---

Not many years ago the conscience of England was stirred because the Government of the day sent out a circular instructing captains of men-of-war, on the decks of which fugitive slaves sought asylum, to restore them to their "owners." Here an apostle does the same thing — seems to side with the oppressor, and to drive the oppressed from the sole refuge left him, the horns of the very altars. More extraordinary still, here is the fugitive voluntarily going back, travelling all the weary way from Rome to Colosse in order to put his neck once more beneath the yoke. Both men were acting from Christian motives, and thought they were doing a piece of plain Christian duty. Then does Christianity sanction slavery? Certainly not; its principles cut it up by the roots. Historically it is true that as Christianity has grown slavery has withered. But the New Testament never directly condemns it, and by regulating the conduct of Christian masters, and recognising the obligations of Christian slaves, seems to contemplate its continuance, and to be deaf to the sighing of the captives. This attitude was probably not a piece of policy or a matter of calculated wisdom on the part of the apostle. He no doubt saw that the gospel brought a great unity in which all distinctions were merged, and rejoiced in thinking that "in Christ Jesus there is neither bond nor free"; but whether he expected the distinction ever to disappear from actual life is less certain. The attitude of the New Testament to slavery is the same as to other unchristian institutions. It brings the leaven and lets it work. That attitude is determined by three great principles. First, the message of Christianity is primarily to individuals, and only secondarily to society. It leaves the units whom it has influenced to influence the mass. Second, it acts on spiritual and moral sentiment, and only afterwards, and consequently on deeds or institutions. Third, it hates violence, and trusts wholly to enlightened conscience. So it meddles directly with no political or social arrangements, but lays down principles which will profoundly affect these, and leaves them to soak into the general mind. If an evil needs force for its removal, it is not ready for removal. If it has to be pulled up by violence, a bit of the root will certainly be left, and will grow again. The only true way is by slow degrees to create a state of feeling which shall instinctively abhor and cast off the evil. There will be no hubbub and no waste, and the thing once done will be done forever. So has it been with slavery; so will it be with war, and intemperance, and impurity, and the miserable anomalies of our present civilisation. Coming centuries will look back on the obtuseness of the moral perceptions of nineteenth-century Christians in regard to matters of Christian duty which, hidden from us, are sun clear to them, with the same half-amused, half-tragic wonder with which we look back to Jamaica planters or South Carolina rice growers who defended slavery as a missionary institution, and saw no contradiction between their religion and their practice.

(A. Maclaren, D. D.)

---

---

KJV: Whom I have sent again: thou therefore receive him, that is, mine own bowels:

WEB: I am sending him back. Therefore receive him, that is, my own heart,