tinctly apprized them of the result. He told them that it would set
the father against the son, and the son against the father; the mother
against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; and that a
man's enemies should be those of his own household. He said that he came
not to bring peace, but a sword, and that such would be the opposition
to his followers, that whosoever killed them, would think he did God
service. Yet in view of these certain consequences, the apostles did
denounce idolatry, not merely in principle, but by name. The result was
precisely what Christ had foretold. The Romans, tolerant of every other
religion, bent the whole force of their wisdom and arms to extirpate
Christianity. The scenes of bloodshed, which century after century
followed the introduction of the gospel, did not induce the followers of
Christ to keep back or modify the truth. They adhered to their
declaration, that idolatry was a heinous crime. And they were right. We
expect similar conduct of our missionaries. We do not expect them to
refrain from denouncing the institutions of the heathen, as sinful,
because they are popular, or intimately interwoven with society. The
Jesuits, who adopted this plan, forfeited the confidence of Christendom,
without making converts of the heathen. It is, therefore, perfectly
evident that the authors of our religion were not withheld by these
considerations, from declaring slavery to be unlawful. If they did
abstain from this declaration, as is admitted, it must have been because
they did not consider it as in itself a crime. No other solution of
their conduct is consistent with their truth or fidelity.

Another answer to the argument from Scripture is given by Dr. Channing
and others. It is said that it proves too much; that it makes the Bible
sanction despotism, even the despotism of Nero. Our reply to this
objection shall be very brief. We have already pointed out the fallacy
of confounding slaveholding itself with the particular system of slavery
prevalent at the time of Christ, and shown that the recognition of
slaveholders as Christians, though irreconcilable with the assumption
that slavery is a heinous crime, gives no manner of sanction to the
atrocious laws and customs of that age, in relation to that subject.
Because the apostles admitted the masters of slaves to the communion of
the church, it would be a strange inference that they would have given
this testimony to the Christian c