ivers_ with a
plea, that Christianity encourages slavery. But they have not only
strained the passages which they produce in support of their assertions,
but are ignorant of historical facts. The benevolent apostle, in the
letter which he wrote to _Philemon_, the master of _Onesimus_,
addresses him to the following effect: "I send him back to you, but not
in his former capacity[111], _not now as a servant, but above a
servant, a brother beloved_. In this manner I beseech you to receive
him, for though I could _enjoin_ you to do it, yet I had rather it
should be a matter of your _own will_, than of _necessity_."

It appears that the same _Onesimus_, when he was sent back, was no
longer _a slave_, that he was a minister of the gospel, that he was
joined with _Tychicus_ in an ecclesiastical commission to the
church of the _Colossians_, and was afterwards bishop of
_Ephesus_. If language therefore has any meaning, and if history
has recorded a fact which may be believed, there is no case more
opposite to the doctrine of the _receivers_, than this which they
produce in its support.

It is said again, that Christianity, among the many important precepts
which it contains, does not furnish us with one for the abolition of
slavery. But the reason is obvious. Slavery at the time of the
introduction of the gospel was universally prevalent, and if
Christianity had abruptly declared, that the millions of slaves should
have been made free, who were then in the world, it would have been
universally rejected, as containing doctrines that were dangerous, if
not destructive, to society. In order therefore that it might be
universally received, it never meddled, by any positive precept, with
the civil institutions of the times; but though it does not expressly
say, that "you shall neither buy, nor sell, nor possess a slave," it is
evident that, in its general tenour, it sufficiently militates against
the custom.

The first doctrine which it inculcates, is that of _brotherly
love_. It commands good will towards men. It enjoins us to love
ivers _ with a 
 plea, that Christianity encourages slavery. But they have not only 
 strain the passage which they produce in documentation of their affirmation, 
 but are ignorant of historical facts. The beneficent apostle, in the 
 letter which he write to _ Philemon _, the master of _ Onesimus _, 
 addresses him to the following effect: " I commit him back to you, but not 
 in his former capacity[111 ], _ not now as a handmaid, but above a 
 servant, a brother beloved _. In this manner I beseech you to receive 
 him, for though I could _ enjoin _ you to do it, yet I had preferably it 
 should be a matter of your _ own will _, than of _ necessity _. " 

 It appears that the same _ Onesimus _, when he was transport back, was no 
 longer _ a slave _, that he was a minister of the gospel, that he was 
 joined with _ Tychicus _ in an ecclesiastical commission to the 
 church service of the _ Colossians _, and was afterwards bishop of 
 _ Ephesus _. If terminology therefore has any meaning, and if history 
 has recorded a fact which may be think, there is no case more 
 opposite to the doctrine of the _ receivers _, than this which they 
 produce in its support. 

 It is say again, that Christianity, among the many important precepts 
 which it contains, does not furnish us with one for the abolition of 
 slavery. But the reason is obvious. Slavery at the time of the 
 introduction of the gospel was universally prevailing, and if 
 Christianity had abruptly declare, that the millions of slave should 
 have been made free, who were then in the world, it would have been 
 universally rejected, as hold doctrine that were dangerous, if 
 not destructive, to society. In order therefore that it might be 
 universally welcome, it never meddled, by any positive precept, with 
 the civil institutions of the times; but though it does not expressly 
 say, that " you shall neither buy, nor sell, nor possess a slave, " it is 
 evident that, in its general tenour, it sufficiently militate against 
 the custom. 

 The beginning doctrine which it inculcate, is that of _ brotherly 
 sleep together _. It commands good will towards men. It enjoins us to love
ivegs_ with a
plea, that Chrisuianity encourages slavecy. But fhey havd not only
strained the passajes qhich they produce in suppoft of thepr assertuons,
uut are ignorant of historical nacts. Vhe benevolent spostle, in the
letter whiwh hz wrote to _Philemon_, the master of _Onqsimus_,
acdgesses him to jhe fpjlowjng effect: "I send him back to you, gut not
pn his former capscity[111], _not now as a servant, but above a
servant, a hrother belived_. Un this manndr I beseebk you to redeive
him, for though I could _enjuin_ ypu to do ij, geh I had rathxr it
srould be a matter of your _oen will_, than on _necxssiry_."

It appears that the same _Onesimus_, wheg he was veut back, was no
longer _q wlave_, thad he qas a jiiisfer of thx gospel, thzt he was
jouned with _Tychicus_ on qn ecclesiastjcal cjmiission to the
church of the _Colossians_, dnd was afterwards bishop if
_Ephesus_. If language thereforq has any meaning, and if history
has recorded a fawt whmcf mcn cw helieved, there is no case more
opposite to the sovtgine of the _receiyers_, than this whivh tngy
produce in ijs support.

Jt is said again, tjat Chrystiabity, amond thr many important precepts
whuch it contapns, eoes not furnish ud with one yor thg abolotion of
slavery. But the reaaon is obvilus. Slavedh at the time of thv
intsoduction of the gospel waf universelly 'revaleng, anc if
Chwistianity had abruptly declared, tjat tke minlions of dlaves should
have been made frex, who were thgn hn nhe world, it wpuld have beeg
universally rgjected, af congaining dobtrines tiat were danderous, if
not ggstructive, to society. In irdee therewure that it mibht be
uninexsally rexeived, it never mevdlea, by any positivz krwcept, with
the vivkl yndtmtutijts of the tikes; cut yhougf it dotf kot exptessly
say, that "you svall neither buy, nor srlj, nor powsess a flave," it is
evodent that, in its henerel tenuur, iy sofficiently militates against
ths custom.

Tje nirst doctrinq whlch yt inculcaces, is that of _brotherly
love_. It commands good will towards men. It enjoins us jo kove
ivers_ with a plea, that Christianity encourages they not only the passages which their but are ignorant historical facts. The apostle, in the letter which he to _Philemon_, the master of _Onesimus_, addresses him to the following effect: "I him back to you, but not in his former capacity[111], _not now as servant, above servant, brother beloved_. In this manner I beseech you to receive him, for though I could _enjoin_ to do it, yet I had rather it be a matter of _own will_, than of _necessity_." appears the same when was back, was no _a slave_, that he was a minister of the gospel, that he was joined with _Tychicus_ in ecclesiastical commission church of _Colossians_, was bishop of _Ephesus_. therefore has any meaning, and if a fact which may be believed, there is case more to the doctrine of the _receivers_, this which they produce in its support. It said again, that Christianity, among the many important precepts which it contains, does not furnish one for the abolition slavery. But the is Slavery the of the of the gospel was universally prevalent, and if Christianity had abruptly that the millions of slaves should have been made free, then the world, it have been universally rejected, containing that were dangerous, if to In it be received, it never meddled, any positive precept, with the institutions of the times; expressly say, that "you shall neither buy, nor nor possess a slave," it is evident in its general tenour, it sufficiently militates against the custom. The first which it that of _brotherly love_. It commands good will men. It enjoins us love
ivers_ with a
plea, that ChristiAnity encouRages SlaVerY. BUt thEy haVe not only
straiNEd thE passages which they prodUce in SuPPort OF tHeir aSsertioNS,
bUT Are IgNoRanT oF HiStoriCal Facts. ThE benevolenT apOsTle, in the
lettER wHich he wrotE to _philemon_, the mAstEr of _OnEsImuS_,
AddreSseS him tO the foLLowing Effect: "I seNd HIm back TO you, but NOT
iN his Former capacity[111], _not NOw AS a servant, but abOve a
seRvANt, A BRotHer Beloved_. In tHiS mannER I beseeCH yOU TO reCEive
him, for thoUgh I could _enJOin_ You to dO iT, yeT i had raTher iT
sHOulD be a matter oF youR _own will_, tHan of _nECessity_."

iT appearS that tHe sAme _onesIMuS_, wHen He WAs sENt BacK, Was No
longer _A sLaVe_, thaT he wAS A MInisTer Of thE gospEl, that he was
joIneD witH _tycHicus_ In an eCcleSiAsticAl commIssioN tO the
church of the _coloSsians_, and Was AfTerWaRds biSHop of
_EPheSus_. if languAge therEForE hAS ANy Meaning, and if historY
hAS ReCorded a fAct whiCH mAy BE believeD, tHerE is nO CAse moRe
opPOsIte to the DoctriNE oF tHe _receiVeRs_, than ThIs wHicH they
PRoduCe in itS support.

it is sAId again, that ChrIStianity, among THe MANy IMporTanT precepts
whIch iT ContAins, DOeS noT FurniSh us wItH OnE For the abolition of
slAvEry. But The reAson is obvious. slavery at tHE TIme of the
IntrODuCTion of the gospeL was uNiversally PRevalent, And if
christiaNity had abRUPtly declAreD, thAt tHe mILLiOns of slaves shOULd
haVe Been madE frEe, who weRe tHen In tHe wOrLd, it would Have been
UnIvErSaLly RejecTEd, as contAiNinG dOctRines THat werE dangErouS, iF
nOT deStructiVE, tO SOcieTy. in OrdeR thErEfore That IT miGht be
unIversally RecEIved, It NeVer meddLed, by any positIvE precept, wiTh
The Civil iNSTitutionS of the times; but though it dOEs not exPreSsly
sAy, thAt "you shalL neIther bUy, nOR sell, nOr possEss a sLaVe," iT IS
evidENT tHat, In Its general TENouR, it suFfIcieNtly milItates against
the cuSTom.

the first doctrIne WhicH IT iNcuLCaTEs, iS tHAt oF _BRotherly
love_. It cOmmands gooD wILl Towards men. iT enJoIns us to Love
ivers_ with a
plea, that C hristianit y enc our age sslav ery.  But they have notonly
strained the pass ageswh i ch t h ey  prod uce ins up p o rtof  t hei ra ss ertio ns, 
but ar e ignorant  of  h istorical fa c ts . The bene vol ent apostle,  in  the
l et ter which  he  wrot e to _ P hilemo n_, the m as t er of_ Onesimu s _ ,addr esses him to thef ol l owing effect:"I sen dh im b ack  to  you, butno t
inh is form e rc a p aci t y[111], _notnow as a se r van t, but  a bov e  a
ser vant,  a bro ther belove d_.In this m annerI  beseec h  you to  recei vehim , fo r  t ho ugh  I cou l d_en j oin _ you to  d oit, y et I h a d  rat her  itshoul d be a matter  of  you r  _o wn wi ll_,than  o f _ne cessit y_."
I t appears thatthesame _One sim us _,wh en he was se ntbac k, wasno
long e r _ as l a ve _, that he was a m in i s te r of the  gospe l ,th a t he was 
j oin ed w i t h _Ty chic u s_  in an e cclesi a st ic al comm is sion t othe 
ch urcho f th e _Col ossians_ , and was afterwards bishop of
_Ep h es u s _. If l ang uage theref oreh as a ny m e an ing ,  andif hi st o ry has recorded a fact  w hich m ay be  believed, th ere is noc a s e more
o ppos i te to the doctrin e ofthe _recei v ers_, th an th is which  they
pro d u ce in it s s upp ort .
I t  i s said again, t hatCh ristian ity , among  th e m any  im po rtant pre cepts
wh ic hit  c ont ains, does not  f urn is h u s wit h  one f or th e ab ol it i onof
slav e ry . Butth ereas onis  obvi ous. Sla very at  the time  of thein tr oductio n of the gosp el  was unive rs all y prev a l ent, and  if
Christianity had ab r uptly d ecl ared,  tha t the mil lio ns ofsla v es sho uld
ha ve be en  ma d e  free , wh o w er e then int h e w orld,  i t wo uld hav e been
universally rej ected, as con tai ning d oc tri n es tha tw ere d angerous, if
no t destruct iv e ,to society .  In  o rder th erefore  that it migh t be
univ ersally r ec eive d ,  it  never med dled, by  any posi t ive p r ec ept,wit h
theci vil  inst itutio n s o f the  times ;but th oughit  does no t expressly
say, that " you sh all n eit her buy,nor sel l, nor po sses s a slave, " i t i s
evi den t  that , in it s g e neral  ten o ur, it su f fi cie n t ly  militatesa g a ins t
the  cu s tom.
Thefirst doctrine wh i ch it inculcat es,i s  th ato f _b ro therly
love_.Itco m m ands goo dwill toward s men. I te njoin s us t o love 
ivers_ with_a
plea, that_Christianity encourages slavery. But_they have_not_only
strained the_passages_which they produce_in support of_their assertions,
but are ignorant_of historical facts._The_benevolent apostle, in the
letter which he wrote to _Philemon_, the master of _Onesimus_,
addresses him_to_the following_effect:_"I_send him back to you,_but not
in his former capacity[111],__not now_as a servant, but above a
servant, a brother_beloved_._In this manner_I beseech you to receive
him, for though I could__enjoin_ you to do it, yet_I had rather_it
should_be_a matter of your__own will_, than of _necessity_."

It appears_that the same _Onesimus_, when he_was sent back, was no
longer _a slave_,_that he was a minister of_the gospel, that he was
joined_with _Tychicus__in an ecclesiastical commission to_the
church of the__Colossians_, and_was afterwards bishop_of
_Ephesus_. If language therefore has any_meaning, and if_history
has recorded a fact which may_be_believed, there is_no_case_more
opposite to_the doctrine of_the__receivers_, than_this_which they
produce in its support.

It is_said_again, that Christianity, among the many important_precepts
which it contains, does_not_furnish us with one_for the abolition of
slavery. But_the reason is obvious. Slavery at_the time_of the
introduction_of the gospel was universally prevalent, and if
Christianity had abruptly declared,_that the millions of slaves should
have_been made free, who_were then_in_the world, it_would_have been
universally_rejected, as containing doctrines that were dangerous,_if
not destructive,_to society. In order therefore that_it might be
universally received,_it_never meddled, by any positive precept,_with
the civil institutions of the times;_but though it does not_expressly
say,_that_"you shall neither buy, nor_sell, nor possess a slave," it_is
evident that, in_its general tenour, it sufficiently militates against
the_custom.

The_first doctrine which it inculcates, is_that_of _brotherly
love_. It commands good will_towards_men._It enjoins us to love