the rant
of those days" would not do for the more enlightened people of the
1880's. Black men were beginning to see that they could make some-
thing of themselves in this world as well as in the next. The young
people who had learned to read and write were demanding an educated,
chaste, and upright ministry. No longer would they tolerate the old-
fashioned preacher who ministered to passion and decried the intel-
lect. Such men of the cloth were rightly looked upon as hindrances
to progress whose ministry induced contentment with ignorance and
stupidity.19

Like many other Americans who were influenced by the new cur-
rents of thought in the post-war world, Douglass tended to Judge all
things, religion included, by taking them to "the bar of reason and

of science."20 In a lecture before the Bethel Literary and Historical

 

19Douglass, "Freedman," pp. 782-783. See also flag National
Egg, October 2“, 1872.

Zoggg National Egg, September 8, 1870, October 6, 1870. In
1870, Douglass lamented the fact that most Negroes seemed to value a
scriptural text far more than a scientific truth. It was far more
agreeable to them to "pursue what cannot be known than that which may
be known." The disciplines of Geology, Chemistry, Astronomy, Botany,
Philology, Ethnology, and "profane" History were not highly regarded
by black men. According to Frederick, "One sweep of the telescope
around the heavens converts GenesEiJs into a mEthh. The commonest
stone on the earth does the work for the six days story. But one
would be stoned if he said so in the presence of the religious crowd
of colored people, yet all intelligent white men know this and know

312

Society in Washington, Douglass asserted that "an irrepressible con-
flict, grander than that described by the late William H. Seward, is
perpetually going on." Two hostile and irreconcilable tendencies
were in the field-~good and evil, truth and error, enlightenment and
superstition. All would be well if the forces of enlightenment car-
ried the battle. On the other hand, if superstition was the victor,
the nation could perhaps look to a future as dark as that which en-
compassed the people of the Dominican Republic.21

On an 1871 tour of that poverty-stricken land, he found super-
stition "with palid cheek, and awe-struck vision," hoping by prayers,
incantations, and tastings to accomplish for its adherents what they
should have been doing for themselves. The superstitious refused to
see that the world was governed by laws which were in no way con-
trolled by faith. They contented themselves with ”listening to the
reveries of dreamers" rather than to the "sober sonitions of reason."
As he toured Santo Domingo, he was shown a cross which the priests
allegedly made the people believe need only be carried through the
streets of the city in seasons of drought to cause rain to fall in
abundance. He saw scores of people wandering about, "mumbling
prayers to themselves," and "gazing into the unknown" for the help

that they should have found in their own souls and in the powers

 

it none the less because they still cling to the Bible." On another
occasion, he asserted, "I do not know that I as an evolutionist, but
to this extent I am one. I certainly have more patience with those
who trace mankind upward from a low condition, even from the lower
animals, than with those who start him at a high point of perfection
and conduct him to a level with the brutes." Douglass to William
Hhipper, June 9, 1870, American Negro Historical Society Papers,

Leon Gardiner Collection, Historical Society of Pennsylvania; Holland,
Colored Orator, pp. 335-336.

21

 

Holland, Colored Orator, p. 336.

313

with which Nature had already supplied them. Obviously, it would be
clear to any observer that those who spent so much time engaged in
"forms and ceremonies" had little disposition to look rationally
into the problems of life or to set about the work of improving
their earthly condition.22

According to Douglass, only enlightened man, aided and sup-
ported by the strength of his own intellect, could solve the multi-
tudinous and diverse problems of mankind. The true philosophy of
reform which would set man on the path toward solving the world's
ills was not to be found in the heavens, but in humanity itself. So
far as the laws of the universe had been discovered and interpreted,
they seemed to teach that the mission of human improvement was wholly
committed to mortal hands. Han could be his own savior or his own
destroyer. He had neither angels to help him nor devils to hinder
him. It did not appear from the operation of these laws, nor from
any trustworthy data, that divine power was ever exerted to remove
evil from the world. Divinity never seemed to protect the weak
against the strong, the simple against the cunning, the oppressed
against the oppressor, or the slave against his master. No power of
heaven ever rescued even the most innocent mortal from the conse~
quences of violating a natural law. The babe and the lunatic both
perished when they fell from a great height. This was the fixed
and unalterable penalty for the transgression of the law of gravita-
tion. If such laws were not "imperative and inexorable," but could
be propitiated by prayers or other religious offerings, the "ever

shifting sands“ of piety or impiety would take the place_of law.

 

22".. National Era, April 13, 1871.

31h
Under these conditions, man would find himself without a standard
of right conduct.
The "more thoughtful" orthodox Christians conceded that the
laws pertaining to matter were unchangeable and eternal. They had
long since ceased to pray for rain or for clear weather. But to
save something from the wreck thatxthis admission made in their an-
cient theological system, they excepted the spiritual nature of man
from the operation of fixed and unchangeable law. To Douglass' mind
they gained nothing by making this distinction. If the smallest par-
ticle of matter in the universe was subject to natural law, it seemed
to him that a thing so important as the moral nature of man could not
be less so. Even when the orthodox admitted that there were moral
laws, they affirmed that the consequences of their violation could
be removed by "a prayer, a sigh, or a tear." In such cases, faith
took the place of law, and belief, the place of life. Douglass
could not accept this "office of faith" because he felt that it
struck at the fundamental principles of real progress. ine €F—wwv
.chorm had to ree£_eal££g_3§£B!PEi°P_i??? !§n 355 E Exsatnael9!,ab:
sglntm+_in£lexihlewlsweeboth.moral and spiritual. Human happiness
and well-being could be secured only by discovering and perfectly
obeying such laws.23
Douglass described one such man-initiated reform during a
speech at Elmira, New York on August I, 1880. West India Emancipa-
tion came not by bloody revolution, but by peaceful agitation--not
by divine interference, but by the exercise of human reason and feel-

ing. It was a revelation of the power inherent in human society,

 

23Holland, Colored Orator, pp. 336-538-

315
showing what could be done against worldly wrong without the aid of
"armies on the earth or of angels in the sky." The example of the
abolition of slavery in the West Indies gave life and vigor to the
abolition movement in America. "Clarkson of England gave us Garrison
of America; Granville Sharpe of England gave us our Wendell Phillips;
and Wilberforce of England gave us our peerless Charles Sumner," he
said. These "grand men" and their brave co-workers took up the moral
thunderbolts which had struck down slavery in the West Indies and
hurled them with increased zeal and power against the American slave
institution. Eventually, "goaded to madness," the slaveholders rent
the bonds of union and filled the land with hostile armies and "the
ten thousand horrors of war." Out of this man-made tempest came the
abolition of slavery in the United States.2“

Humanity could not, however, allow itself to be lulled into
inaction by the recitation of past triumphs. Much work remained to
be done to uplift the colored people. Their post-war plight had be-
come desperate as they crowded into the poorer sections of the large
cities. Even angels, said Douglass, would find it impossible to
rear families in those "dreadful dens of bad air and bad morals."

The nation's most populous urban centers were filled with unemployed
and destitute Negroes who were living "on the verge of life"-sus-
pended over "the sharp teeth of hunger." To rescue these people from
their wretchedness and to show them the way to knowledge, plenty, and
independence was a task which called for the labors of a true mission-

ary. Unfortunately, the American religious establishment continued

to send them missionaries of a different kind. Thousands of church

 

2“Speech at Elmira, New York, August 1, 1880, in Douglass,
Lit . pp. ‘.96, “98-4990

316

workers were rushing to save Negroes‘ souls from a misery which they
had never seen while passing by the misery "all around them and
every where visible." Christians were eager to take up the cross to
save mortal souls from future perditions, but passed by the bells
and horrors into which the black man was daily plunged.25
In Douglass' opinion, the American Church was to be valued
more for what it did to promote honorable character and conduct than
for its theological pronouncements. He cared less for form than for
substance--less for professions than practice. It was on this basis
that he decided which churches and religious organizations to support
financially during the 1880's. In April, 1881, he noted that he was
a subscriber to 223 Christian Recorder, organ of the African Metho-
dist Episcopal Church, not because he was in agreement with its the-
ological opinions, but because of its "tendency to educate and ele-
vate its readers in all their moral and social relations." Three
years later Douglass commended the post-war work of the American Mis-
sionary Association in "lifting up" the black man to a higher plane
of life. Not only had it taken the church among the freedmen, but
it had also remembered to "take the school-house." Ever concerned
for the material elevation of his people, the ex-slave evidenced his
deepest feelings when, in 1886, he wrote that "it is something to
give the Negro religion. It is more to give him justice. It is some-
thing to give him the Bible, it is more to give him the ballot. It
is something to tell him that there is a place for him in the Chris-

tian‘s heaven, it is more to let him have a place in this Christian

 

25!:3 N tic a1 Egg, September 22, 1870, July 6, 1871.

317

country to live upon in peace."26

In chapter eight of his gigs and Times, Frederick Douglass
referred to his European excursion of 1886-1887 as "a milestone in
my experience and journey of life." Since, by 1887, Douglass'
"journey" had spanned some seven decades of American history, his
account of the trip sometimes seemed to speak more of personalities
and events from his own past than it did of the historic sites which
he had visited in London, Paris, and Rome. Many of the former aboli-
tionist's religious views were also mirrored in this portion of his
autobiographyo-as well as in diary notations made during the tour.27

During his stay in Paris, Douglass frequently attended reli-
gious services in a little chapel in the Rue d'Arras. He went there
to hear Father Pere Hyacinthe speak. Said to be the most eloquent
preacher in the city, Hyacinthe was not a Protestant, but rather
called himself an Old Catholic and worshipped "according to the an-
cient customs of the church." Douglass found that he differed from

the more orthodox Catholics in that he contended for a congregational

church government, "a Bible open to all," and the right of a priest

 

26Douglass to Theophilus G. Steward, July 27, 1886, Douglass
Papers, Library of Congress; Frederick Douglass to Russell Lant
Carpenter, April 30, 1881, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress;
Douglass, "Freedman," p. 783; Douglass to w. H. Thomas, July 16, 1886,
in Foner, Life 22g Writin 3, IV, 4th. In his letter to Rev. Steward,
Douglass gave another reason for making contributions to various
churches: "It is because I would have colored people enjoy advan-
tages for assembling themselves together equal to those enjoyed by
others. A large, commodious, and well appointed church in pulpit,
choir, and architecture, is attractive to the people who assemble
and commands respect from the outside world...." Douglass to Theophilus
G. Steward, July 27, 1886, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

27Doug1ass, Life, p. 557.

318

to marry. Although his knowledge of French was much too limited to
understand all of the speaker's words, Douglass nevertheless "com-
prehended the noble spirit of the man" and was deeply impressed by
his oratorical ability. The ex-slave was especially attracted to
Hyacinthe because he had broken many of the spiritual fetters which
had bound him to Catholicism. He dared to follow his convictions
and to "stand alone in the world" even though this course of action
was leading him through the thorny paths of poverty and persecution.
Paris Catholics were opposed to his ministry because he had strayed
too far from orthodoxy and Protestants withheld their support be-
cause he did not "come quite near enough to them." Having broken
some spiritual, as well as physical chains in his own day, Douglass
could sympathize with Pere Hyacinthe-~a man who had "abandoned high
position and in the face of poverty and ostracism, dared to break
away from spiritual bondage."28

But Douglass was not entirely satisfied with Hyacinthe's re-
ligious profession. "I cannot understand," he said, "hvaather
Hyacinthe stopped half way in his religious evolution, and when I
see him still going through the service of the Roman Church, I reluc-
tantly ask myself, can it be that he believes in this?"

He was even less satisfied with the type of religion.which
he found at Avignon. In that city he visited the Palace of the Popes,

an ancient building which had been both a place of prayer and a place

 

ZBSpeech on Europe, 1889, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.
On Sunday, February 6, 1887, Douglass listened to a sermon in
Italian at the Methodist church in Pompeii, Italy. Called upon to
say a few words, which were interpreted by the Methodist minister,
he congratulated the congregation for having acquired "the liberty
to worship outside the Romish Church...." Douglass' Diary, February 6,
1887, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress. See also Foner, Frederick
Dou lass, p. 3h6.

. 319
of punishment. In the palace were many halls--"halls of judgment,

halls of inquisition, halls of torture, and halls of banqueting."
When he peered into its dungeons "where people were tortured and
doomed to death for rejecting the dogmas of the Romish faith," his
critical attitude once again asserted itself. "I almost hated the
name of the Church," he wrote. "What a horrible lie that Romish
Church has palmed ofEf] upon the people of this and otherEcountriesJ
pretending that its Pope is the Vice regent of God...." The holy
men of yesteryear were sometimes more like lions than lambs. In
the day of their rule at Avignon, religion allowed no freedom of
thought. Believe with the Church or be accursed, accept the "true"
faith or be hurled among the damned, had been the pronouncement of
the stern voice of religion. Douglass shuddered at the "ghosts of
dead and buried fanaticism, superstition, and bigotry" which roamed
the palace. He found it hard to believe that men could, from inno-
cent motives, so brutally punish those whose religious beliefs dif-
fered from their own, but when he remembered that many pious souls
in the United States still despised the Negro while they professed
to love the Lord, it became easier to believe that men could indeed
behave in such a manner. According to Douglass, a difference of re-
ligion in the days of the Avignon palace caused a man to be treated
in much the same way as a difference in skin color did in some por-
tions of nineteenth-century America. It was his fervent hope that
the same "light" which had "dawned" upon the question of freedom of

thought would soon illuminate the color question.29

 

29Theodore Stanton, "Frederick Douglass in Paris," 0 en
Court, I (April 28, 1887), 152; Douglass' Diary, January 10, 1887,
Douglass Papers, Library of Congress; Foner, Frederick Dou lass,
p. 3““; Douglass, Life, pp. 565-566. In 1875 Douglass said, "Who

. 320
The diary entries which Douglass made while in Rome reflected

another aspect of his continued resentment over the contradictions
which existed between Christian theory and practice. He could not
help being impressed by the beauty and splendor of St. Peter's Basil-
ica, but nevertheless felt the edifice stood in utter contradiction
to the life and lessons of Jesus. The Nazarene was "meek and lowly"
but "here was little else than pride and pomp."30 Through the inter-
vention of a friend, the Douglasses were able to see some of the "in-
terior treasures" of the cathedral. Douglass' anger mounted as he
viewed the costly ceremonial vestments decorated with "all manner of
precious stones," the gold and silver crosses, and the "other bril-
liant things" with which the papacy dazzled the eyes of "the credu-
lous and superstitious." The tourists were also shown many sacred
relics, among them two of the thorns which had pierced the brow of
Christ on the day of His crucifixion, a casket which contained the
head of St. Luke, and a lock of the Virgin Mary's hair. Douglass
marvelled at the solemnity with which their guide showed them the

devil's cloven foot imprinted in stone. He gazed with curiosity at

 

amongst us wants to go back to those great days of religious faith,
when the Church tore men's flesh from their bones with iron pincers,
and roasted them alive in fire and flame, because they entertained
religious views different from those proclaimed from its pulpit.
There are those who would tear men to-day, if they could, for their
difference in religion. They call hard names and endeavor to excite
prejudice; but we must all rejoice that the day of old-fashioned re-
ligious persecution has gone by." Speech at Philadelphia, 1875,
Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

30Douglass esteemed the works of man too highly to be overly
critical of St. Peter's. He wrote, "It is well for the world that the
age that could rear this wonderful building so perfect in architec-
tural grace has past. Yet in view of what it speaks of architec-
tural skills of man and his possibilities we may rejoice that this
marvellous building was erected and that it will long stand to please
the eye of man." Douglass' Diary, January 20, 1887, Douglass Papers,
Library of Congress.

321

the devout who queued up to kiss the statue of St. Peter. "What
will not men believe?" he asked. "Crowds of men and women going up
a stairway on their knees, monks making ornaments of dead men's
bones, others refusing to wash themselves-oand all in order to se-
cure the favor of God." To Douglass' mind, these practices "gave a
degrading idea of man‘s relation to the Infinite Author of the Uni-
verse." The tour only served to increase his belief in the hollow-
ness of the Catholic faith and to strengthen his conviction that
"Science must in the end do for that church what time has done for
the vast structures of kingly pride and power-~which lie broken and
mouldering all over Home."31

The glaring contrasts between wealth and poverty which
Douglass saw in the Eternal City also deepened his belief in those
aspects of religion which ministered to the physical needs of man.
Rome was a city of "divinity and dirt, of Religion and rags, of
grandeur and squalor, piety and poverty"--a place of lofty towers
pointing to heaven and of dark, cavernous rooms never reached by
pure air or sunshine. As a remedy for this situation, he favored
less religion and fewer rags, less piety and fewer beggars, fewer
churches and more pum~air and sunshine for the poverty-stricken. In

place of the "all-pervading, complicated, accumulated and mysterious"

 

31Douglass' Diary, January 2“, 1887, January 23, 1887,
Douglass Papers, Library of Congress; Douglass, Life, p. 577% Foner,
Frederick Dou lass, pp. 3kh-3k5. In Paris, Douglass attended a
grand mass in the Saint Eustache Cathedral, but left before the end
of the ceremony. "The superstition made me sad," he remarked in ex-
plaining his conduct. After witnessing the Easter services at St.
Peter'sin April, 1887, he described the ceremonies as abounding in
"much kneeling, changing of vestments, much.posturing, making signs
of the crosseand which seemed to my.eyes.mere pantomime, but which
to the worshippers I must try to believe was full of devotion.”
Stanton, "Douglass in Paris," p. 152; Douglass' Diary, April 15, 1887,
Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

322

power of the Catholic Church, Home needed to substitute that "gen-
uine Christianity" which did not neglect the oppressed, the father-
less or the widow.32

In early February, 1887, the Douglasses decided to extend
their tour to Egypt and Greece. While journeying from Ismalia to
Cairo, the ex-slave noted that the dark-skinned Egyptian people would
be classed with mulattoes and Negroes in the United States. He saw
now why the Mohammedan religion appealed to these people, "for it
does not make color the criterion of fellowship-oas some of our so
called Christian nations do." All colors were welcomed into the
faith of the Prophet. Later, after observing Muslim society for sev-
eral days, Douglass noted, "If sincerity is any proof of the truth
of their creed they certainly give that proof, but alas! sincerity
is no proof." History's most hideous impostures had been defended
with equal earnestness.33

Perhaps the "most hideous" of the impostures which Douglass
witnessed while in Cairo was the sight of the Howling Dervishes at
worship. Their frenzied shouting and dancing distressed him greatly.

Many of their actions reminded him of the black Methodist camp

 

32Douglass, Life, p. 575; Foner, Frederick Dou lass, p. 348;
Douglass to Amelia Douglass, April 29, 1887, Douglass Mss., New York
Public Library. Douglass did favor the Roman Catholic Church with
at least one compliment. In 1889 he noted: "I met in Paris no man-
ifestation against men on account of race or color.... I think it is
in part because the negro has never been seen there as a degraded
slave, but often as a gentleman and a scholar,... Perhaps also, the
absence of race prejudice may in some measure be due to the presence
and prevalence of the Roman Catholic religion. For whatever may be
its other faults and defects, the Roman Catholic church welcomes to
its altar and communion men of all races and colors, and would con-
tradict its assumption of being the universal church if it did other-
wise." Speech on Europe, 1889, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.
See also Stanton, "Douglass in Paris," p. 151.

33Doug1ass' Diary, February 18, 1887, February 26, 1887,
Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

323

meetings of the American South. It saddened him to think that ra-
tional beings "could be made to believe that such physical contor-
tions could be pleasing to God or secure his favour." Yet, he asked,
how much better is the form of worship adopted by many other denom-
inations? Was it not strange that men "should imagine to secure
Divine favor by telling God how good and great he is-oand how much
they love and adore him."? God was not glorified by such worship and,
more importantly, burnt offerings and incantations tended to "silence
reason and degrade manhood."3h

After his return to the United States in August, 1887,
Douglass' addresses and letters continued to speak of those religious
beliefs which he had come to hold after seventy years of introspec-
tive thought.35 As Haitian Commissioner at the World‘s Columbian
Exposition in 1893, he described the sordid relationship which had

existed between slavery and religion in the earlier years of the

 

3“Douglass' Diary, February 25, 1887, Douglass Papers, Library
of Congress; Douglass, Life, p. 587.

35Various estimates of the intellectual quality of Douglass‘
thoughts have been made. On an 1869 visit to the Douglass home in
Rochester, Richard T. Greener saw the master of the house "not as a
lecturer, but as one alive to all the new thought of the time, inter-
ested in literature, in music, in politics." Greener recalled that
this was "observable from his books and his surroundings." Through-
out their discussion of current thought, philosophy, history and
politics, Douglass "showed himself well informed, critical and a sys-
tematic reader." In 1895, Jane Marsh Parker wrote that the ex-slave
"never became a student, even when the victory of his cause had been
won, and he had the leisure for study. Composition was never easy
for him, unless his soul was stirred in its depths; nor was public
speaking, unless his tongue was on fire. His literary lectures upon
subjects foreign to his personal experience were largely disappoint-
ing... He liked a good novel--of the stirring kind. Dumas was one
of his favorites, and of 'The Three Musketeers' he never tired."
Frederic May Holland added: "His capacity for leading and organising
is beyond all question. He may not have been an original thinker;
but they are rare." Greener, "Reminiscences," pp. 292-293; Parker,
"Reminiscences," p. 5533 Holland, "Frederick Douglass," p. #416.

32h

century. The island nation of Haiti was the first to be "invaded"
by the Christian religion and to "witness its forms and ordinances."
It was the first to see a Christian church and to behold the cross
of Christ. It was also the first to witness the bitter agonies of
the Negro bending under the lash of Christian slaveholders. No peo-
ple had ever shown greater religious seal or had given more atten-
tion to the ordinances of the Church than the Spanish colonizers of
Haiti, but it was likewise true that no people had ever treated their
fellow men more cruelly or unjustly than those same religious Span-
iards. With "religion on their lips, the tiger in their hearts and
the slave whip in their hands" they lashed the innocent natives "to
toil, death and extinction." The example of Haiti seemed to prove
that men could be very pious and yet commit the foulest crimes ima-
ginable.36

Not until the Haitians "struck for freedom" was the conscience
of the Christian world awakened to the horrors of slavery. Haiti's
"brave example" startled the Christian nations and made them aware
of the Negro's manhood. Until the Haitians revolted, men made for-
tunes in the international slave trade and yet were considered to be
good Christians-~"the standing types and representations of the
Saviour of the World." The churches were silent and the pulpit was
dumb. Slave traders lived and slave traders died. Funeral services
were preached over them, the ministers assuring the mourners that their
loved ones had "died in the triumphs of the Christian faith."37

American slavery had also resulted in violence. It was indeed

 

36Speech at Chicago, January 2, 1893, in Foner, Life and
Writin s, IV, #78-479.

37Ibide, pe “850

325
a credit to the people of the United States to have blotted out the
infamous institution in 1865, but it would have been even more ad—
mirable if, along with slavery, Americans had ridded themselves of
color prejudice. In the United States a "white scoundrel," because
he was white, was more highly respected than an honest, educated
black man. A base white man could ride in the first class cars on
railroads, could attend the theater, and could enter any hotel or
restaurant, while a man with the least drop of African blood in his
veins would be refused and insulted. Nowhere in the world was the
dignity of manhood more exalted in speech and press than they were
in America, but nowhere was "manhood pure and simple more despised
than here." This fact was evidenced by the way in which the black
man was treated thirty years after the end of the Civil War. He was
excluded from every respectably calling, from "workshops, manufac-
tories, and the means of learning trades." Not only was the Negro
denied a decent livelihood, but he was also villified and persecuted.
The strength and activities of "the malign elements" of the country
against equal rights and equality before the law seemed to increase
in proportion to the increasing distance between the present day and
the time of the war. Indeed, there was nothing in the "history of
savages" to surpass the "blood-chilling horrors and fiendish ex-
cesses" which were perpetrated against the colored people by the
"so-called enlightened and Christian" lynch mobs of the southern
states. In the 1890's, the black man continued to remain "outside

the Church, and largely outside of the State."38

 

38Frederick Douglass, Th: Lesson 2;.thg Hour (pamphlet, 189k),

in Foner, Life and Writi 3, IV, #92-5933 Holland, Colored Orator,
p- 399; Douglass. Life. pp- 535. 539.

 

326

That the former abolitionist did not remain completely out-
side of the Church during the 1890's undoubtedly came as a surprise
to some churchmen. In his later years, Douglass, along with his se-
cond wife, Helen, attended Rev. J. T. Jenifer's Metropolitan African
Methodist Episcopal Church.39 At Douglass' funeral in February,
1895, Jenifer noted that the elder statesman of the abolitionist cru-
sade "always called this his church and took deep interest in its
welfare and in the affairs of the connection." Several times, at the
conclusion of the morning sermon, he had grasped the minister's hand
saying, "I have been greatly instructed, edified and inspired this
morning." On other occasions, Douglass told Jenifer that his soul
had been thrilled by Metropolitan Methodist's former pastor, Dr. John
W. Beckett, when he sang the old hymn, "Jesus my Savior, to Bethele-
ham came, Seeking for me; for me."

Dr. Jeremiah Rankin did not find it strange for the ex-slave
to attend services in Jenifer's church. "It was quite natural for
Mr. Douglass to come back here to the bosom of the Methodist Church,"
he said. By doing so he was saying to his old mother church that

the past had been forgiven. He was repeating in his heart the words

 

39Quarles, Frederick Dou lass, p. 29?; Helen Douglass to
editor of the Washington Evening Star, February, 1895, Douglass Papers,
Library of Congress.

“ODouglass, I2 Memoriam, pp. 27-28; Washington Evening Star,
February 25, 1895. Douglass seemed to take great pleasure in vocal
music during these years. In an 1895 interview, Rev. Francis J.
Grimke said: "I have never known a person, scarcely, who was so fond
of the singing of hymns as Mr. Douglass. Not long ago I was invited
to dine at his residence, and in the evening he suggested that we
should sing. He selected 'In Thy Cleft, 0h, Rock of Ages,’ and his
voice rose as if in triumph above the others. He sang every line of
every verse, and his face was bright with enthusiasm when he concluded."
Washington Evening Star, February 22, 1895. See also Douglass, lg
Memoriam, pp. 192-1933 Rochester Post Ex ress, February 26, 1895.

327

which Ruth spoke to her mother-in-law, Naomi: "Thy people shall be
my people and thy God my God"--hiding himself anew in "the 'cleft of
the rock' that was smitten on Calvary." Like a vessel that had made
many a rough voyage, but had come back to its final anchorage, "Mr.
Douglass each Lord's day sat with his dearly cherished companion in
this sanctuary of God."‘+1

Despite his attendance at A.M.E. services, Douglass refused
to return to the Methodist fold as a formal member. Asked by Rev.
Beckett to join Metropolitan Methodist Church in 1891, he answered
that he did not feel it his duty to become a member of any one of
the "many sects now arrogating to themselves the title of 233 Church
25 Christ and considering all outside of them 'ashamed of Jesus.'"
Lest Beckett become curious to know the reason for his church atten-
dance, Douglass noted that he continued to attend services at Metro-
politan Methodist "because I believe it is good for people to meet
together to worship God and gain religious instruction; because I
believe it is a duty to set a good example; because I feel myself
mentally, morally, spiritually and socially benefitted; because I
feel that your church is doing good to our people in many way ...."42

Frederick's church attendance certainly did not mean that he
had become a staunch advocate of those pharisaical practices which

he had so long condemned. During the 18k0's, the editor of The North

Star had avoided commenting on the question of Sabbath observance.

 

“ISee Ruth 1:16. Rev. J. E. Rankin, Frederick Douglass:
Memorial Words S oken At His Obsequies (Washington, D. C.: Howard
University Print, 1 957: pp. lO-ll; J. E. Rankin, "The Last Days of
Frederick Douglass," Independent, April 23, 1903; Douglass, lg
Memoriam, p. 206.

thouglass to John W. Beckett, October 28, 1891, Douglass
Papers, Library of Congress; Quarles, Frederick Dou lass, p. 297.

328

He claimed to hold no views on the subject which were not perfectly
consistent with both the Old and New Testaments and, as such, were
"in unison with the obvious dictates of common sense." Yet, Douglass
felt that he would be abusing the "high trust" which his subscribers
had placed in the S355 if a heated discussion of the Sabbath question
were to be carried on in the columns of his paper. "There are more
important topics that claim, and ought to claim, the attention of
mankind just now,..." he wrote, "We need moral rather than theolo-
gical light."h3

Through his personal actions, however, the black abolitionist
showed his scorn for the rigid observance of Sabbath laws. In 18h7,
while lecturing at Youngstown, Ohio, a deacon of one of the city's
churches threatened the antislavery party with prosecution if they
dared to set up seats for their audience on the Sabbath day. The
threat only caused the abolitionists to summon a number of friends
to the meeting site early in the morning to make the necessary seat-
ing arrangements. "The meeting was large and spirited," Douglass
wrote triumphantly, "The churches were all nearly vacated, and a large
portion of their congregations came to worship in God's great temple,
and to show their love for the All Good by doing good to His children."
For the men who braved the scorn of the local clergymen on such occa-
sions and aided the abolitionists in setting up chairs, he had only
praise. Those brave souls were determined to do something for human-
ity even though, by so doing, they would be ranked with Sabbath-
breakers. Truly, the genuine Christianity of Christ prayed "for more

of just such sabbath-breakers as these."uh

 

“3m ESQ-1:, OCtOber 27, 18u8e

““Douglass to Sidney Howard Gay, August 20, 18h7, in National

329

It was not surprising then to find Douglass in favor of
keeping the World's Columbian Exposition open on Sunday. He believed
that both the doors of the Church and the gates of the Exposition
should be allowed to remain open, "leaving to the peeple absolute
freedom of choice between one or the other." He urged policy making
officials to "resist the first encroachments of bigotry and supersti-
tion." Any such tendency should be "stamped out in the egg." Great
questions of human liberty and progress were not to be determined by
any text, but were to be left to "reason, experience, and the general
welfare." Nevertheless, in this case, be deemed it fortunate that
the Christian Scriptures, "not less than reason," rejected the author-
ity of the Jewish Sabbath as a holy day and left men free to choose
their own way of spending that day. When Christ was called to ac-
count by the church and priesthood of His day for breaking the Sab-
bath, he told them that the Son of Man was the Lord of the Sabbath.

He told them that the Sabbath was made for man and not man for the
Sabbath. Just as the Pharisees of that day would have shut hungry
men out of the cornfields, so today the same class would shut the
people out of the Exposition grounds.“5

In like manner, Douglass' church attendance did not mean that

 

Anti-Slavery Standard, September 2, 1847; Douglass to William Lloyd
Garrison, November 8, 18k2, in Liberator, November 18, 18h2. Benjamin
Quarles has noted that, while in England, Douglass and Garrison "got
in a blow for anti-Sabbatarianism" by spending a September, 18h6
Sunday afternoon "rolling balls on the greensward" in company with a
Unitarian minister. Quarles, Frederick Douglass, p. “9.

“SSee Mark 2:23-28. Douglass further noted that the Apostle
Paul, though brought up at the feet of the Pharisee Gamaliel "after
the manner of the perfect law," utterly rejected the bondage of the
law and declared that Jewish ordinances, the Sabbath included, were
ended in Christ. Douglass to Mr. Butterworth, January 20, [1893],
Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

330

he had radically altered his view of the nature of the God-man rela-
tionship. In September, 1890 at Tremont Temple in Boston, he was
preceded on the platform by a clergyman who asserted that it was nei-
ther the Garrisonians nor the Republicans who were responsible for
the abolition of slavery, but that the great deliverance was an act
of Almighty God. To this Douglass replied, "The good Lord had had
a chance for a long time before the abolition.... I am no pessimist;
I give thanks to the good Lord, and also to the good men through
whom He has worked." Prominent among these men were William Lloyd
Garrison and Wendell Phillips. They and their associates had made
Abraham Lincoln and the Republican party possible. What abolished
slavery was the moral sentiment which had been created, not by the
pulpit, but by the Garrisonian platform. The churches did more to
thwart the abolitionist program than they did to abolish slavery.“6

During the last years of his life, Douglass continued to for-
ward the belief that men, especially black men, should rely upon
their own power and upon "the things of this world" to solve their
worldly problems. During an address at Baltimore's Centennial Afri—
can Methodist Episcopal Church in 1891, he spoke of his preference
for "natural things" over "the spiritual." "When a child first comes
into the world," he noted, "it don't cry for metaphysics or for theo-
logy, but for a little milk." How could the black man get some of
this "milk"? In 1892 he answered this question by asserting that the
Negro had to "contend and strive" for the things which were freely
granted to other citizens "without effort or demand." This conflict

was, however, far from being a curse--it was ennobling. Conflict was

ueHolland, Colored Orator, pp. 390-391.

331
better than stagnation. It was bad to be a slave, but much worse
to be a willing and contented slave. Since American Negroes were
men, their goal for the future should be "perfect manhood, to be men
among men." Truly, the situation of the black people in the 1890's
demanded that they have faith in themselves, "faith in the power of
truth, faith in work, and faith in the influence of manly charac-

ter e N “7

 

“7Ba1timore Sun, September 7, 1891, Frederick Douglass,
Introduction to The Reason Wh the Colored American Is Ng£_ in the
World's Columbian Exposition pamphlet, Chicago, 18927, in Foner,
Life and eritin s, IV, #77. Speaking on the subject of the teaching
profession at the Manassae, Virginia Industrial School in 189“,
Douglass asserted his belief that "neither politics nor religion
present to us a calling higher than this primary business of unfold-
img and strengthening the powers of the human soul." Speech at
{Mansssas, Virginia, September 3, 189#, Douglass Papers, Library of
Congress.

EPILOGUE

When will men learn that "mercy" is above
"sacrifice;" that true Christianity is not
to be advanced by...shutting up meeting
houses against reform, and turning a deaf
ear to the cries of God's poor?
--Frederick Douglass
August 19, 18h9
If Frederick Douglass could not stop battling the wrongs
which plagued the Negro during the post-war years, he did manage to
sign a treaty of sorts with his old adversaries, the Garrisonians.
The Civil bar tended to push past differences into the background
and to make all groups of abolitionists more willing to work to-
gether for the overthrow of slavery. As the black abolitionist
noted in 1862, "We form a common league against slavery, and what-
ever political or personal differences, which have in other days
[divided] and distracted us, a common object and a common emergency
makes us for the time at least, forget those differences, and strike
at the common foe." Nevertheless, the war which again cemented the
Union left Douglass and Garrison apart.

During the post-war decades, Douglass' public comments on

the character of the Boston editor were not harshly critical. Even

 

1Foner, Frederick Dou lass, pp. 199-200; Douglass' Monthly,
March,1862; Quarles, "Breach," p. 15%. See also Douglass' Monthl ,
June, 1861, February, 1862. In 1862 Douglass wrote that "no class
of men are doing more according to their numbers, to conduct this
great war to the Emancipation of the slaves than Mr. Garrison and
the American anti-slavery society." Douglass' Monthly, March, 1862.

332

333

their differences over the advisability of disbanding the American
Anti-Slavery Society did not bring out the worst in the black aboli-
tionist's temper.2 Douglass continued to dissent from the assertion
that Garrison originated the antislavery movement. He still could
not "pretend to forget" the differences which had caused so much
trouble between himself and the Garrisonians. But, as he told Oliver
Johnson in 1885, he believed that he had grown less partisan over
the years. He now found it easy to "make little of mere personal
differences as to methods and even as to estimates of character grow-
ing out of such differences." These he considered to be merely "the
dust and smoke" of the fierce battle which the abolitionists had
waged against slavery.3

Douglass‘ most extensive analysis of his former mentor's
character came in the eulogy which he delivered at the Garrison mem-
orial meeting in Washington's 15th Street Presbyterian Church on
June 2, 1879. In the death of William Lloyd Garrison the nation be-
held a great life ended, a great purpose achieved, and "a great exam-
ple of heroic endeavor nobly established." Firm and fearless, clear-
sighted and strong, his meal was like fire and his courage like steel.

Driven from the doors of the Church that he loved, Garrison was

 

2In April, 1870 Douglass said of Garrison: "While the mid-
night darkness of slavery lasted, none more clearly than he saw the
true course, or more steadily pursued it; but the first streak of day-
light confused his vision, and he halted; while at halt, a part of
the hosts he had led moved on." Speech at Albany, New York, April 22,
1870, in £23 £53, May 5, 1870. See also Douglass, Life, pp. 377-379.

3Speech at Washington, D. 6., April 16, 1883, in Foner, Life
222 Writin s, IV, 362; Douglass to Oliver Johnson, 1885, in Foner,
Life 55g Writin s, IV, #26-427. In 1872, Douglass noted: "One of
the most valuable lessons left us by the abolition movement is faith
in man and in truth." Speech on the antislavery conflict, 1872,
Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

334

ridiculed, denounced, and misrepresented, yet he had continued to
stand tall, without bitterness or hate--without violence in speech
or act, in thought or wish. Born to poverty, to labor and to hard-
ship, he owed nothing to his early surroundings. He stood among the
learned and great of his day by his own exertion, rising not by the
power of the Church or the State, but in bold, inflexible, and de-
fiant opposition to the mighty power of both. Here was a man who
had truly possessed "faith in the simple truth and faith in himself."

Admitting that he had sometimes considered his fellow aboli-
tionist to be uncharitable toward those who differed with him,
Douglass said that this trait of Garrison's only proved him to be
human. Honest himself, Garrison could not always see how men could
differ with him and still be honest. "CHJhen he erred here," Douglass
noted, "he erred in the interest of truth." He revolted at half-
heartedness, abhorred compromise, and demanded that men "should be
either hot or cold." Although he sometimes carried the practice to
excess, he tried all men, parties, and sects by one simple principle:
"They that were not for him were against him."u

In his last letter to Frederic May Holland, Douglass wrote
that he did not believe that the leader of the Massachusetts aboli-
tionists "went to his grave, thinking there was any 'roguery' in me."
If he did, the ex-slave did not consider himself to be alone "in
this bad opinion of his." No man who ever removed himself from the
"Garrisonian denomination" was permitted to leave without a doubt be-
ing cast upon his honesty. This was one of Garrison's weapons of

waro-a weapon which surely "never rusted for want of using." In any

 

I*Speech at Washington, D. 0., June 2, 1879, Douglass Papers,
Library of Congress.

r. j f
‘,. \v'

43115

case, concluded Douglass, "There are spots on the sun; but it shines
for all that; and Garrison with all his harshness of judgment is
Garrison still, and one of the best men of mothers borne."s

Douglass was not alone in eulogizing the Boston reformer.
As is often the case with the passing of famous men, the death of
William Lloyd Garrison on May 2h, 1879 served as an occasion for
friends, former associates, and casual acquaintances to pass Judg-
ment on the life of the departed. While the majority of the commen-
tators were largely or wholly concerned with formulating an estima-
tion of Garrison as an abolitionist, there were those who sought to
voice their opinion of Garrison as a Christian. To one close friend
there seemed to be as little truth in the assertion that the former
Newburyport choirboy was an infidel as there was in the charge that
Jesus was a blasphemer. A second individual considered Garrison to
be the "ripest fruit" which the Church had produced in recent times--
"the best, almost the only evidence of her essential Christianity
and value." Nevertheless, another generally sympathetic acquaintance

admitted that during the antislavery conflict Garrison made certain

controversial statements which, perhaps, "he ought not to have said."

 

5Holland, "Frederick Douglass," p. “#15. In 1891, Holland
wrote Douglass, "I am particularly glad to find you satisfied with
what I say about Garrison. If I were re-writing this book,[IFrederick
Douglass: Th3 Colored Orator] I should make my estimate of him even
less favorable." Frederic May Holland to Frederick Douglass, April 20,
1891, Douglass Papers, Library of Congress.

6Johnson, "Garrison as a Christian," p. 506; Wendell Phillips,
"Garrison," North American Review, CCLXXIII (August, 1879), 152;
Josiah Copley, "William Lloyd Garrison," United Presb terian, (June 5,
1879), 362. See also William Dorling, "William Lloyd Garrison, "
.Modern ReviewI I (March, 1880), 365-366; Child, "Garrison," p. 236;
{Phomas Wentworth Higginson, "Two Antislavery Leaders," International
Review, IX (August, 1880), 1““.

336

Comments encompassing a similar range of opinion appeared in
the press following the death of Frederick Douglass in February, 1895.
Some acquaintances were defensive of his "infidelity" while others
saw nothing in his religious life which required such a defense.
While some estimations of his religious character were highly lauda-
tory, others hinted at a disapproval of his theological beliefs.7

What is one to make of these comments? Surely, it was not
the place of the eulogist to examine the religious evolution of these
men in minute detail. But even those who penned their evaluations
for church-related publications seemed to be more interested in right-
ing old wrongs and justifying past deeds than in dispassionately ex-
amining the religious views of the two reformers. In order to do
justice to such a subject, they would have had to detach themselves
from the emotional aura which surrounded Garrison and Douglass even
after deatho-and this was something which the various writers and
eulogists were unable to accomplish. The crusade against slavery
had generated too much controversy to be easily forgotten. Aboli-
tionist and slaveholder, Garrisonian and clergyman, bondsman and mas-
ter, still remembered the roles which they had played during the
ante-bellum era and were not about to pass from the earth without
registering a final testimony against their opponents of yesteryear.
In like manner, those who had been too young to play a major role in
the moral battles of the past were eager to express their opinion on

the question of whether a Garrison or a Douglass was the chosen of

 

7See Rankin, Memorial Words, pp. 11-12; Douglass, In Memori-
53, pp. 26-28, 192-193, 202-203, 23“, 2h3, 325; Theodore Tilton,
Sonnets 52 322 Memory 2; Frederick Douglass (Paris: Brentano's,
18955. p. 7; Parker, "Reminiscences," p. 553; Washington Evening Star,
February 21, 1895. February 22, 1895, February 25, 1895; Inde endent,
February 28, 1895.

33?
Christ or the spawn of Satan.8

The preceding pages have traced the religious evolution of
these two key nineteenth-century figures in order to show that their
personal involvement in the fight against slavery led them to modify
religious views to which they had been deeply attached in earlier
years. Raised in an atmosphere of Christian love and piety, Garrison
was taught to eschew sin in all of its manifestations. He was sup-
ported by fellow believers in denouncing tippling, smoking, immoral-
ity, and "religious infidelity" and thus expected to have the aid of
these same Christians in his fight against the sin of slavery. Un-
fortunately, many of the New Englanders who were closest to Garrison
in a theological sense were not willing to place themselves in the
vanguard of the antislavery enterprise. Judging their stand to be
both uncharitable and un-Christian, the young reformer compensated
for the religionists' lack of interest in the bondsmen by devoting
an ever-increasing proportion of his time to antislavery endeavor.

As his gradualism changed to immediatism and his fulminations against
slaveholders and their "northern allies," including churchmen, became
more heated, the breach between Garrison and the clergy widened.

The indifference and hostility with which a large segment of
the American religious establishment met his pleas for immediate and
unconditional emancipation not only caused Garrison to become alien—
ated from the clergy, but also served to convince him that he needed

to reconsider many of the religious views which he had held since

 

8See Greener, "Reminiscences," p. 29H; Johnson, "Garrison as
a Christian," p. 5063 Phillips, "Garrison," p. 143; Johnson, Garrison
and His Times, pp. 70-71, 78-80, 363-366, 368, 371; Daniel Dorchester,
“The Relations of the Churches and Mr. Garrison to the American Anti-
slavery Movement," Methodist Quarterly Review, XXXIII (April-July,
1881). pp. 270-286. 375-500.

338
the days of his youth. Separated from his religious roots, he found

it increasingly easy to reject those elements of his evangelical
heritage which seemed to do little for man and nothing for the suffer-
ing slave. Consequently, religious "forms and ceremonies," sabba-
tarianism, and "temple worship" became targets of his critical pen.
When combined with his immediatist doctrines, these attacks on widely
held religious beliefs and practices increased even further the dis-
tance between himself and the more orthodox evangelicals.

Into this breach stepped several of the nation's most liberal
religionists. Not an original thinker in matters of theology, Garri-
son was greatly influenced in his theological views by those individ-
uals, such as Henry C. Wright, Lucretia Mott, and Theodore Parker,
who were able to give abundant evidence of "practical righteousness"
through their support of the antislavery crusade. To join with
Garrison in the abolitionist cause not only showed that a person was
spiritually liberated from the "corrupt and wrongheaded" notions for-
warded by the nation's "time-serving" clergymen, but it also gave
one access to Garrison's mind. Convinced that antislavery was "of
God," the Boston editor refused to receive religious instruction from
those who believed it to be "of the devil." He would, instead, fel-
lowship with those who agreed with him that the object of Christian-
ity, as taught by its founder, was to undo the heavy burdens of suf-
fering humanity, not to increase those burdens.

Having planted his abolitionist standard in the camp of the
religious liberals, Garrison further modified his beliefs. Not only
"forms and ceremonies," but religious revivals, the divinely inspired
Bible, and the doctrine of the atonement were discredited. Champion-

ing a type of freedom of conscience which his own devotion to the

339
tenets of Garrisonian abolitionism seemed at times to violate, the
Boston editor defended those individuals who, like himself, had been
"despised and rejected of men" because of their willingness to for-
ward unpopular sentiments. To Garrison's mind, it was indeed "a
good thing to be a heretic" if the only alternative to heresy was
an unthinking adherence to a heartless orthodoxy.

Despite his markedly different background and experiences,
Frederick Douglass followed a somewhat similar path to religious
liberalism. Indeed he went even further than his antislavery mentor
by rejecting the power of the Christians' God. Like Garrison, the
ex-slave was disappointed with the Christians' response to the moral
challenge of slavery. Treated shabbily by slaveholders who claimed
to be eminently pious, Douglass hoped that northern churchmen, unlike
those of the South, would treat him as a brother in Christ. Unfor-
tunately, he found only proscription, prejudice, and indifference in
the sanctuaries of the northern churches. Believing that a "genuine
Christianity" would evidence love both to God and man, Douglass
sought a "higher faith" in the company of the Garrisonian abolition-
ists. Attracted to Garrison in spite of his "heretical" views, the
ex-slave was influenced greatly by his contact with the Boston re-
former. As a Garrisonian, he became an enthusiastic critic of organ-
ized religion, political parties, and the American Union with slave-
holders.

During the 1850's, when he found that he was both alienated
from the Church of his youth and estranged from the radical aboli-
tionists, Douglass placed an ever-increasing emphasis upon man's power
in the shaping of human events. Eventually his love of God was trans-

formed into a veneration of man and his works while the doctrine of

340
"genuine Christianity" was changed into a personalized social gos-
pel. Unlike Garrison, the black abolitionist refused to give God a
major portion of the credit for the success of the abolitionist cru-
sade.

The causal factors involved in religious change are both
multitudinous and infinitely complex. No attempt has been made in
this study to forward the idea that a single, overriding factor or
event can explain all of the changes which were effected in the reli-
gious views of the two abolitionists. It has, however, been sugges-
ted that for an individual to feel that his deepest convictions and
concerns, his reputation, and his manhood have been assailed and ul-
timately treated as unworthy of respect by the very sources of author-
ity which he has been taught to honor can become a major determinant
of that person's future belief and behavior. In the case of Garrison
and Douglass, to be "rejected of men" closed off certain avenues of
belief and opened up others which may never have been seriously con-
sidered had the rejection experience not occurred.

Those seeking to effect reform in the religious institutions
of the twentieth century have often complained of the same exclusive-
ness and unwillingness of the Church to "strike a blow for freedom"
which so greatly disheartened Douglass and Garrison. In doing so
they have claimed for themselves an allegiance to a higher form of
religious faith than that prevailing in the nation's churches. It
is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility that modern-day ac-
tivists, finding their deepest convictions to be ridiculed or treated
as unimportant by the Church, will follow in the steps of the two
nineteenth-century abolitionists--abandoning the beliefs of their

youth as they attempt to find support and acceptance for their deeply

391

held religious and social concerns. If today's churchmen deem it
important that such activists be kept "in the fold"--if they would
prefer not to be stigmatized as "hypocrites" and "Pharisees," then
it is imperative that they examine the possible consequences of
their refusal to consider the proposals of the modern-day reformers
with an open mind and, to some degree, a sense of history. To be
"rejected of men" tends to make an individual consider the possibil-
ity of breaking old ties and of abandoning long-accepted beliefs.
Unless future generations of men differ radically from those of the
past and the present, it is entirely possible that such rejection

will always lead to this type of theological reappraisal.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL ESSAY

WILLIAM LLOYD GARRISON

Archival Materials
The most valuable and wide-ranging collection of manuscripts

useful to the study of William Lloyd Garrison's changing religious

views are those housed in the Department of Rare Books and Manuscripts,

Boston Public Library. In addition to its Garrison holdings, the
Samuel May, Jr. Papers, the Amos Phelps Papers, the Weston Family
Papers, and the Edmund Quincy-Richard D. Webb Correspondence are also
useful. Houghton Library's collection of Garrison material is like-
wise extensive. Most valuable are the letters penned by Garrison to
his fiancee,Helen Benson,and those written to his daughter, Fanny
Garrison Villard. Many of the Boston reformer's letters to William
Lloyd, Jr., are in the Garrison Family Papers, Smith College, North-
ampton, Massachusetts. Included in the Sophia Smith Collection are
several important letters from Garrison‘s mother and sister urging
him to "seek Jesus."

Despite the concentration of Garrison material in the Boston
area, many manuscripts remain scattered in repositories located in
other parts of the country. Professors Walter M. Merrill and Louis
Ruchames are attempting to remove this "bottleneck" to scholarly re-
search by collecting and publishing all letters written by the Boston
abolitionist between 1822 and 1879. Two of the projected six volumes

have already appeared. Merrill's I Will B3 Heardl, 1822-1825, Vol. I

343

34k
of 233 Letters 3; William glglg Garrison (Cambridge, 1971) and
Ruchames' A £3233 Dividing Against Itself, 18g6-18ho, Vol. II of
222 Letters 2; William £1213 Garrison (Cambridge, 1971) are models
of editorial craftsmanship. The two books contain 471 documents
drawn from the major collections already mentioned,as well as from
the New York Public Library, the Garrison Collection of the Massa-
chusetts Historical Society, the Merrill Collection at Wichita State
University, and the Lewis Tappan Papers in The Library of Congress.
Other Garrison papers are housed in the libraries of the Essex Insti-
tute, the American Antiquarian Society, the Maine Historical Society,
the Historical Society of Pennsylvania, Swarthmore College, Haver-

ford College, and Yale University.

Newspapers

Garrison's changing religious views can be traced in the
columns of the newspapers with which he was connected during his
long editorial career. The Newburyport Herald (Newburyport, Massa-
chusetts, 1822-1825), the Newburyport Egg: £5233 (Newburyport,
Massachusetts, 1826), the National Philanthropist (Boston, 1828),
the Journal 23 £53 Ziggg (Bennington, Vermont, 1828-1829), the Genius
21 Universal Emancipation (Baltimore, 1829-1830), 222 Liberator
(Boston, 1831-1865), and 22: Independent (New York, 1868-1876) yield
varying amounts of pertinent information. Most valuable as a research
tool is Garrison's Liberator. It is conceivable that a fairly com-
plete study of the abolitionist's life between 1831 and 1865 could be
made using only this paper as an information source. Second in im-
portance is the religious journal, Th: Independent, for which Garrison

wrote over 100 articles. Both weeklies are available on microfilm.

 

345

Ready access to the other Garrison newspapers is somewhat more diffi-
cult. Indeed, the files of the Journal 23 the Times once held by the

Bennington Museum have completely disappeared over the years.

Contemporary Accounts

In addition to his newspaper articles, Garrison also authored
a number of antislavery tracts. The most useful to the study of his
religious views are Thoughts 23 African Colonization (Boston, 1832)
and 2g: :Igfidelity" g; Abolitionism (New York, 1860). Also of some
value is Selections £325 Eh: Writings 23g Speeches 2; William ngyg
Garrison (Boston, 1852).

Many of Garrison's writings are included in his sons' massive
William £1212 Garrison, 1802-1822: 22: §2231 2; gig gig; 221g 21
His Children (A vols., New York, 1885-1889). Although Francis
Jackson Garrison and Wendell Phillips Garrison seemed at times to
be more interested in preserving their father's correspondence than
in formulating an interpretive portrait of him, they nevertheless
concluded that "the name of gentleman, like that of Christian, is
sadly abused; but if...father did not deserve to bear both the one
and the other, there is no reason why the world should cherish
either." (IV, p. 32k.)

Also highly laudatory is Oliver Johnson's William £1219
Garrison 522 £15 21225 (Boston, 1880). Containing an abundance of
material concerning "the times"--including Johnson's view of the
abolitionist-ministerial conflict--Garrison 523 EEE £3223 pictures
the Boston editor as the founder and moral leader of the abolition
movement. According to Johnson, Garrison possessed a trust in God
and a faith in the "sacredness and power of moral principles" more

"absolute" and "immovable" than that "exhibited by any other man."

 

346
(p. 52). Similar statements are made in Johnson's "Mr. Garrison as
a Christian," Christian Egigg, XIX (June 8, 1879), 506; "The Hour
and the Man," Independent, June 12, 1879; and "Garrison's Piety,"
Christian Re ister, January 30, 1890.

Other associates in reform also penned complimentary accounts
of "Garrison the Christian." In S223 Recollections 25 923 Antislav-
ggy Conflict (Boston, 1869),Samue1 J. May asserted that the "reli-
gion of Jesus Christ" was "dearer to Mr. Garrison than his own life."
Only the "hollow-hearted pretenders to piety" were made the targets
of his censure and rebuke (p. 34). Wendell Phillips echoed May's
sentiments in the eulogy which he delivered at Garrison's funeral,
an oration reprinted in Old S2252 Leaflets, Vol. IV, No. 79 (Boston,
n.d.). Phillips expanded his remarks in "Garrison," E2523 American
Review, CCLXXIII (August, 1879), 1hl-l52. Noting that Garrison "had
not the profoundness of Emerson, the brilliancy of Phillips, or
Whittier's visions of truth draped in poetic beauty. He simply had
strong, practical good sense; but this was combined with intense
moral earnestness, and the hammer and the fire tagether molded the
hardest materials into the shape he willed," Lydia Maria Child penned
a somewhat more objective portrait of the abolitionist in "William
Lloyd Garrison," Atlantic Monthl , XLIV (August, 1879), 234-238.

Several additional writers of the day gave their opinion of
Garrison's religious character. Among the most important of these
are: Mary Howitt, "Memoir of William Lloyd Garrison," People's
Journal, II (September-October, l8h6), pp. lhl-lh5, 166-168, 179-180,
185-187; William Dorling, "William Lloyd Garrison," Modern Review,

I (March, 1880), 355-374; and Daniel Dorchester, "The Relations of

 

347
the Churches and Mr. Garrison to the American Antislavery Movement,"
Methodist Quarterly Review, XXXIII (April-July, 1881), pp. 270-286,
k7h-500--the latter being a spirited defense of the role played by
the Church in the antislavery struggle.

Other accounts of Garrison's life include: Archibald H.
Grimke's William ggglg Garrison: 3g; Abolitionist (New York, 1891)
and "Biographical Oration," Alexander's Ma azine, I (January, 1906),
17-22; Goldwin Smith, TA: A252; Crusader, William AAgyA Garrison:

A Biographical Eggs; Founded 25 [Egg S5251 2; Garrison's AAA; TQAA
21 AAA Children“ (New York, 1892); William Denton, Garrison §£.§221?
gg: A Egggg,(Wellesley, Massachusetts, n.d.); Josiah Copley,
"William Lloyd Garrison," United Presb terian, (June 5, 1879), 362;
and John W. Chadwick, "The Garrison Memoir," Unitarian Review, XXXII

(D.C.Iberg 1889). 506-519e

Modern Accounts

Garrison biographies have proliferated during the twentieth
century, but none has examined thoroughly the abolitionist's chang-
ing religious views. In William Algyg Garrison (Philadelphia, 1911),
Lindsay Swift devoted a number of pages to the Boston editor's theo-
logical evolution, but was overly disposed to philosophize and to
psychologically analyze his subject. John Jay Chapman's William
ElElE Garrison (Boston, 1913) is even more impressionistic. Believ-
ing that "the history of the United States between 1800 and 1860 will
some day be rewritten with this man as its central figure," (p. x),
Chapman portrayed Garrison as God's agent in the eternal contest of
good against evil. Fanny Garrison Villard's William E1212 Garrison

22 Non-Resistance (New York, 1924) is no less complimentary.

31.8

The 1950's witnessed a new upsurge of scholarly interest in
Garrison. Ralph horngold's 232 Friends pg Asp, 223 Spgpy 23 William
AAgyA Garrison £22 Wendell Phillips 2&2 Tpgip RelationshAp ELLE
Abraham Lincoln (Boston, 1950) criticizes the Boston editor's post-
war position on reform, but says little about his religious views.

In William AApyA Garrison 222 the Humanitarian Reformers (Boston,
1955), Russel B. Nye grappled with the complexities of the reformer's
religious character, although space limitations dictated that this

be done in a less than complete and detailed manner.

Two major Garrison studies appeared in 1963. A third signi-
ficant work was published in 1969. More than any other recent writer,
John L. Thomas, in TE: Liberator: William AApyA Garrison (Boston,
1963) stressed the formative effects of religion on the abolition-
ist's life. Due to the length of his book (over 500 pages) and the
focus of his scholarly interests (American intellectual history),
Thomas was able to deal with many long-neglected aspects of Garrison's
religious character. Walter M. Merrill's Against EApg 229 TAAA: A
Biography 2; E2; AApyA Garrison (Cambridge, 1963) is a more concise
work than 353 Liberator and relies to a greater extent on primary
source material. In attempting to present the Boston reformer "in
the context of his family and his closest associates--a side of
Garrison neglected by other biographers," (p. xv), Merrill illumina-
ted aspects of his subject's character which even the lengthy Thomas
work slights. Merrill's "Prologue to Reform--Garrison's Early
Career," p232; Institute Historical Collections, xc11 (April, 1956).
153-170 and "A Passionate Attachment: William Lloyd Garrison's

Courtship of Helen Eliza Benson," New England Quarterly, XXIX (June,

389

1956), 182-203 are also valuable. Aileen S. Kraditor's Means and

 

£222.£2 American Abolitionism: Garrison and His Critics pp Strategy
222 Tactics, 183h-l850 does not deal specifically with Garrison's
religious views, but nevertheless contains a number of incisive state-
ments on the abolitionist's antisabbatarianism, come-outerism, and
perfectionism.

David Alan Williams' "William Lloyd Garrison, the Historians,
and the Abolitionist Movement," £3335 Institute Historical Collec-
pAgpg, XCVIII (April, 1962), 84-99 and Jean Wentworth's "'Not Without
Honor': William Lloyd Garrison," Maryland Historical Ma azine, LXII
(September, 1967), 318-335 are useful historiographical essays on

Garrisonian scholarship.
FREDERICK DOUGLASS

Archival Materials

The manuscripts most important to the study of the black
abolitionist's religious views are those found in the Frederick
Douglass Papers now in The Library of Congress. Following their re-
moval from the Douglass home, "Cedar Hill," in January, 1972, the
Papers were reorganized and definitively arranged to better facili-
tate future research. While stored at "Cedar Hill," Anacostia, the
manuscript materials were microfilmed and a Calendar 2; AA: Writings
2; Frederick Douglass (Washington, D. C., 1940) was compiled. The
twenty reels of positive microfilm contain important letters and
speeches as well as various newspaper clippings, legal documents, and
the Douglass Diary. TA: Calendar, containing a foreword by Carter G.

Woodson, is incomplete and outdated, but useful.

350

Many of the manuscripts now housed in The Library of Con-
gress are reprinted in Philip S. Foner's TA: Elifi 2&3 Writings 2;
Frederick Douglass (# vols., New York, 1950-1955). Beginning in
l9##, Foner made a nationwide search to uncover little known Douglass
material and thereby to remedy the "deplorable situation in American
historiography" which denied the black reformer his rightful place
among major nineteenth-century figures. The four volumes contain 21
items from the Douglass Home, #6 from the Gerrit Smith Papers, Syra-
cuse University, and 9 from the Charles Sumner Papers, Harvard Uni-
versity. Other manuscript collections represented include the Anti-
slavery Collection of the Boston Public Library (7 letters), Univer-
sity of Rochester Collection (3 letters), and the Historical Society
of Pennsylvania Collection (2 letters). Documents representative of
those included in the larger work may be found in Foner's Frederick

Douglass: Selection; From His Writings (New York, l9#5).

Newspapers

Douglass' four newspapers contain a vast amount of informa-
tion vital to the study of the black editor's theological development.
For many years it was widely believed that the invaluable research
tool, 223 Egppp S325, had been lost forever in the fire which de-
stroyed the Douglass home in 1872. Nevertheless, due to the efforts
of Foner and others, researchers now have access to many issues of
both the S555 (Rochester, 1827-1851) and Frederick Douglass' nggp
(Rochester, 1851-1860). Foner's AAgg gpg‘yritings contains #2 ex-
cerpts from 222 52212 §£2£ and 33 from Douglass' Egpgp. Microfilmed
copies of the papers are also available. Douglass' Monthly (Roches-

ter, 1859-1863) and The New National Era (Washington, D. C., 1870-

351
187#) are represented in Foner's collection by 101 and 36 excerpts,
respectively. These two papers are also available on microfilm.
Other papers which contain useful information are Garrison's
Liberator and 12: National Anti-Slavery Standard, organ of the

American Anti-Slavery Society.

Contemporary Accounts

The most valuable insight into Douglass' changing religious
beliefs can be gained by reading the black abolitionist's autobio-
graphy. The first version of this work appeared under the title,
Narrative 2; App AAAA 2g Frederick Douglass (Boston, l8#5). This
relatively short volume contained a preface written by Garrison and
an appendix dealing with "The Christianity of America." Ten years
later, an expanded version, fly Bondage AAA fly Freedom (New York,
1855), was published. This version contained an important section
on the ex-slave's religious life in New Bedford which was later de-

leted from the otherwise more complete Life and Times 2; Frederick

 

 

 

Douglass (1881, 1892).

Other useful published Douglass writings are his "Folly of
Our Opponents," in 223 Liberty 22;; (Boston: Massachusetts Anti-
Slavery Fair, 18#5), pp. 166-172; "Bibles for the Slaves," in TA:
Liberty §2ll (Boston: Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Bazaar, 18#8),
pp. 253-255; "The Condition of the Freedmen," Harper's Weekl , XXVII
(December 8, 1883), 782-783; and "Reminiscences," Cosmopolitan, VII
(August, 1889), 376-382.

Second only to the abolitionist's own work in importance is
.Frederic May Holland's avowedly partisan account, Frederick Douglass:

'The Colored Orator (New York. 1891). In writing this biography,

352
7 Holland was able to use unpublished materials and rare manuscripts
loaned to him by Douglass. He also interviewed the ex-slave at
"Cedar Hill" and was given permission to use Frederick Douglass, Jr.'s
collection of memorabilia. Consequently, The Colored Orator con-
tains many bits of information about Douglass' religious life which
are recorded in no other published work.

Several other contemporaries either described Douglass'
actions or gave their opinionflof his religious character. The best
of these writings are: Theodore Stanton, "Frederick Douglass in
Paris," ngp 92353, I (April 28, 1887), 151-153; Richard T. Greener,
"Reminiscences of Frederick Douglass," Champion Ma azine, I (February,
1917), 291-295; and Helen Pitts Douglass, ed., Ag Memoriam: Frederick
Douglass (Philadelphia, 1897)--the latter being a compilation of re-

miniscences and funeral oratory.

Modern Accounts

The two finest twentieth-century biographies of Douglass are
Benjamin Quarles' Frederick Douglass (Washington, D. C., l9#8) and
Philip Foner's Frederick Douglass (New York, 196#). Unfortunately,
these works give the reader relatively little insight into the com-
plexities of the black abolitionist's religious development. Both
historians are, however, more adept in untangling the charges and
counter-charges of the Garrison-Douglass feud. Quarles' "The Breach
Between Douglass and Garrison," Journal 2; Nggpg History, XXIII
(April, 1938), 1##-15# is also extremely valuable in this respect.

Other biographers have been even less interested in Douglass'
religious beliefs. Neither Charles W. Chesnutt's Frederick Douglass

(Boston, 1899), or Booker T. Washington's Frederick Douglass (Phila-

353
delphia, 1906) devote much space to the ex-slave's theological views.

Indeed, Washington even wrote that Douglass "never formulated any
definite religious creed." (p. 351) Shirley Graham's There Was Once
2 Slave: The Heroic Story 2; Frederick Douglass (New York, l9#7)

and Arna Bontemps' Free t Last: The Life 2; Frederick Douglass

 

 

(New York, 1971) offer the student of religious change little new
information.

Of greater value are the shorter and more narrowly focused
studies of the black abolitionist's life. Chief among these are:
Amy Hanmer-Croughton's "Anti-Slavery Days in Rochester" in Rochester
' Historical Society Publication Fund Series, Vol. XIV (Rochester, 1936),
pp. 113-155; George Shepperson's "Frederick Douglass and Scotland,"
Journal 2; Eggpg Histor , XXXVIII (July, 1953), 307-321; Herbert
Aptheker's "An Unpublished Frederick Douglass Letter," Journal 2;
Aggpg Histor , XLIV (July, 1959), 277-281; and J. W. Cooke's "Freedom
in the Thoughts of Frederick Douglass, l8#5-1860," Eggpp History

Bulletin, XXXII (February, 1969), 6-10.

llHl Will”1111111111 1111111111“ HHIHIHHI

017309521