Mr. Merritt, published in Zion's Herald, Dr. Fisk gives utterance to
such things as the following:--"But that you and the public may see and
_feel_, that you have the ablest and those who are among the honestest
men of this age, arrayed against you, be pleased to notice the following
letter from Prof. Stuart." I wrote to him, knowing as I did his integrity
of purpose, his unflinching regard for truth, as well as his deserved
reputation as a scholar and biblical critic, proposing the following
questions:--

1. Does the New Testament directly or indirectly teach, that slavery
existed in the primitive church?

2. In 1 Tim. vi. 2, And they that have believing masters, &c., what is
the relation expressed or implied between "they" (servants) and
"_believing masters_?" And what are your reasons for the construction of
the passage?

3. What was the character of ancient and eastern slavery?--Especially
what (legal) power did this relation give the master over the slave?

PROFESSOR STUART'S REPLY.

ANDOVER, 10th April, 1837.

REV. AND DEAR SIR,--Yours is before me. A sickness of three months'
standing (typhus fever,) in which I have just escaped death, and
which still confines me to my house, renders it impossible for me to
answer your letter at large.

1. The precepts of the New Testament respecting the demeanor of
slaves and of their masters, beyond all question, recognize the
existence of slavery. The masters are in part "believing masters,"
so that a precept to them, how they are to behave as _masters_,
recognizes that the relation may still exist, _salva fide et salva
ecclesia_, ("without violating the Christian faith or the church.")
Otherwise, Paul had nothing to do but to cut the band asunder at
once. He could not lawfully and properly temporize with a _malum in
se_, ("that which is in itself sin.")

If any one doubts, let him take the case of Paul's sending Onesimus
back to Philemon, with an apology for his running away, and sending
him back to be his servant for life. The relation did exist, may
exist. The _abuse_ of it is the essential and fundamental wrong. Not
that the theory of slavery is in itself right. No; "Love thy
neighbor as thyself," "Do unto others that which ye would that
others should do unto you," decide against this. But the relation
once constituted and continued, is not such a _malum in se_ as calls
f