RACISM ROOTS
Christianity & Slavery:
Irreconcilable Differences
In 1845 Frederick Douglass wrote something that still can be used to describe Christianity in America today.
…for between the Christianity of this land and the Christianity of Christ, I recognize the widest possible difference - so wide, that to receive the one as good, pure, and holy is of necessity to reject the other as bad, corrupt, and wicked…I love the pure, peaceable, and impartial Christianity of Christ; I therefore hate the corrupt, slave-holding, women-whipping, cradle plundering, partial and hypocritical Christianity of this land. Indeed, I can see no reason, but the most deceitful one, for calling the religion of this land Christianity. We have men-stealers for ministers, women-whippers for missionaries, and cradle-plunderers for church members. The man who wields the blood-clotted cow skin during the week fills the pulpit on Sunday claim to be a minister of the meek and lowly Jesus. The man who robs me of my earnings at the end of each week meets me as a class leader on Sunday morning to show me the way of life and the path of salvation. He who sells my sister, for purposes of prostitution, stands forth as the pious advocate of purity. He who proclaims it a religious duty to read the Bible denies me the right of learning to read the name of the God who made me…We have the thief preaching against theft - the adulterer against adultery. We have men sold to build churches, women sold to support the gospel, and Bibles sold to purchase Bibles for the poor heathen! all for the glory of God and the good of souls! "
Douglass was making reference to the racism that he saw in the Church, how inconsistent Christianity and the practice of slavery were with true biblical Christianity. Douglass, in short, was criticizing the racially segregated practices, blatant racism, and hypocrisy he witnessed in the church. In fact, he refused to call what he saw Christianity. Unfortunately, Douglass' statement rings clear today when our attention returns again to the Christianity of this land, and the racism that continues to permeate the church. Not much seems to have changed in the 153 years since Douglass pinned this statement.
Many in the church today concur with this former slave and abolitionist's sentiment particularly at a time when today's movement in Christian circles seems to be toward "racial reconciliation," while on the other hand burning churches in the south seem to echo the cry for continued "racial segregation". One almost feels compelled to say there is no hope! Racism is here to stay and nothing can change that! But is this true? The church seems to be at the forefront in its call for racial reconciliation, and rightly so. They were the ones who introduced racism into the church and initiated the practices of racial segregation that are present in our society as a whole. I believe, for this reason, the Christian church should be first to recognize the sin, recognize their part in it and be the first to break the cycle of racism. Notably of late, some Christian organizations are taking this stance.
In 1995, the Southern Baptist Convention Resolutions Committee offered an official apology to African-Americans for the sin of slavery.
Be it... resolved that we apologize to all African Americans for condoning and/or perpetuating individual and systemic racism in our lifetime," .. "and we genuinely repent of racism of which we have been guilty, whether consciously or unconsciously. Be it further resolved that we ask forgiveness from our African American brothers and sisters.
This is promising considering the position they took during slavery. At a Baptist convention in Mississippi in 1819, they had a considerably different position on slavery believing it to be a "biblical institution approved by God and practiced by his chosen people [white people]''' Then after addressing the masters and how they should treat their slaves, they turned their attention to the slaves. First admonishing them to obey their masters then issuing this statement:
"Brethren, under the dispensations of God you have been brought into a state of bondage, however dark, mysterious and unpleasant those dispensations may appear to you we have no doubt that they are founded in wisdom and goodness."
Also joining the ranks in the call for racial reconciliation is Promise Keepers. This organization has placed emphasis on racial reconciliation since it began in 1991. As a growing force in Christendom, Promise Keepers is sweeping men into stadiums in record numbers. Bill McCartney, founder of the organization, gives racial reconciliation top priority.
McCartney is quoted as saying, "I know that Promise Keepers has been growing at a phenomenal rate ... but, you see, I think the big explosion is still around the corner. I believe we will see real revival across this land. But that will only happen after we've faced the issue of racism and meet it head on."
I agree wholeheartedly. How can Jesus return for a church who's biggest spot and blemish is the blatant, unrepentant sin of racism.
And this has been the criticism of many Christians, particularly those who fall into the category of African-Americans; don't talk it - walk it. They are very skeptical and feel these gestures have no real depth. After all, what's taken them so long? Slavery ended 130 years ago and its taken 130 years to get an apology - or an offer to reconcile? We have learned to work together, live together, eat together, and sleep together, but we have never learned to worship together. It remains that eleven o'clock on Sunday mornings is still the most segregated hour of the week, and this ex-slave explains why.
Sarah Fitzpatrick said they had to sit in the roped off sections and the white folks wouldn't allow them to worship God in their own way. Fitzpatrick said the white folks would come around and tell them to pray and get religion on Sunday, but they would 'beat de life out'cha de next day ef ya didn't walk the chalk line." Fitzpatrick said the slaves saw through their hypocrisy and the "Niggers" commence 'ta wanna go to church by de'selves, even ef dey had 'ta meet in de white church. So white fo'ks have deir service in de mornin' and "Negroes" have deirs in the evening', a'ter dey clean up, wash de dishes, and look a'ter ever'thing." 4
Isn't it interesting that the very place were segregation should be abolished is still the place where segregation is bred. Are we really trying to reconcile?
How can there be true reconciliation or forgiveness when the offenders and the offended don't understand the offense. In order for true reconciliation among blacks and whites to take place, we must both come to the table with the same understanding of the sin. Our stories have to corroborate and the facts must agree. Both parties must understand the offense, its magnitude, its horrendous inhumanity to humanity, its continuing legacy today, and the impact it has had in indelibly marking a race of people and Christendom in America.
Once the offense is understood by all, then heartfelt, and soul rending repentance can take place. Then and only then can a genuine effort toward reconciliation take place. Without this, it is simply words spoken with no feeling, surface gestures with no depth, and forgiveness with no understanding of the offense - which is not true forgiveness.
True racial reconciliation comes with a price. Before one can reconcile they must understand the breach that separated them. Reconciliation is the coming together of two people or races that have been separated by an act so hideous, as to cost both to turn away from each other in disgust and distrust. Proverbs 18: 19 "A brother offended is harder to be won over than a strong city, and [their] contentions separate them like the bars of a castle." (Amplified Bible)
Most of the time this kind of rend in a relationship causes one to avoid the other at all cost, taking great care and effort to avoid contact and maintain separation. Which is what has taken place in America and in the church. We were both at the scene of the crime, and both left with totally different accounts of what took place. But there is a truth that can only be found in the voices of those who were born into slavery and lived to see freedom. Truth can be found in their histories - the oral histories of ex-slaves. It is their stories that are put together in this work to demonstrate and explain, to both parties, what really happened during slavery and this strange relationship between Christianity and racism.
The truth hurts, which is why it is often, particularly in the case of how blacks where treated during slavery by Christians - avoided. How, in the name of Jesus, they were captured and brought to this country under the guise of evangelizing the "heathens" but once here were treated barbarically, with no efforts being made to evangelize them for almost 200 years. This belief justified by slave masters' reasoning that slaves were subhuman and had no souls to save.
Former slave Jenny Proctor quoted the following as part of the sermons slaves received from white preachers, which reflects what they thought of the souls of black folks. "Now I takes my text, which is, [Negro] obey your marster and your mistress, 'cause what you git from dem here in dis world am all you ev'r going' to git, 'cause youjes' like de hogs and de other animals, when you dies you ain't no more, after you been throwed in dat hole.'" "I guess we believed dat for a while 'cause we didn' have no way of findin' out different. We didn' see no Bibles."
During slavery they justified their acts by using the Scriptures. But the sin had taken place, the deed done, the stage set to separate the two races in a way that only Jesus can reconcile. Now that words of reconciliation are resonating throughout Christendom, that's encouraging, but actions speak louder than words.
Just this past year the burning of black churches in the south spoke real loud. Again raising the question - can this rift be healed? The U.S Commission on Civil Rights reported that racism continues to divide American society sharply. The Commission held hearings in six southern states, partly in response to the burning of black churches. Based on the information they gathered they found that racial segregation remains unabated, encompassing everything from banking, to public swimming pools, to churches. 6
That's why racial segregation must first be addressed in the church and not in a superficial, let's just worship together manner. As a body of believers we must take a serious look at the sin of slavery, its impact on black and white Christians, and this country. Then, when we both understand and agree to the magnitude of the offense and its resultant implications, can we meet at the table and let the healing begin.
That is why the voices of ex-slaves permeates this book, allowing both races to listen to the voices of wisdom and insight of the ancestors, to gain both knowledge and strength to reconcile .
... Ef yuh go 'cordin 'tuh de Bible dere is very few rail preachers today. Now we got some few good preachers among us but de majority uv dem aint' doin' nutbin' but goin' thru de motions. Hit don't seem tuh me dat de white preacher takes 'vantage uv his opportunity ter build up rail brotherly love 'between "Negroes' en white folks. Yer know de 'postle Paul sed God is no respecter uv pussons.
Christianity & Slavery: An Unholy Union
Evangelization Or Exploitation
It began almost 500 years ago, in the West Indies, when a group of Spanish settlers and priests on the island of La Navidad met together to find a solution to their dwindling labor force, the Tainos Indians. The Tainos Indians who had inhabited the island of La Navidad (present day II Hispaniola) were slowly being annihilated brought on from death, overwork, disease, and suicide. The Spanish settlers and plantation owners were becoming desperate for a new source of labor, so they held meetings in search of a specimen that could endure hard work, tropical heat, and disease. It was almost like an experiment. They were like scientists looking for the right laboratory specimen to endure the testings they were proposing. Their lab was the cane fields and plantations, and their specimens were human beings, beginning with the Arawak or Tainos Indians.
The experiment had begun under the guise of evangelization, setting the stage for a play of two very unlikely characters. A mixture of two ingredients that would prove explosive and deadly even into the 21st century - slavery and Christianity. No stranger bedfellows have come since, nor produced such an ugly offspring - racism. The combination of the two would prove to be a unholy union.
It began with a religious decree, one of only many to follow. Pope Alexander VI had given Spain the right to evangelize the heathens in the new world. Christopher Columbus took this decree to heart and approached Queen Isabella with the idea of sending him to find new lands, spread the gospel to the heathens and find gold.
Christopher Columbus' surname means bearer of Christ. He was said to have been a devout Catholic, who felt obligated to carry the message of Jesus Christ to remote lands and to the countless races who had never heard of Him. 1
On December 6, 1492, he arrived on the island of La Navidad (present day Haiti and Dominican Republic) where he encountered the inhabitants of this island, the Tainos Indians. Columbus' first impression of the Tainos Indians was that they were a "loving, uncovetous people, so docile in all things". He assured his highness that there wasn't a better people or a better country in all the world; adding that they "loved their neighbors as themselves". Columbus further assured the Queen that they would be good servants and were of quick intelligence ... and believed they would easily be made Christians. 2
The Tainos Indians were soon to become the first ingredients and the first victims of this strange combination of "Christianity and slavery". They were the first victims of this "white man's religion".
It didn't take long for the Spanish to set up a system of slavery. The experiment began with each Spanish settler being given what was called an encomienda, which was a tract of land or a village. The Indians on the land or in the village were entrusted to the Spanish settler in return for instructing the Indians in Christian doctrines, or at least promising to instruct them. In addition, these Spanish settlers had the right to force the Indians to labor in their fields and mines. 3
The fact that slavery became the first result of this expedition, made it clear that the real motives were gold not God. Little efforts were made to evangelize the Indians and by 1496 the native peoples were completely under the control of the Spaniards. These frightened Indians were forced to pay tribute in gold or lose their lives. Natives from fourteen years of age and up, had to furnish a Banders hawk's bell full of gold dust every three months or be killed. Those living in the outer regions who had no gold had to furnish spun or woven cotton.
The Betrayal of The Africans
In January 1502, ten years after the Spaniards had arrived on Hispaniola, Bartolome' de Las Casas, a Dominican, who would later become the first priest ordained to the West Indies around 1512, arrived. He was sent out as a teacher of Christian doctrines to the Indians. 5
By the time he arrived, the first phase of the experiment had begun to produce unacceptable results. The first specimens were dying or choosing death over slavery. The Indians, who had welcomed the white men to their land, were now being massacred, mistreated, and enslaved. Many died from overwork, torture, and others by a sheer act of their will, rather than live in slavery. Others died from the white man's diseases of small box and syphilis. Although Las Casas would arrive in villages and baptize the little children, they only ended up dying from disease or the cruelty of the Spaniards a few months later. 6
By the spring of 1514, Las Casas was convinced that the Indians in Cuba and on Hispaniola were being treated unjustly and tyrannical and decided to preach against their enslavement. Las Casas gave up his Indians and began a ceaseless crusade to stop the enslavement and exploitation of the Indians. He began making plans to lobby in Spain for better treatment of the Indians. 7
Finding his efforts failing, knowing that he could not take out a key ingredient in the experiment without replacing it, and knowing that the Spaniards were not willing to give up their gold, Las Casas had to find a more suitable specimen to replace the dwindling Indians. Thus, in 1517, Las Casas proposed to Charles V the substitution of Africans in place of the Indians. 8 This suggestion to import Africans was based on the idea that the Africans could work longer and harder than the Indians. It was clear that in order for this experiment to work they needed a stronger, healthier specimen. One that could endure the harshest of slavery, tropical heat, deprivation, and long hours of labor.
Thus entered another strange twist in this unholy union of slavery and Christianity. This time it was the priest proposing the change. It is said he later bitterly regretted making this proposal, as he found out that the Negroes' captivity was just as inhumane, but the wheels had begun turning.
It has been suggested that Las Casas plea to use the Africans instead of the native races, reflects he did not feel the Africans were human, as he objected to the use of the native races on the grounds of their humanity. Suggesting the use of the Africans is a clear indication that he did not feel them part of humanity. 9
However, what Las Casas and the Spanish did feel, was that the Africans were more suited for slavery and were agriculturalists and hence more able than the America Indians to withstand the rigors of slavery." 10
Las Casas did not make this suggestion with no knowledge of the Negroes. The first blacks had been brought to La Navidad (Hispaniola) in 1502, thirteen years before he made his proposal. By 1520, three years after his proposal to Charles V, African slaves were used throughout the Island.
Even if Las Casas later regretted his proposal, and even if some Spaniards opposed Negro slavery along with him, neither fought against the Africans' enslavement as hard or as consistently as they fought for the Indians. "Despite Las Casas final rejection of Negro slavery, as late as 1544 he owned several Negro slaves and no document has come to light which reveals any concerted opposition to Negro slavery during the sixteenth century." 11
Their first laboratory experiment had failed miserably. The Tainos Indians had not proven strong enough for the job. Now they turned their eyes to another source, the Africans. What they did not know was that this experiment would come back to haunt them, and the deadly viruses they were planting and creating would cause such a mutation that even they would be hard pressed to find a way to destroy it - racism. The stage was being set for centuries of bitterness, hatred, and division among blacks and whites.
A passage in "African Glory", describes what happened to these captured Africans upon their destination, and the twisted way Christianity was used in this most cruel and inhumane of practices - slavery.
When the ship reached harbor, the cargo came up on deck to be brought. Their purchasers examined them for defects, looked at the teeth, pinched the skin, tasted the perspiration to see if the slave's blood was pure and his health as good as his appearance. Some of the women affected a curiosity, the indulgence of which, with a horse, would have caused them to be kicked twenty yards across the deck. But the slaves had to stand it. Then in order to restore any dignity which might have been lost by too intimate an examination, the purchaser spat in the face of the slave. Having become the property of his owner, he was branded on both sides of the breast with a hot iron. His duties were explained by an interpreter and a priest instructed him in the first principles of Christianity.12
References:
1. Frederick Douglass, "Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass", An American Slave", (The New American Library, Inc., New York, New York, 1968), pp. 120-121.
2. John B. Boles, "Masters & Slaves In The House of The Lord", (University Press of Kentucky, 1988), pp . 63-64.
3. Christianity Today, 1997.
4. John '1/. Blassingame. "Slave Testimony", (Louisiana State University Press, Baton, Rouge, 1977), p. 643.
5. George P. Rawick, 'The American Slave: A Composite Autobiography, Unwritten History, Fisk University (Greenwood Publishing Company, Westport Connecticut, 1972, p. 253.
6. Christianity Today, November 1996.
7. John W. Blassingame, "Slave Testimony", (Louisiana State University Press, Baton, Rouge, 1977).
Chapter One
1. George Sanderlin, "Bartolome de Las Casas", A Selection of His Writings, (Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, 1971), p. 38
2. Richard Roscoe Miller, "Slavery and Catholicism," (North State Publishers, Durham, North Carolina, 1957), p. 45.
3. George Sanderlin, "Bartolome de Las Casas," A Selection of His Writings, (Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, 1971), p. 7.
4. Miller, "Slavery and Catholicism," p. 7.
5. Sanderlin, "Bartolome de Las Casas," p. 5.
6. Ibid. p. 61.
7. Ibid, p. 8.
8. Miller, "Slavery and Catholicism," p. 10.
9. Ibid. p. 63.
10. Patrick Bellegrade-Smith, "Haiti: The Breached Citadel," (Westview Press, Inc., London, England, 1990, p. 31.
11. Lewis Hanke, "Aristotle and the American Indians," A Study in Race Prejudice in the Modem World, (Fitzhenry & Whiteside Limited, Don Mills, Ontario, 1959), p. 9.
12. J.G. DeGraft JOhnSvil, "African Glory: The Story of Vanished Negro Civilizations, 1954, p. 155.
Christianity & Slavery:
Irreconcilable Differences
In 1845 Frederick Douglass wrote something that still can be used to describe Christianity in America today.
…for between the Christianity of this land and the Christianity of Christ, I recognize the widest possible difference - so wide, that to receive the one as good, pure, and holy is of necessity to reject the other as bad, corrupt, and wicked…I love the pure, peaceable, and impartial Christianity of Christ; I therefore hate the corrupt, slave-holding, women-whipping, cradle plundering, partial and hypocritical Christianity of this land. Indeed, I can see no reason, but the most deceitful one, for calling the religion of this land Christianity. We have men-stealers for ministers, women-whippers for missionaries, and cradle-plunderers for church members. The man who wields the blood-clotted cow skin during the week fills the pulpit on Sunday claim to be a minister of the meek and lowly Jesus. The man who robs me of my earnings at the end of each week meets me as a class leader on Sunday morning to show me the way of life and the path of salvation. He who sells my sister, for purposes of prostitution, stands forth as the pious advocate of purity. He who proclaims it a religious duty to read the Bible denies me the right of learning to read the name of the God who made me…We have the thief preaching against theft - the adulterer against adultery. We have men sold to build churches, women sold to support the gospel, and Bibles sold to purchase Bibles for the poor heathen! all for the glory of God and the good of souls! "
Douglass was making reference to the racism that he saw in the Church, how inconsistent Christianity and the practice of slavery were with true biblical Christianity. Douglass, in short, was criticizing the racially segregated practices, blatant racism, and hypocrisy he witnessed in the church. In fact, he refused to call what he saw Christianity. Unfortunately, Douglass' statement rings clear today when our attention returns again to the Christianity of this land, and the racism that continues to permeate the church. Not much seems to have changed in the 153 years since Douglass pinned this statement.
Many in the church today concur with this former slave and abolitionist's sentiment particularly at a time when today's movement in Christian circles seems to be toward "racial reconciliation," while on the other hand burning churches in the south seem to echo the cry for continued "racial segregation". One almost feels compelled to say there is no hope! Racism is here to stay and nothing can change that! But is this true? The church seems to be at the forefront in its call for racial reconciliation, and rightly so. They were the ones who introduced racism into the church and initiated the practices of racial segregation that are present in our society as a whole. I believe, for this reason, the Christian church should be first to recognize the sin, recognize their part in it and be the first to break the cycle of racism. Notably of late, some Christian organizations are taking this stance.
In 1995, the Southern Baptist Convention Resolutions Committee offered an official apology to African-Americans for the sin of slavery.
Be it... resolved that we apologize to all African Americans for condoning and/or perpetuating individual and systemic racism in our lifetime," .. "and we genuinely repent of racism of which we have been guilty, whether consciously or unconsciously. Be it further resolved that we ask forgiveness from our African American brothers and sisters.
This is promising considering the position they took during slavery. At a Baptist convention in Mississippi in 1819, they had a considerably different position on slavery believing it to be a "biblical institution approved by God and practiced by his chosen people [white people]''' Then after addressing the masters and how they should treat their slaves, they turned their attention to the slaves. First admonishing them to obey their masters then issuing this statement:
"Brethren, under the dispensations of God you have been brought into a state of bondage, however dark, mysterious and unpleasant those dispensations may appear to you we have no doubt that they are founded in wisdom and goodness."
Also joining the ranks in the call for racial reconciliation is Promise Keepers. This organization has placed emphasis on racial reconciliation since it began in 1991. As a growing force in Christendom, Promise Keepers is sweeping men into stadiums in record numbers. Bill McCartney, founder of the organization, gives racial reconciliation top priority.
McCartney is quoted as saying, "I know that Promise Keepers has been growing at a phenomenal rate ... but, you see, I think the big explosion is still around the corner. I believe we will see real revival across this land. But that will only happen after we've faced the issue of racism and meet it head on."
I agree wholeheartedly. How can Jesus return for a church who's biggest spot and blemish is the blatant, unrepentant sin of racism.
And this has been the criticism of many Christians, particularly those who fall into the category of African-Americans; don't talk it - walk it. They are very skeptical and feel these gestures have no real depth. After all, what's taken them so long? Slavery ended 130 years ago and its taken 130 years to get an apology - or an offer to reconcile? We have learned to work together, live together, eat together, and sleep together, but we have never learned to worship together. It remains that eleven o'clock on Sunday mornings is still the most segregated hour of the week, and this ex-slave explains why.
Sarah Fitzpatrick said they had to sit in the roped off sections and the white folks wouldn't allow them to worship God in their own way. Fitzpatrick said the white folks would come around and tell them to pray and get religion on Sunday, but they would 'beat de life out'cha de next day ef ya didn't walk the chalk line." Fitzpatrick said the slaves saw through their hypocrisy and the "Niggers" commence 'ta wanna go to church by de'selves, even ef dey had 'ta meet in de white church. So white fo'ks have deir service in de mornin' and "Negroes" have deirs in the evening', a'ter dey clean up, wash de dishes, and look a'ter ever'thing." 4
Isn't it interesting that the very place were segregation should be abolished is still the place where segregation is bred. Are we really trying to reconcile?
How can there be true reconciliation or forgiveness when the offenders and the offended don't understand the offense. In order for true reconciliation among blacks and whites to take place, we must both come to the table with the same understanding of the sin. Our stories have to corroborate and the facts must agree. Both parties must understand the offense, its magnitude, its horrendous inhumanity to humanity, its continuing legacy today, and the impact it has had in indelibly marking a race of people and Christendom in America.
Once the offense is understood by all, then heartfelt, and soul rending repentance can take place. Then and only then can a genuine effort toward reconciliation take place. Without this, it is simply words spoken with no feeling, surface gestures with no depth, and forgiveness with no understanding of the offense - which is not true forgiveness.
True racial reconciliation comes with a price. Before one can reconcile they must understand the breach that separated them. Reconciliation is the coming together of two people or races that have been separated by an act so hideous, as to cost both to turn away from each other in disgust and distrust. Proverbs 18: 19 "A brother offended is harder to be won over than a strong city, and [their] contentions separate them like the bars of a castle." (Amplified Bible)
Most of the time this kind of rend in a relationship causes one to avoid the other at all cost, taking great care and effort to avoid contact and maintain separation. Which is what has taken place in America and in the church. We were both at the scene of the crime, and both left with totally different accounts of what took place. But there is a truth that can only be found in the voices of those who were born into slavery and lived to see freedom. Truth can be found in their histories - the oral histories of ex-slaves. It is their stories that are put together in this work to demonstrate and explain, to both parties, what really happened during slavery and this strange relationship between Christianity and racism.
The truth hurts, which is why it is often, particularly in the case of how blacks where treated during slavery by Christians - avoided. How, in the name of Jesus, they were captured and brought to this country under the guise of evangelizing the "heathens" but once here were treated barbarically, with no efforts being made to evangelize them for almost 200 years. This belief justified by slave masters' reasoning that slaves were subhuman and had no souls to save.
Former slave Jenny Proctor quoted the following as part of the sermons slaves received from white preachers, which reflects what they thought of the souls of black folks. "Now I takes my text, which is, [Negro] obey your marster and your mistress, 'cause what you git from dem here in dis world am all you ev'r going' to git, 'cause youjes' like de hogs and de other animals, when you dies you ain't no more, after you been throwed in dat hole.'" "I guess we believed dat for a while 'cause we didn' have no way of findin' out different. We didn' see no Bibles."
During slavery they justified their acts by using the Scriptures. But the sin had taken place, the deed done, the stage set to separate the two races in a way that only Jesus can reconcile. Now that words of reconciliation are resonating throughout Christendom, that's encouraging, but actions speak louder than words.
Just this past year the burning of black churches in the south spoke real loud. Again raising the question - can this rift be healed? The U.S Commission on Civil Rights reported that racism continues to divide American society sharply. The Commission held hearings in six southern states, partly in response to the burning of black churches. Based on the information they gathered they found that racial segregation remains unabated, encompassing everything from banking, to public swimming pools, to churches. 6
That's why racial segregation must first be addressed in the church and not in a superficial, let's just worship together manner. As a body of believers we must take a serious look at the sin of slavery, its impact on black and white Christians, and this country. Then, when we both understand and agree to the magnitude of the offense and its resultant implications, can we meet at the table and let the healing begin.
That is why the voices of ex-slaves permeates this book, allowing both races to listen to the voices of wisdom and insight of the ancestors, to gain both knowledge and strength to reconcile .
... Ef yuh go 'cordin 'tuh de Bible dere is very few rail preachers today. Now we got some few good preachers among us but de majority uv dem aint' doin' nutbin' but goin' thru de motions. Hit don't seem tuh me dat de white preacher takes 'vantage uv his opportunity ter build up rail brotherly love 'between "Negroes' en white folks. Yer know de 'postle Paul sed God is no respecter uv pussons.
Christianity & Slavery: An Unholy Union
Evangelization Or Exploitation
It began almost 500 years ago, in the West Indies, when a group of Spanish settlers and priests on the island of La Navidad met together to find a solution to their dwindling labor force, the Tainos Indians. The Tainos Indians who had inhabited the island of La Navidad (present day II Hispaniola) were slowly being annihilated brought on from death, overwork, disease, and suicide. The Spanish settlers and plantation owners were becoming desperate for a new source of labor, so they held meetings in search of a specimen that could endure hard work, tropical heat, and disease. It was almost like an experiment. They were like scientists looking for the right laboratory specimen to endure the testings they were proposing. Their lab was the cane fields and plantations, and their specimens were human beings, beginning with the Arawak or Tainos Indians.
The experiment had begun under the guise of evangelization, setting the stage for a play of two very unlikely characters. A mixture of two ingredients that would prove explosive and deadly even into the 21st century - slavery and Christianity. No stranger bedfellows have come since, nor produced such an ugly offspring - racism. The combination of the two would prove to be a unholy union.
It began with a religious decree, one of only many to follow. Pope Alexander VI had given Spain the right to evangelize the heathens in the new world. Christopher Columbus took this decree to heart and approached Queen Isabella with the idea of sending him to find new lands, spread the gospel to the heathens and find gold.
Christopher Columbus' surname means bearer of Christ. He was said to have been a devout Catholic, who felt obligated to carry the message of Jesus Christ to remote lands and to the countless races who had never heard of Him. 1
On December 6, 1492, he arrived on the island of La Navidad (present day Haiti and Dominican Republic) where he encountered the inhabitants of this island, the Tainos Indians. Columbus' first impression of the Tainos Indians was that they were a "loving, uncovetous people, so docile in all things". He assured his highness that there wasn't a better people or a better country in all the world; adding that they "loved their neighbors as themselves". Columbus further assured the Queen that they would be good servants and were of quick intelligence ... and believed they would easily be made Christians. 2
The Tainos Indians were soon to become the first ingredients and the first victims of this strange combination of "Christianity and slavery". They were the first victims of this "white man's religion".
It didn't take long for the Spanish to set up a system of slavery. The experiment began with each Spanish settler being given what was called an encomienda, which was a tract of land or a village. The Indians on the land or in the village were entrusted to the Spanish settler in return for instructing the Indians in Christian doctrines, or at least promising to instruct them. In addition, these Spanish settlers had the right to force the Indians to labor in their fields and mines. 3
The fact that slavery became the first result of this expedition, made it clear that the real motives were gold not God. Little efforts were made to evangelize the Indians and by 1496 the native peoples were completely under the control of the Spaniards. These frightened Indians were forced to pay tribute in gold or lose their lives. Natives from fourteen years of age and up, had to furnish a Banders hawk's bell full of gold dust every three months or be killed. Those living in the outer regions who had no gold had to furnish spun or woven cotton.
The Betrayal of The Africans
In January 1502, ten years after the Spaniards had arrived on Hispaniola, Bartolome' de Las Casas, a Dominican, who would later become the first priest ordained to the West Indies around 1512, arrived. He was sent out as a teacher of Christian doctrines to the Indians. 5
By the time he arrived, the first phase of the experiment had begun to produce unacceptable results. The first specimens were dying or choosing death over slavery. The Indians, who had welcomed the white men to their land, were now being massacred, mistreated, and enslaved. Many died from overwork, torture, and others by a sheer act of their will, rather than live in slavery. Others died from the white man's diseases of small box and syphilis. Although Las Casas would arrive in villages and baptize the little children, they only ended up dying from disease or the cruelty of the Spaniards a few months later. 6
By the spring of 1514, Las Casas was convinced that the Indians in Cuba and on Hispaniola were being treated unjustly and tyrannical and decided to preach against their enslavement. Las Casas gave up his Indians and began a ceaseless crusade to stop the enslavement and exploitation of the Indians. He began making plans to lobby in Spain for better treatment of the Indians. 7
Finding his efforts failing, knowing that he could not take out a key ingredient in the experiment without replacing it, and knowing that the Spaniards were not willing to give up their gold, Las Casas had to find a more suitable specimen to replace the dwindling Indians. Thus, in 1517, Las Casas proposed to Charles V the substitution of Africans in place of the Indians. 8 This suggestion to import Africans was based on the idea that the Africans could work longer and harder than the Indians. It was clear that in order for this experiment to work they needed a stronger, healthier specimen. One that could endure the harshest of slavery, tropical heat, deprivation, and long hours of labor.
Thus entered another strange twist in this unholy union of slavery and Christianity. This time it was the priest proposing the change. It is said he later bitterly regretted making this proposal, as he found out that the Negroes' captivity was just as inhumane, but the wheels had begun turning.
It has been suggested that Las Casas plea to use the Africans instead of the native races, reflects he did not feel the Africans were human, as he objected to the use of the native races on the grounds of their humanity. Suggesting the use of the Africans is a clear indication that he did not feel them part of humanity. 9
However, what Las Casas and the Spanish did feel, was that the Africans were more suited for slavery and were agriculturalists and hence more able than the America Indians to withstand the rigors of slavery." 10
Las Casas did not make this suggestion with no knowledge of the Negroes. The first blacks had been brought to La Navidad (Hispaniola) in 1502, thirteen years before he made his proposal. By 1520, three years after his proposal to Charles V, African slaves were used throughout the Island.
Even if Las Casas later regretted his proposal, and even if some Spaniards opposed Negro slavery along with him, neither fought against the Africans' enslavement as hard or as consistently as they fought for the Indians. "Despite Las Casas final rejection of Negro slavery, as late as 1544 he owned several Negro slaves and no document has come to light which reveals any concerted opposition to Negro slavery during the sixteenth century." 11
Their first laboratory experiment had failed miserably. The Tainos Indians had not proven strong enough for the job. Now they turned their eyes to another source, the Africans. What they did not know was that this experiment would come back to haunt them, and the deadly viruses they were planting and creating would cause such a mutation that even they would be hard pressed to find a way to destroy it - racism. The stage was being set for centuries of bitterness, hatred, and division among blacks and whites.
A passage in "African Glory", describes what happened to these captured Africans upon their destination, and the twisted way Christianity was used in this most cruel and inhumane of practices - slavery.
When the ship reached harbor, the cargo came up on deck to be brought. Their purchasers examined them for defects, looked at the teeth, pinched the skin, tasted the perspiration to see if the slave's blood was pure and his health as good as his appearance. Some of the women affected a curiosity, the indulgence of which, with a horse, would have caused them to be kicked twenty yards across the deck. But the slaves had to stand it. Then in order to restore any dignity which might have been lost by too intimate an examination, the purchaser spat in the face of the slave. Having become the property of his owner, he was branded on both sides of the breast with a hot iron. His duties were explained by an interpreter and a priest instructed him in the first principles of Christianity.12
References:
1. Frederick Douglass, "Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass", An American Slave", (The New American Library, Inc., New York, New York, 1968), pp. 120-121.
2. John B. Boles, "Masters & Slaves In The House of The Lord", (University Press of Kentucky, 1988), pp . 63-64.
3. Christianity Today, 1997.
4. John '1/. Blassingame. "Slave Testimony", (Louisiana State University Press, Baton, Rouge, 1977), p. 643.
5. George P. Rawick, 'The American Slave: A Composite Autobiography, Unwritten History, Fisk University (Greenwood Publishing Company, Westport Connecticut, 1972, p. 253.
6. Christianity Today, November 1996.
7. John W. Blassingame, "Slave Testimony", (Louisiana State University Press, Baton, Rouge, 1977).
Chapter One
1. George Sanderlin, "Bartolome de Las Casas", A Selection of His Writings, (Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, 1971), p. 38
2. Richard Roscoe Miller, "Slavery and Catholicism," (North State Publishers, Durham, North Carolina, 1957), p. 45.
3. George Sanderlin, "Bartolome de Las Casas," A Selection of His Writings, (Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., New York, 1971), p. 7.
4. Miller, "Slavery and Catholicism," p. 7.
5. Sanderlin, "Bartolome de Las Casas," p. 5.
6. Ibid. p. 61.
7. Ibid, p. 8.
8. Miller, "Slavery and Catholicism," p. 10.
9. Ibid. p. 63.
10. Patrick Bellegrade-Smith, "Haiti: The Breached Citadel," (Westview Press, Inc., London, England, 1990, p. 31.
11. Lewis Hanke, "Aristotle and the American Indians," A Study in Race Prejudice in the Modem World, (Fitzhenry & Whiteside Limited, Don Mills, Ontario, 1959), p. 9.
12. J.G. DeGraft JOhnSvil, "African Glory: The Story of Vanished Negro Civilizations, 1954, p. 155.