How Does the Power of Christ Compel You?

“I love the pure, peaceable, and impartial Christianity of Christ: I therefore hate the corrupt, slaveholding, women-whipping, cradle-plundering, partial and hypocritical Christianity of this land” (Douglass 75).

The above quote is intriguing to me because it reveals that even though Douglass acknowledges the existence of a double standard of Christianity, he continues to practice it. Douglass, throughout the appendix, skillfully depicts the contribution the church makes to the institution of slavery and vice versa. I particularly found this line effective in summing up the collaboration between slavery and the church: “The dealer gives his blood-stained gold to support the pulpit, and the pulpit, in return, covers his infernal business with the garb of Christianity” (Douglass 76). This issue is clearly an emotional one for Douglass since, unlike in the rest of the novel, he does not support his assertions with facts and names; he instead resorts to making allusions to the Bible to prove his generalized points. It’s clear that Douglass was not a part of the dealings between church officials and slave owners, but that did not stop him from seeing the relationships that bound the two together. Perhaps Douglass is directing his critique to northern church officials (or perhaps to those overseas) in order to bring about reform throughout the south.

I thought it was remarkable that Douglass still supported Christianity until I thought more deeply about his connections to the religion. Upon first glance, it appears as though Douglass’s support of Christianity is a sign of his submission to the white, landed patriarchy. It is true that Douglass practices the religion of his oppressors, yet this is because he does not disagree with its central tenets. Douglass learned to appreciate the teachings Christ even while his masters would cite them as reasons to justify the “disciplining” of their slaves. The Bible is clearly a text that is open to interpretation from different sects and races of people, thus it makes sense that both blacks and whites in the south in such the ways that they did. Ultimately, neither group’s interpretation can be correct, yet this should not diminish the immeasurable effect it had on slaves to seek their freedom and their human rights. Thus, while Christianity caused, in part, the slaves’ suffering, it also arguably incited their liberation.

In regard to the power of words, it is stressed by Douglass’s narrative that words only have power and influence after people interpret them. Only those Christ’s words in the Bible can determine their truth. Passages of the Bible are not only misquoted, but also omitted when interpretation is brought up. For Frederick Douglass, his affinity to the Bible occurred when he arguably had lost all hope. He yearned for intellectual and spiritual enlightenment – and the Bible was able to provide him with both. Douglass’s analysis of the Bible’s influence on the conscience of man becomes murky when he considers the mindset of slave owners. Do they feel immense remorse for the pain they are inflicting on their slave, or do they completely believe what they are doing is condoned and by Christ? While Douglass does not offer enough to answer this question, if such an answer is even attainable, I think it is appropriate that he reminds his readers that church officials, like slaves, are still human beings and thus are not immune from criticism.