Conclusion

In August 22, 1831, a thirty-year-old slave named Nat Turner staged a bloody slave revolt in rural Southampton Country, Virginia. Over two days, Nat and his men killed approximately 57 whites. By the time the revolt was crushed on Tuesday, August 23, 1831, an estimated 60 to 80 blacks had taken part in the uprising. The rebellion persuasively undermined the story of slave docility. ⁷⁵⁰

By 1840, the abolitionists were divided into three categories:

1. The Garrisonians, who were anti-clericalists, anti-statists and radicalists on such issues as women’s right that had driven away most churches inclined and politically motivated abolitionists of the American anti-slavery society.

2. The evangelical, who continued to work through their churches for emancipation, 3. The political abolitionists, who hoped to achieve abolition through the political process.

On the ideological spectrum from immediate abolition on the left to conservative anti-slavery on the right, it is often hard to tell where abolition (which demanded unconditional emancipation and usually envisaged civil equality for the freed slaves) ended and anti-slavery or free soil (which desired only the containment of anti-slavery) began.⁷⁵¹

As would be noted from the foregoing, a great deal of enlightenment thoughts still bore a Christian character, and Christian activism spread and flourished during the “Age of Reason” and has been a vital force since then.

The lessons and ideas of the abolitionists apply not only to secularists but also to contemporary Christians. Modern Christianity has been dented by separating evangelism from social activities. Though liberal churches often embrace the political activities of the abolitionists but seem embarrassed by the very thought of evangelism. Consequently, the church has become a mere rubber stamp where spiritual activities are left to social activities. The three cardinal points, i.e. brotherhood, benevolence and human rights, that once shaped the abolitionists’ movement, are conspicuously missing today among the so-called Christians. Consequently, the quest to underline slavery and slave trade as a crime and sin against Africans seemed to be impossible, yet it is far from clear that we should avoid one reductionist view of Christian mission (the social gospel) only to replace it with another kind of reductionism (a Christianity show of concern for the created order for the poor and the oppressed). ⁷⁵³

For the abolitionist Christians, converting people into Christianity and ending slave trade were complimentary activities and, for example, Equiano’s interesting narrative was both an antislavery tract and an evangelical conversion story. Evangelical movements like the Methodist and the Baptist were at the forefront of British antislavery movement from the 1780s -1830s. And Seymour Drescher observes, “the take-off of British abolitionism coincided with the revival of British missionary movement”.⁷⁵⁴ Evangelisation and social reform flowed from a revitalized Christianity. Together, they bore eloquent testimony to the transforming power of the gospel and as David Brion Davis added, Christian abolitionism served to rehabilitate Christianity as a force for human progress in the face of challenges from rationalists scepticism.⁷⁵⁵ Thomas Clarkson in his contribution argued that the slave trade was the greatest of the social evils addressed by the Christian religion and he urged his readers to: “retire to their closets, and pour out thy thanksgivings to the Almighty for this his unspeakable act of mercy to thy oppressed fellow-creatures”. ⁷⁵⁶

753 Macaulay, Renald, The Great Commission, Cambridge Papers, 7:2, 1998; Chester, T., The gospel to the Poor:

Sharing the Gospel through Social Involvement, IVP, 2004.

754 Dawson, W. W., Antislavery, Religion and Reform, Bolt, C. and Drescher, S., (eds.), 1980, p. 47.

755 Davis, D.B., Slavery and Human Progress, pp. 129-53.

756 Clarkson, Thomas, The History of the Rise, Progress and Accomplishment of the Abolition of the African Slave Trade by the British parliament, 2 Vols. 1808, Vol. I, pp. 5-9; Vol. II, p. 587.

The Christians among the abolition movement were not unblemished. Some were against the slave trade but more willing to tolerate slavery itself; some rejected racism, but retained condescending attitudes towards Africans; some showed little concerns for exploited Africans in Britain’s industrial cities; and some were uncritical of British imperialism. But for all their weakness and prejudice, the clarity of their moral vision of the slave trade stands as a challenge to later generations. Just as the 18^th-century Britons learned that their consumption of sugar sustained the slave economy, so humanity need to see that the injustices of the past against the slaves are accessed today. In spite of this historical injustice and plethora of woes, the lesson of the abolitionists was and is that God can use Christians to think globally and act locally to accomplish seemingly impossible situations. When the philosopher, John Stuart Mill, reflected on the abolition of slave trade and the demise of slavery itself, he concluded that these events had happened not because of any change in the distribution of material interest, but by the spread of moral convictions. “It is what men think”, wrote Mill, “that determines how they act”. ⁷⁵⁷ Politicians, historians and modern societies may disagree with this interpretation of abolition because of their emphasis on the importance of the political contingencies and economic expediency. However, they must agree or they ought to agree that they have a moral burden toward the Africans to address their sins and crimes of the past. Whether the laws passed by the various slave societies can form a basis for reparation is a matter of conjecture. This aspect shall be taken care of in the on-going analysis, in particular, on the basis of natural law and modern laws.

757 Mill, John Stuart, Representative Government, 1861, chap. 1.