Ashtabula weekly telegraph. [volume] (Ashtabula, Ohio) 1853-1873, 1861-02-09
WHOLE NUMBER. 58l.

DENY ihat the New Testament psIy sssf in re-
gard 70 the sagss ssi1es of savebodiag In sl the IN
by the HOLY Spirit 10 write for the instruction Of coming gem
c'pate bis slaves"
1 confess that / read this part Of Mr..
Van Dykes sermon with astOnisbment, and
wondered, IL a New York or Brooklyn
audience could be found to endorse il, even
when heated up with secession excitement F!
or 1t country readers could be fonud to be-
| lieve It,
| pass by the assumption that slavery was
so universal and common when our Saviour
came aud that masters and slaves met
Christ and his apostles at every step, and
we're present in every audience to notice
some other glaring assertion.
FIRST. lie says. 1t is not alleged BY
any one, or at least, by any having any pre-.
tentions 10 scholarship or caaslor. that the
Roman Lat0s regulating slavery. we're even
RS mild as the reTy Ie0rst statutes which
have been passed upon the subject in mod
ern times Assumption, wholesale asser-
tion seems to he favorite mode of reason
ing with Mr.. Van Dyke when on the sub
ject Of slavery Does be mean to assume
that all scholarship and eaadOr resides in
in the advocates Of slavery Or was he
ignorant of the fact that many men whose
scholarship and candor have ranked quite
high as his own have maintained that
American Slavery is the rilest, that ever
saw the sun ? Heaven only can measure
the enormity Of Roman laws on the subject
Of slavery, it they we're ,oOrS than any of
modern times. M. Rice, of Kentucky
speaking Of the laws that con6ne the slave,
says they are consigned to a bottomless
gulf of wretchedness' The Maryvile fH.
| telligencer says the condition Of slaves in.
the southwestern states is second OnLg to
that Of the wretched creatures IN heLl The
synod Of Kentucky says they suffer all that
can be inflicted By l0aat0n caprice grdspiMg
GUGrioc brutal lust, DaignGt spite, and az
sane anger Now if Roman laws and Ro.
man slavery, were still worse, then perdi-
tion, itself can hardly furnish parallel of
wretchedness. Passing, would ash, was
Roman slavery sinful, and those bad laws
only abuses Did Roman laws regulating
slavery hold that 'meH teaS stot property
only his 'Serrices we're property If Christ
and his apostles believed, that such slave:
holding was sin and ought to be abolished,
were they not Abolitionists ? Or did they
defend upon principle such slaveryP Or
did their utter silence signify approval.
SECOND. After Mr.. Van Dyke assumes,
and claims all candid scholars, as agreeing
with him that Roman laws regulating slave.
ry, were not even as mild as the worst stat.
utes of modern times, he informs us, that
although Christ and bis apostles met it at
every step and in every audience, still they
were utterly silent in regard to the sinful.
ness of slaveholdng. He tells us. that they
condemned every acknowledged sin, in un-
measured terms, drunkenness and adultery,
theft and murder'-'all the moral wrongs.
which ever have been known to afflicted
society, are forbidden by name,' and yet
Slaveholdng lis never spoken of except in
respectful terms . Then, according to Mr..
Van Dykes own showing modern statutes
upon the subject of slavery are bad but
Roman laws were 'toOrse' If understand
common English Grammar, comparison
runs in the direction Of bad, l0OrSe, l0orst,
and not good, worse So then we have,
indirectly, at last, the confession that, both
in the Roman and American code there are
bad hUs but although Roman laws gave
Shareholders the power of life and death
over the slave, still neither Christ nor the
apostles ever alleged that slavehoIding was
sinful, but were utterly silent Let those
believe this who can. And we might add,
if they were thus silent, what does it prove7
THIRD. But, silence is the mighty argu.
ment when we approach the New Testa-
ment with the question of slavery. Mr..
Van Dyke says at is remarkable fact,
which the AholitioniSt does not, because he
cannot deny, that the New Testament is
utterly SleM in regard to the alleged sinful.
ness of sIaveholding" Now, in the 6rst
place, DENY that any intelligent, sane Abo-
litionist ever maintained, that the New
Testament is utterly silent" ON the sinful
ness Of slaveholding. The precepts and
teachings Of Christ and the apostles are cou4
iinually leveled against this sin by Aboli.
tioni>ts Henc', for Mr.. Van Dyke to as
sert that Abolitionists admit the SILENCE -
utter silence" Of the New Testament in re-
gard to the sinfuness of slaveholding, be.
trays an unaccountable ignorance of Adolf
tionsm-or something worse. 1t is repre-.
senting them as virtually yielding the Bible
argument, while he ought to know that the
New Testament has been the mighty wea-
pom against slavery, in the hands of patriots,
phianthropists and christians, in every age
of the world, aud that his Ol0a church, by
its G enera Assembly, boasts OF being
among the first 10 "the good work Of en-
deavoring to put an erid to slavery, because
opposed to the Gospel of Christ"
DIGEsf, .. Sia
But suppose we should admit that Christ
and the apostles were silent on the sin Of
sayehol1ing, how does their silence prove It
rightY Such ruIe Of testimony would
prove some Of the most fragrant evils, sin.
less and right.
FIRST. At our SaviOr's advent the Ro-
man government was infected to its very
center with IdOlatry Where did Christ
directly ever say q word against Idolatry
He never named it once BY implication
Of course, he condemned it but he was
'uttery SILENT" so far as any open rebuke
or condemnation was concerned Are We
to infer that Idoatfy was not sinful, be-
cause the Savior did not openly assault Il
SECOND In the time Of Christ and bis
apostles, every Roman father possessed the
power of life aud death over his child.