Recent scholarship has looked at the issue of slavery from a Puritan viewpoint to a very limited extent and only from the New England perspective. [1] The issue recently came into sharp focus following the release of a rap song by Christian hip-hop artist Propaganda. [2] The song ignited a firestorm of response in the blogosphere by various historians, pastors, and church leaders, ranging from defense of the Puritans to condemnation of the Puritans’ position on slavery. [3] Such a debate can quickly devolve into an argument about race and ethnicity while failing to deal honestly with the writings of Puritans, written within their respective historical environments. The Puritans, especially Richard Baxter, [4] and to a lesser extent, William Gouge, [5] developed a social ethic or conscience regarding the issue of slavery based on scriptural injunctions, though not going far enough to call for an end to slavery. [6]
This article will approach the issue from several different angles. First, the parameters of Puritanism must be established in order to argue effectively for a collective social ethic regarding the issue of slavery in the sixteenth and seventeenth century. This article will then look at what Baxter and Gouge said regarding servanthood and slavery, demonstrating that the Puritan view of servanthood and slavery were closely linked and based on ethical injunctions from Scripture.
From a historical standpoint alone, it is very difficult to argue for the position that the Puritans advocated for or against slavery in collective fashion. Part of this difficulty lays in the fact that Puritanism as a movement is difficult to define in terms of its historical parameters. As with most historical movements or developments, difficulty lies in pinpointing an exact start date or an exact end date, and the influence of a particular historical movement or figure can easily extend beyond the actual time period given. The Puritan era as defined by Joel Beeke and Mark Jones ends somewhere between 1662-1689, or perhaps as late as 1705. [7] However, for the purposes of this paper and for the sake of historical argument, this article will set the parameters of Puritanism as ending in 1662 or 1689, the dates which find most consensus among scholars of Puritanism.
Puritanism can be further divided into Puritanism in England and in the early colonies in America, each with its own unique set of circumstances and influences. The majority of scholarship is focused on slavery in New England and almost none on slavery among the English Puritans. As such, Richard Baxter and William Gouge do speak to the issue of slavery from a general English Puritan perspective from the opposite side of the Atlantic. Although not ignoring the influence of Puritanism in New England nor the devastating effects of slavery in the colonies, those topics fall outside of the scope of this study and can be accessed through the studies of Bremer, Bradley, and others, which deal with slavery from a New England perspective. [8]
Richard Baxter wrote A Christian Directory, a manual of Christian ethics and pastoral counsel, in which he addresses servanthood and slavery, making careful distinctions between the two concepts, yet eventually linking them. Servanthood is akin to the modern day employer-employee contract; it is entered into willingly and the servant receives proper remuneration. Slavery, in general, is the coercing of individuals into forced labor with no remuneration and pitiable living conditions. Throughout his work, Baxter works with this distinction and provides clarifying evidence of his stance on slavery as a result. What emerges from Baxter—and from Gouge as well—is a form of “humanized” slavery governed by certain principles and rules, but no clear call to end slavery as a social institution.
The Master-Servant Relationship
For Baxter, the master-servant relationship was an integral part of the social fabric of the seventeenth century. His work contains practical directions or instructions for both masters and servants. He carefully directs masters to be careful in their choice of servants since servants were “integral parts of the Family, who contribute much to the holiness or unholiness of it, and to the happiness or misery of it, it much concerneth Masters to be careful in their choice. And the harder it is to find such as are indeed desirable, the more careful and diligent in it should you be.” [9] A master must look carefully into the matter of finding a good servant so that they show, “1. Strength, 2. Skill, 3. Willingness: And no two of these will serve without the third.” [10] Willingness thus became the cardinal virtue governing the servant selection process. This certainly does not give the picture of coercion but demonstrates that there was some sort of choice on the part of the servant. This also indicates that servants were not relegated to the servants’ quarters, but were to contribute to the overall family culture.
The care of the servant, both physically and spiritually, is incumbent upon the master. He bears full responsibility under God for the life of the servant. [11] In order to emphasize this point, Baxter writes that the master, when selecting even an ungodly servant, must “take them not as you buy a horse or an ox, with a purpose only to use them for your work: But remember they have immortal souls which you take charge of.” [12] The servant is not a mere piece of property or two-thirds of a person as promoted in later slavery; Baxter here affirms a servant’s basic human dignity and the inestimable value of the human soul. Baxter reaffirms this truth when he writes that masters must regard their servants as brothers in Christ and “fellow servants.” [13] The master was to teach them at family worship, see to it that the servants attended public worship, and “pray for them daily, as well as your own selves.” [14]
The rule of justice and equity must prevail from master to servant, in regard to both working conditions and remuneration the master provides for his servant. The workload must be moderated to fit the health and strength of the servant. Baxter here invokes the Golden Rule and argues with masters, “And should another mans Life be cast away for your commodity? Do as you would be done by if you were servants yourselves and in their case.” [15] As to remuneration, Baxter gives this direction: “Provide them such wholesome food and lodging, and such wages as their service doth deserve, or as you have promised them.” [16] He reprimands those who would deprive a servant of his due wages, saying that “it is so odious an oppression and injustice to defraud a servant or labourer of his wages (yea or to give him less than he deserveth) that methinks I should not need to speak much against it among Christians.” [17] In arguing for justice in the master-servant relationship, Baxter invokes James 5:1-5, [18] which according to Baxter ought to be enough evidence to argue for justice and equity, seeing that fraud and injustice will only serve to the condemnation of masters. [19]
William Gouge takes a similar course in his treatment of the master-servant relationship found in his treatise, Of Domestical Duties, which first took shape as a series of sermons to his congregation. Like Baxter, he bases his remarks on an exposition of Ephesians 6:5-9. Structurally, he moves from servant to master, from lesser to greater in terms of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century social standing, also following Paul’s pattern in Ephesians 6. At the outset, Gouge argues that there are certain societal structures as seen from Ephesians 6. He says that servants “[i]n their Opinion…must be informed and resolved that the place of a master and a servant is lawfull and warrantable: that God in general ordained degrees of superioritie and inferioritie, of authority and subjection: and in particular gave to masters the authoritie which they have, and put servants in that subjection wherein they are.” [20] For Gouge, the master-servant relationship is not only found in the New Testament, but also in the fourth commandment, “where God giveth a charge to masters over their servants, to see that they doe no manner of worke.” [21] Further evidence for this relationship is found in the specific case laws of Moses, the Book of Proverbs, the parables of Christ, and the fact that saints throughout history have occupied either place of master and servant. [22] This is where Gouge differs from Baxter. Baxter cites the voluntary nature of the master-servant relationship, whereas Gouge considers the relationship less voluntary and more rigid according to each one’s calling by God within societal structure.
Although the master-servant authority structure in Gouge’s thought seems to be more rigid than in Baxter’s, Gouge does distinguish between the outward authority structure, which maintains distinction between the master and servant, and the image of God, which constitutes inward equality between the master and servant. On the one hand, Gouge writes that the master retains the image of God in terms of exercising authority and thus is called to exercise that authority. [23] On the other hand, Gouge maintains that the image of God constitutes equality inwardly when he writes, “Though for outward order a master be more excellent than a servant, yet as a man he ought to judge himselfe equal.” [24] This inward equality finds expression in the master and servant before God as created in God’s image. In expositing Ephesians 6:9, Gouge recognizes that this verse “declareth an equality betwixt masters and servants in relation to God.” [25] Thus he acknowledges differences in terms of authority and relationship; but, in terms of basic human dignity and value before God, the master and servant are equal. As such, this line of thought does not seem odd or revolutionary but seems to form the foundation of even modern societal structure: some people have legitimate authority over others, yet also equality rooted in the image of God.
While Gouge seems to advocate a harsher authority structure in the master-servant relationship, he does remind masters not to be too rigorous towards their servants in looks, speech, and action. This caution provides some measure of restraint upon those who would unjustly punish their servants and falls under Gouge’s treatment of the duties of servants to their masters. But elsewhere Gouge seems to advocate physical violence towards servants—though never to the point where the servant’s life is endangered. [26] However, the equality mentioned above ought to temper a master’s propensity to cruelty. When they realize that “in regard of outward government there be some difference betwixt them and their servants, yet before God they are as fellow servants, would they be over-rigorous and cruell? Would they not be kind and gentle?” [27] Thus Gouge seeks to bring moderation into the discussion of corporal punishment between master and servant.
Despite his allowance for corporal punishment, Gouge argues that justice and equity ought to control the relationship between master and servant. Gouge writes, “All servants, in that they are servants, and doe their masters worke, must have that which of right belongeth to servants. This is Justice.” [28] Equity is defined in the following way when “such servants as beare an especiall love and liking to their masters, doing service not by constraint, or with eye-service, as men-pleasers, but in singlenesse of heart with good will, and all good faithfulnesse, seeking to the uttermost of their power, their masters good, must be accordingly respected and dealt withal. This is Equitie.” [29] Furthermore, Gouge links the master’s goodness to justice and his gentleness to equity. [30]
While the master should follow certain guidelines in choosing a godly servant, it is also incumbent upon a servant to choose an employer wisely. Baxter writes, “Seeing the happiness of a servant, the safety of his soul, and the comfort of his life, depend very much upon the family and place which he liveth in, it much concerneth every prudent servant to be very careful in what place or family he take up his abode, and to make the wisest choice he can.” [31] The choice of employment or master should not be based on “ease or sensuality.” [32] Rather the choice of employment should reflect the choice “to live in such a place where you have the greatest helps and smallest hinderances to the pleasing of God, and the saving of your souls: and in the such a place where you shall have no liberty to sin, nor have your fleshly will fulfilled, but shall be best instructed to know and do the will of God, and under him the will of your Superiors.” [33]
Servants are responsible, as much as in them lies and with as much knowledge as they have, to choose a master “that will have a care of your souls, as well as your bodies, and will require you to do Gods service as well as their own: and not with worldly ungodly Masters, that will use you as they do their beasts, to do their work, and never take care to further your own salvation.” [34] The servants must also do their utmost “to be the best servants.” [35] The best servants do not demand charity from their masters, but, by virtue of being the best, their master “in point of Justice…owe[s] you nothing but what your work and virtues shall deserve.” [36] If a particular master was not fulfilling his obligations to care for his servant, finding an alternate place of employment was an option. Baxter urges the servant to be content with the provisions they receive by giving this direction, “Grudge not at the meanness of the provisions of the family.” [37] He goes on to explain that “if you have not that which is needful to your health, remove to another place as soon as you can, without reproaching the place where you are. But if you have your daily bread, that is, your necessary wholesome food, how course soever, your murmuring for want of more delicious fare, is but your shame, and sheweth that your hearts are sunk into your bellies, and that you are fleshly minded persons.” [38]
Several observations are to be noted in Baxter’s directions to servants. First, while the social ladder remained much more static in the seventeenth century than in the modern social structure, this does not mean that the servant is forever stuck in a rut of servitude. Later, Baxter explains that servants are sometimes bound by contracts that limit them for a time. For the most part, servants are free to choose their masters; thus Baxter maintains a voluntariness or mutuality within the master-servant relationship, which slavery will ultimately deny. Second, the master-servant relationship is evangelistic and moral in nature. It is evangelistic in the sense that the master ought to promote the salvation and Christian growth in any way he can; the relationship is moral in the sense that the servant is first of all answerable to do God’s service and then his master’s. Thirdly, Baxter does not deny that there are masters who abuse their servants; therefore, servants must choose those masters who treat their servants with dignity and respect. Finally, a good servant will have justice on his side in receiving his just remuneration for services offered as well as living conditions that promote both his spiritual and physical well-being.
Gouge also speaks of justice in the master-servant relationship because the master’s justice extends to “the soule, bodie, and estate of their servants.” [39] Similar to Baxter’s directions, Gouge writes that the master is obligated to see that his servant’s soul is ministered to in both family and public worship. He must also provide sufficient food to his servants. The master is further obligated to moderate the work of the servant according to their capacity. The justice of the master further extends to clothing, times of rest, times of recreation, giving proper medical attention in times of sickness, and just wages for services rendered. [40] There is thus an overall desire on the part of both Baxter and Gouge to ensure proper working conditions.
Gouge proceeds to define the duties of a servant to his master. A servant must show his master fear—a fear which is “an awe in regard of his masters place: a dread in regard of his masters power. An awe is such a reverend esteeme of his master, as maketh him account of his master worthy of all honour…. A dread is such a feare of provoking his masters wrath, as maketh him thinke and cast every way how to please him.” [41] Although servants are to fear their masters, masters are in turn “to carrie themselves as their servants may rather reverence, then dread them.” [42] Obedience is the cardinal virtue in the servant for Gouge. Obedience is the servant’s “maine, and most peculiar function.” [43] For Gouge, there are strict rules that govern a servant’s life:
- They may not go wherever they want;
- They must not do their own business and affairs;
- They must not do anything else than what is prescribed for them to do;
- They must not marry for the length of contract, unless their master grants permission;
- They must not use their masters goods at their own pleasure;
- They must not break the terms of their contract by leaving their master. [44]
But let masters here learne to cast off all such fond conceits, and foolish hopes. Though they be higher in place, have more wealth, and better friends then their servants, and though men who have carnall eies may thereby be much moved to respect them, yet will not God goe an haires bredth from justice for the whole world. If the greatest man that ever was in the world should have a servant that were the meanest that ever was, and a case betwixt that master and that servant should come before God, God would not any whit at all leane to that master more then to the servant. If the greatest that be abuse the meanest, they shall not escape. Wherefore, O masters, give no just cause of complaint to any servant. [48]While this is a powerful and comforting statement regarding the justice of God, it is not a call to redress the injustices that took place in the master’s home.
The Master-Slave Relationship
Understanding Baxter’s position on slavery requires understanding his and Gouge’s position on the master-servant relationship. Both men clearly ground this master-servant relationship on Scripture. He quotes Ephesians 6:9, “And ye Masters, do the same things to them, forbearing threatening, knowing that your master also is in heaven, neither is there respect of persons with him.” [49] Baxter also invokes Colossians 4:1, which states, “Masters, give unto your servants that which is just and equal, &c.” [50] Baxter and Gouge clearly build a system of moral rules regarding the master-servant relationship, which overlaps with their discussion of a master-slave relationship. After quoting these Scripture references, Baxter segues into a discussion about slavery. Within the structure of A Directory, he includes the issue of slavery under the chapter dealing with directions to masters in how to treat their servants, thus linking these two important concepts.
Unlike Baxter, who clearly distinguishes between servant and slave, Gouge links the two concepts of servant and slave together when he defines what a servant is:
This title (Servants) is a generall title, which may be applied to all such as by any outward civill bond, or right, owe their service to another; of what sex soever the persons themselves be: or of what kinde soever their servitude is: whether more servile or liberall. Servile, as being borne servants, or sold for servants, or taken in warre, or ransomed; For of old they were called servants, who being taken in warre, were saved from death. Liberall, as being by voluntary contract made servants, whether at will…or for a certaine terme of years. Servants they must be subject, and doe the duty of servants: the Apostles indefinite title (servants) admitteth no exception of any. [51]Gouge distinguishes here between the servile and liberal (or free) servants and does not use the servant-slave distinction as Baxter clearly does. Baxter understands that both servanthood and slavery are more voluntary in nature but nevertheless overlap in some areas.
Baxter begins his discussion of slavery under the title, “Directions to those Masters in foraign Plantations who have Negro’s and other Slaves; being a solution of several Cases about them.” [52] In writing these directions to these masters, Baxter seeks to remind them that their power over their slaves is limited. It is limited because God has set those limits upon them. Those limits are seen first of all in equality between master and slave. Baxter writes, “Remember that they are of as good a kind as you; that is, They are reasonable Creatures, as well as you; and born to as much natural liberty.” [53] Baxter reaffirms the biblical truth that all humans are created in the image of God and are reasonable creatures; thus the slave is not inferior to his master. Baxter also reaffirms the natural liberty that the slaves have as much as the master.
So what brings on slavery? Baxter argues, “If their sin have enslaved them to you, yet Nature made them your equals.” [54] Although sin brings on slavery, Baxter does not specify whose sin it is that has enslaved them. If it is sin on the part of the slave, this is still no excuse for harsh treatment of the slaves, but Baxter urges the master, “Remember that they have immortal souls, and are equally capable of salvation with yourselves. And therefore you have no power to do anything which shall hinder their salvation. No pretence of your business, necessity, commodity or power, can warrant you to hold them so hard to work, as not to allow them due time and seasons for that which God hath made their duty.” [55] The same spiritual concern shown to servants must also be shown to slaves, but more than that Baxter lays down a key idea for equality between master and slave: the immortal soul.
Not only is equality between master and slave based on the image of God, but is also reflected in God’s ownership of the slave. Baxter points out that “God is their absolute Owner, and that you have none but a derived and limited Propriety in them.” [56] This equality is also seen in the fact that both master and slave are “equally under the Government and Laws of God.” [57] The equality between master and slave is also based upon redemptive realities. The first such reality, says Baxter, is that for the slave, “God is their Reconciled tender Father, and if they be as good, doth Love them as well as you.” [58] This ought to guide a master’s relationship with his slave so that “you must use the meanest of them no otherwise, than beseemeth the Beloved of God to be used; and no otherwise than may stand with the due signification of your Love to God by Loving those that are his.” [59]
The second redemptive reality that Baxter reminds masters of is that slaves are “the Redeemed ones of Christ.” [60] The price that Christ paid to redeem them is great and nothing can change that reality. Baxter warns masters that Christ “hath not sold you his title to them: As he bought their souls at a price unvaluable, so he hath given the purchase of his blood to be absolutely at your disposal. Therefore so use them, as to preserve Christs right and interest in them.” [61] At this point, Baxter is strangely silent about condemning the actual practice of slavery, but he is even more pointed in his directions about equality than in the descriptions of a master-servant relationship. This is important to keep in mind as Baxter continues to flesh out this relationship between master and slave.
Baxter sums up his counsel to masters with this motto: “Power and obligation go together.” [62] As he directed masters in regards to servants, so Baxter directs masters in regards to slaves. They have the obligation to care for their slaves, particularly their spiritual welfare. They are to be guided by their power and love “to bring them [slaves] to the Knowledge and faith of Christ, and to the just obedience of Gods commands.” [63] Failure to do so would result in serious harm to the master. Baxter sums up the danger this way:
Those therefore that keep their Negro’s and slaves from hearing Gods word, and from becoming Christians, because by the Law, they shall then be either made free, or they shall lose part of their service, do openly profess Rebellion against God, and contempt of Christ the Redeemer of souls, and a contempt of the souls of men, and indeed they declare that their worldly profit is their treasure and their God. [64]There is no doubt as to how masters are to treat their slaves, tying together both their power and obligation to do this.
Having laid the foundation of equality, Baxter levels a blistering critique towards the abuse of slavery when he says, “If this come to the hands of any of our Natives in Barbado’s or other Islands or Plantations, who are said to be commonly guilty of this most heinous sin, yea and to live upon it, I intreat them further to consider as followeth, 1. How cursed a crime is it to equal Men and Beasts? Is not this your practice? Do you not buy them and use them merely to the same end, as you do your horses? To labour for your commodity! as if they were baser than you, and made to serve you?” [65] Baxter also compares the actions of those who sold people into slavery and those who bought them and mistreat slaves:
Do you not see how you reproach and condemn yourselves, while you vilifie them as Savages and barbarous wretches. Did they every do anything more savage, than to use not only mens bodies as beasts, but their souls as if they were made for nothing, but to actuate their bodies in your worldly drudgery? Did the veriest Cannibals every do any thing more cruel or odious, than to seel so many souls to the Devil for a little worldly gain? Did ever the cursedst miscreants on earth, do anything more rebellious, and contrary to the will of the most merciful God, than to keep those souls from Christ and holiness and Heaven, for a little money, who were made and redeemed for the same ends, and at the same pretious price as yours. Did you poor slaves ever commit such villanies as these? Is not he the basest wretch and the most barbarous savage, who commiteth the greatest and most inhumane wickedness? And are theirs comparable to these of yours? [66]Thus Baxter appeals to masters to treat their slaves as equals on the grounds that cruel masters destroy the positive witness of Christianity. [67]
Baxter does not end his appeal here, but next addresses the consciences of the masters who own slaves—particularly, cruel masters. He asks them whether the judgments and calamities speak to their conscience about how they are treating slaves. [68] He demonstrates a keen awareness of global slavery and its cruelties and injustices when he asks, “Will not the example and warning of neighbour Countreys rise up in judgment against you and condemn you? You cannot but hear how odious the Spanish name is made (and thereby alas the Christian name also, among the West Indians) for their most inhumane Cruelties in Hispaniola, Jamaica, Cuba, Peru, Mexico and other places.” [69] Baxter ends with a stiff warning of judgment unless the cruelties associated with slavery be ended: “And what comfort are you like to have at last, in that money that is purchased at such a price? Will not your money and you perish together? Will you not have worse than Gehazi’s Leprosie with it; yea worse than Achan’s death by Stoning; and as bad as Judas his hanging himself, unless repentance shall prevent it?” [70]
While these statements and warnings still do not prove whether Baxter approved or disapproved of slavery as a social practice, there are important indicators that point to Baxter rejecting the violence and cruelty of slavery. He builds his case out of the master-servant relationship and takes great lengths to prove that a master and slave are both equal. He points out the great injustices that have taken place in the global slave trade in the various forms of abuse and cruelty and warns against them. Both physical cruelty and spiritual neglect of slaves are soundly condemned, and he continues to move in an anti-slavery direction.
Baxter further builds his case against slavery by dealing with three important questions: 1. Is it lawful for a Christian to buy and use a man as a slave? 2. Is it lawful to use a Christian as a slave? 3. What difference must we make between a free servant and a slave? [71] In answer to the first, Baxter gives a threefold answer. In the first place, there is a lawful form of slavery. Second, there is also an unlawful form of slavery to which none must be subjected. Third, there is a penal form of slavery. [72]
When it comes to slavery to which no man may be subjected, Baxter refers back to the directions that he had given earlier to masters and the treatment of slaves. Baxter writes, “No man may be put to such a slavery…such as shall injure Gods interest and service, or the mans salvation.” [73] Again, Baxter clearly gives precedence to man’s spiritual faculties and clearly considers depriving a man’s soul of eternal life as the highest form of abuse within slavery. But Baxter also appeals to the equality of the human race, particularly Christians of different social classes, to demonstrate that slavery is impermissible under most circumstances. This lies on the basis of basic liberties guaranteed by the exercise of brotherly love, since “no man but as a just punishment for his crimes, may be so enslaved, as to be deprived of those liberties, benefits and comforts, which brotherly love obligeth every man to grant to another for his good, as far as is within our power, all things considered.” [74] Furthermore, Baxter makes his appeal that a slave because of his liberties is both “a servant and a brother, and therefore must at once be used as both.” [75] In ordinary circumstances then, the master-servant relationship and its governing principles apply where slavery is considered impermissible.
There are, however, certain circumstances where slavery is permissible: severe economic hardship and slavery as a form of punishment for crimes committed. Baxter explains the first as when “poverty or necessity do make a man consent to sell himself to a life of lesser misery, to escape a greater, or death itself.” [76] Here slavery is seen as some sort of social and economic safety net. However, the principles of justice and charity must govern in such a situation because it is “not lawful for any other so to take advantage by his necessity, as to bring him into a condition, that shall make him miserable, or in which we shall not exercise so much love, as may tend to his sanctification, comfort and salvation.”77 Connected to this condition, Baxter argues, “[A] certain degree of servitude or slavery is lawful by the necessitated consent of the innocent.” [78] This type of slavery by necessary consent of the innocent is further governed by four principles. It is permissible as long:
- As [it] wrongeth no interest of God.
- Nor of mankind by breaking the Law of Nations.
- Nor the person himself, by hindering his salvation, or the needful means thereof; nor those comforts of life, which nature giveth to man as man.
- Nor the Common-wealth or society where we live. [79]
Regrettably, Baxter unhelpfully blends servanthood and slavery together, and it is unclear precisely where he stands regarding the moral permissibility of slavery.
Another instance where slavery is permissible is that of penal slavery. There are several conditions which must be met in order for penal slavery to be permissible. First, it must fit the crime being punished; a person must actually deserve to be enslaved. Second, slavery is actually a more humane form of punishment than death in cases where restitution cannot be made. [80] The third condition is in the case of prisoners-of-war who have been taken; Baxter says, “More also may be done against Enemies taken in a lawful War, than could be done against the innocent by necessitated consent.” [81]
When answering whether someone may own a Christian who is a slave, Baxter contradicts the rule of love he lays down elsewhere. “As men must be variously Loved according to the various degrees of amiableness in them; so various degrees of Love must be exercised towards them. Therefore good and real Christians must be used with more Love and brotherly tenderness than others.” [82] Baxter does say that it is a noble and good gesture of princes who free their slaves upon being baptized, but slaves who simply desire to be free but not necessarily be a Christian could abuse baptism. [83] There are also times where nominal Christians might forfeit their freedoms through crimes and “may penally be made a slave as well as Infidels.” [84] One more instance of where Christians might be enslaved is in the case of debt, which cannot be paid back except by labor. [85] However, Baxter reserves sharp words of condemnation for those who bought and sold slaves as it was commonly practiced in much of the seventeenth century:
To go as Pirats and catch up poor Negro’s or people of another Land, that never forfeited Life or Liberty, and to make them slaves, and sell them, is one of the worst kinds of Thievery in the world; and such persons are to be taken for the common enemies of mankind; And they that buy them and use them as beasts, for their meer commodity, and betray or destroy or neglect their souls, are fitter to be called incarnate Devils than Christians, though they be no Christians whom they so abuse. [86]What emerges in Baxter’s thought is a form of “humanized” slavery which must meet certain criteria in order to be morally permissible, though this form of slavery, too, is unjustified.
In answering the third question on the difference between a servant and a slave, Baxter points out both similarities and differences. Similarities only exist before slavery in that “a Servant and a Voluntary slave were both free men till they sold or hired themselves: And a criminal person was a freeman till he forfeited his life or liberty.” [87] The difference between a servant and a slave after forfeiture of liberty is that a free servant is bound by the contract that he has made with his master. The contract of the servant stipulates the type of work and the length of time that the servant is committed to work for the master. [88] The contracted slave, by contrast, sells “himself absolutely to the will of another as to his labour both for kind and measure; where yet the limitations of God and nature after (and before) named are supposed among Christians to take place.” [89] Though Baxter does cite Christian charity and justice as the principles governing contracted slavery, there is no hope of freedom because slavery is a lifelong commitment. [90] The slave who is subjected to penal slavery “is lyable to so much servitude as the Magistrate doth judge him to; which may be, 1. Not only such labour as aforesaid as pleaseth his Master to impose, 2. And that for life, 3. But it may be also to stripes and severities which might not lawfully be inflicted on another.” [91]
Baxter seeks to humanize these latter two forms of slavery despite the fact that there is essentially no freedom in either. He places limitations on consensual slavery (an oxymoron for Baxter) through poverty, saying that the soul-care of such a slave is paramount. Time must be given to engage in spiritual disciplines and coercion to sin is prohibited. As important as soul-care is, the care of the body is also important and the slave must receive the comforts of this life to the end of promoting “his cheerful serving of God in Love and Thankfulness.” [92] The only difference that exists between consensual or contractual slavery and penal slavery is that a penal slave “may penally be beaten and denyed part of his daily bread; so it be not done more rigorously than true Justice doth require.” [93]
Having laid out the different types of slavery and distinguishing them from servanthood and the circumstances in which either is permissible, Baxter continues to answer some remaining questions. The first question he deals with is, “But what if men buy Negro’s or other slaves of such as we have just cause to believe did steal them by Piracy, or buy them of those that have no power to sell them, and not hire or buy them by their own consent, or by the consent of those that had power to sell them, nor take them Captives in a lawful War, what must they do with them afterward?” [94] Here Baxter is addressing the problem of the slave trade—buying and selling slaves who had no choice in the matter. He answers that it is a “heinous sin to buy them, unless it be in charity to deliver them.” [95] Such slavery is unjust since the slave has not consented to it, and his owner is therefore bound to set him free. Baxter explains the reason: “Because by right the man is his own, and therefore no man else can have just title to him.” [96]
Baxter deals with the counter-argument to such logic in the next question, which seeks to justify selling the slave by leaving him in the same condition as the current owner first found him. [97] Baxter is adamant that such action is prohibited because the sin of theft belongs to the person who currently holds the slave in possession. Baxter again invokes the rule of love in such a case, arguing rather that “God’s Law bindeth you to Love and works of Love, and therefore you should do your best to free him.” [98]
As with servants, Baxter gives directions in how to treat slaves. He ends with several directions to slave owners. The first direction is motivated towards the salvation of the slave and the promotion of spiritual growth for the slave. The master is also bound to show pity to the slave’s condition. The lower the condition of the slave, the more deserving he is of pity and compassion. Baxter bases this demonstration of pity on the love that is required for one’s neighbor. He writes, “And remember that even a slave may be one of those Neighbours that you are bound to love as yourselves, and to do as you would be done by if your case were his.” [99] The master may also not require more of an innocent slave, “than you would or might do of an ordinary servant.” [100] Furthermore, a master must not be too hasty or too slow in baptizing a slave. If baptism is delayed because of a desire for capital gain, then the master ought to repent of such an attitude. If the baptism is too hasty, they may not understand what baptism really means. This point comes down to careful instruction about baptism and the slave’s understanding of baptism. [101]
However well intentioned Baxter seems to have been in elevating slavery to some form of servanthood, he still maintains slavery as a social institution acceptable in certain circumstances. In the last direction, he writes:
Make it your chief end in buying and using slaves, to win them to Christ and save their souls. Do not only endeavour it on the buy, when you have first consulted your own commodity, but make this more of your end than your commodity itself; and let their salvation be far more valued by you than their service: and carry yourselves to them, as those that are sensible that they are Redeemed with them by Christ from the slavery of Satan, and may live with them in the liberty of the Saints of Glory. [102]Though he still forbids buying unwilling slaves as stipulated in previous directions, in this direction he does maintain slavery for the paying of debts and penal slavery. At the very least, Baxter makes the salvation of their souls the highest priority for a master.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the viewpoints of Baxter and Gouge hold both positive and negative aspects. Positively, both Baxter and Gouge attempt to address a very delicate subject from a biblical perspective. They offer a comprehensive and detailed social ethic or conscience with the intent of regulating the relationship between masters and servants and masters and slaves—though this teaching clearly did not make much of an impact in the social fabric of New England. They highlight the equality that exists between all humans on the level of soul and the image of God, and that these relationships must be guided by love for one’s neighbor. This refutes the notion that slaves were three- or four-fifths of a person, a notion that was later entrenched in slavery in colonial America after the close of the Puritan period. Baxter further affirms a certain level of voluntariness in both servanthood and slavery, though the voluntariness in slavery only existed in people selling themselves into slavery to repay a debt. Both Baxter and Gouge tried to consistently apply Scripture to delineate relationships within society. Baxter, in particular, decried the violence and cruelty associated with the slave trade.
Negatively, both Baxter and Gouge sadly speak of slavery as an acceptable social institution and never sound a clear call to their contemporaries or to the colonies to end not only the cruelty and injustice, but slavery itself in all its forms. Baxter comes closest to condemning slavery outright, but confuses the picture by seeming to accept buying and selling penal and “indentured” slaves as long as it is meant for their conversion. Because of Baxter’s nuance, it seems that the worst kind of thievery is not really so bad after all as long as the master can justify himself by evangelizing his slaves. Granted, the issue is a complicated one and both men obviously worked within their socio-cultural framework addressing a global and monumental problem. As such, they sought to end the cruelty and injustice of slavery, though not slavery itself. What emerges is a form of humanized slavery, without cruelty and injustice, that is more concerned with the souls of slaves than their physical well-being. This position is untenable for Christians, regardless of race, who have been made one in Christ. While their efforts act as voices of moderation to some extent in their milieu, Baxter and Gouge do not go far enough in issuing a call to end slavery altogether. This point must be honestly acknowledged throughout scholarship on the Puritans and how much they modeled Christian living.
The issue of slavery is certainly not closed and continues to draw reactions throughout scholarship. What Baxter and Gouge demonstrate is that the issue transcends race; this should be the focal point of further research in order to prevent incendiary scholarship and provide an environment for honest intellectual activity and reconciliation. The issue also warrants further study on Baxter’s and Gouge’s influence on the colonies—for instance, on men such as John Cotton, John Elliot, Samuel Sewall, and the Edwardses as a moderating voice on slavery and whether they form the basis for an anti-slavery or pro-slavery view in the colonies.
Notes
- Thabiti Anyabwile, “Jonathan Edwards, Slavery, and the Theology of African Americans.” Henry Center, Jonathan Edwards Center; Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, Chicago, Ill., February 1, 2012; Richard A. Bailey, Race and Redemption in Puritan New England (New York: Oxford University Press, 2011); Francis Bremer, The Puritan Experiment (Hanover: University Press of New England, 1995); Joseph R. Washington, Puritan Race Virtue, Vice and Values, 1620-1820: Original Calvinist True Believers’ Enduring Faith and Ethics Race Claims (New York: Peter Lang, 1987); Forrest G. Wood, The Arrogance of Faith: Christianity and Race in America from the Colonial Era to the Twentieth Century (Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1991).
- Propaganda, “Precious Puritans,” Youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiQMYsKa8Sw (accessed November 1, 2012). Lyrics of the song can be found at www.joethorn.net/2012/09/25/precious-puritans-pt-2/.
- Thabiti Anyabwile, “The Puritans are not that Precious,” Pure Church, entry posted October 2, 2012, http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/thabitianyabwile/2012/10/02/the-puritans-are-not-that-precious/ (accessed on November 1, 2012); Anthony Bradley, “Puritans and Propaganda,” Urban Faith, entry posted October 2, 2012, http://www.urbanfaith.com/2012/10/puritans-and-propaganda.html/ (accessed November 1, 2012); Nathan Finn, “Orthodoxy, Orthopraxy, and Puritan Slavery,” Between the Times, entry posted October 4, 2012, http://betweenthetimes.com/index.php/2012/10/04/orthodoxy-orthopraxy-and-puritan-slavery/ (accessed November 1, 2012); Thomas Kidd, “Slavery, Historical Heroes, and ‘Precious Puritans,’” The Anxious Bench, entry posted October 9, 2012, http://www.patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2012/10/historical-heroes-and-precious-puritans/ (accessed November 1, 2012); Steve McCoy, “Missing the Point of Propaganda’s ‘Precious Puritans,’” Reformissionary, entry posted September 27, 2012, http://www.stevekmccoy.com/reformissionary/2012/09/missing-the-point-precious-puritans.html (accessed November 1, 2012); Joe Thorn, “Precious Puritans (Pt. 1),” Joe Thorn.Net, entry posted September 24, 2012, http://www.joethorn.net/2012/09/24/precious-puritans-pt-1/ (accessed November 1, 2012); Joe Thorn, “Precious Puritans (Pt. 2),” Joe Thorn.Net, entry posted September 24, 2012, http://www.joethorn.net/2012/09/25/precious-puritans-pt-2/ (accessed November 1, 2012).
- For biographical resources on Richard Baxter, see N. H. Keeble, “Baxter, Richard (1615-1691),” in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, vol. 4, eds. H. C. G. Matthew and Brian Harrison (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), 418-33; Joel Beeke and Randall Pederson, Meet the Puritans: With a Guide to Modern Reprints (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2006), 61-71.
- For biographical resources on William Gouge, see Brett Usher, “Gouge, William (1575-1653),” ODNB, 23:36-39; Beeke and Pederson, Meet the Puritans, 284-89.
- Richard Baxter, A Christian Directory: or a Summ of Practical Theologie and Cases of Conscience. Directing Christians, how to Use their Knowledge and Faith; How to improve all Helps and Means, and to Perform all Duties; How to Overcome Temptations, and to escape or mortifie every Sin (London: Printed, by Robert White, 1678); William Gouge, Of Domestical Duties: Eight Treatises (London: Printed by John Haviland, 1622).
- Joel Beeke and Mark Jones, A Puritan Theology: Doctrine for Life (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2012), 4.
- Bremer, The Puritan Experiment, 205-8; Bailey, Race and Redemption, 15-37.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 490.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 490.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 490.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 491.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 556.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 556.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 556.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 556.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 556.
- “Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten. Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days. Behold, the hire of the labourers who have reaped down your fields, which is of you kept back by fraud, crieth: and the cries of them which have reaped are entered into the ears of the Lord of sabaoth. Ye have lived in pleasure on the earth, and been wanton; ye have nourished your hearts, as in a day of slaughter.”
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 556.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 591.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 591.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 592.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 650.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 653.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 691.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 659.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 691.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 665.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 665.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 665.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 491.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 491.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 492.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 492.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 492.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 493.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 555.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 555.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 666.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 666-86.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 594.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 653.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 604.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 605-6.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 612.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 613.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 692-93.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 693.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Gouge, Of Domestical Duties, 160.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 557.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 558-59.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 599.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 559-60.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 560.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 560.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 560.
- Baxter, A Christian Directory, 560.
No comments:
Post a Comment