More handpicked essays just for you.
The narrative of the life frederick douglass slavery cruelty
Justification of institution of slavery
The narrative of the life frederick douglass slavery cruelty
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Nicholas Larsen
Mrs. Aguirre
English
August 30, 2017
The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass
Theme: Religion does not justify everything.
After Frederick Douglass was forced to leave Baltimore. To be enslaved by cruel Mr. Thomas in St. Michaels. Master Thomas went to a religion camp. Frederick hoped he would come back a less cruel man. However he returned the exact opposite. “After his conversion he found religious sanction and support for his slave holding cruelty.” When he would whip or beat a slave. He would quote a scripture that reads, “He who kwoweth his masters will and doith it not, shall be beaten with many stripes.” In the article “Christianity as a Justification for Slavery.” It shares a good point on what slave holder’s
The novel Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, published in 1845, provides Americans with a firsthand look into slavery prior to the Civil War. Douglass, born a slave early into the nineteenth century, encounters and survives the task of living as a slave. Within the ninth chapter of his life, an argument arises that claims Southern Christianity differs immensely from its Northern counterpart. A majority of Christians in non-slaveholding states at the time believed that Christian slaveholders were kinder after they converted, Douglass worked to invalidate this claim. In chapter nine, the ingenious use of dispassionate tone and allusion throughout the passages support the claim that a simple conversion to Christianity only gives justification to cruel southern slaveholders.
In his autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Frederick Douglass expresses his views of Christianity and the horrors of slavery for both blacks and whites. Vipul A. Rana (August 7, 2010) writes about how slaves believed one version of Christianity, while the White Americans, or masters, believed another version of Christianity. The slaveholders used Christianity as an excuse to the horrible ways they treated slaves. Vipul writes that over the course of Douglass’ narrative, Douglass describes how non-religious slaveholders seem to be less cruel to their slaves than religious slaveholders. According to Douglass’ autobiography, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass (1845), Thomas Auld was an example of a master that after going to a religious camp he turned, “more cruel and hateful in all his ways, for I believe him to have been a much worse man after his conversion than before (p.32).” Auld started “relying upon his own depravity to shield and sustain him in his savage barbarity; but after his conversion, he found religious sanction and support for his slaveholding cruelty (p.32).”
In the well-written narrative The Life of Fredrick Douglass, the author, and former slave known as Fredrick Douglass, uses multiple examples of brutal whippings and severe punishments to describe the terrible conditions that African American slaves faced in the south. Douglass’s purpose for writing this narrative was to show the physical and emotional pain that slaves had to endure from their owners. According to Fredrick Douglass, “adopted slaveholders are the worst” and he proves his point with his anecdotes from when he was a slave; moreover, slave owners through marriage weren’t used to the rules of slaveholding so they acted tougher. He also proves that Christian slave owners weren’t always holier, they too showed no mercy towards their slaves and Douglass considered them religious hypocrites.
...adiction to American religious ideals of pure, peaceable and impartial conduct. In being a devout man Master Thomas would convert many in the name of the church. His home even became the home of preachers to hold meetings and sermons. Nevertheless, this did not change his demeanor towards his slaves. For all his pious actions, inside Thomas was a vicious man who whipped, beat, and disowned his slaves in a warp sense of duty to the church and god, “Here was a recently-converted man, holding on upon the mother, and at the same time turning out her helpless child, to starve and die!”
Slavery was a dominant part of the political and social arenas of 1800’s America. However, it was not homogenous as it divided America into two distinct groups: those who supported it and those who did not. Traditionally, the states in the north had been anti-slavery while the states in the south had been pro-slavery. Southern life and economy depended on slavery and therefore staunchly supported the continued legal status of slavery. The northern states on the other hand recognized the inhumane nature of slavery and campaigned to establish equality for all citizens. In order to establish solid reasoning for their stance, both pro-slave and anti-slave groups turned to theological inspiration for their actions. The Bible inspired both pro-slavery advocates and anti-slavery abolitionists alike. Religion was used in order to justify slavery and also to condemn it.
Douglass is telling us that until we go out and get our own understanding, we will always be blind to what’s right in front of us. He is saying we can do all the praying we want for change, but until you help ourselves God won’t help you. I don’t think he found a new faith, but I do know he did find knowledge. What the slave masters were telling the slaves wasn’t a lie, but it was written for different time, the bible was always meant to be transcribed and interpreted.
Because it offers them the possibility of community and identity, many slaves find themselves strongly attached to religion. They cannot build a family structure and they cannot be identified by family name, but through the church, they can build a community and identify themselves as Christians. This comfort becomes virtually non-existent for it too is controlled by the slaveowners who “came to the conclusion that it would be well to give the slaves enough of religious instruction to keep them from murdering their masters” (57). The fact that one person could have the ability to control the amount of religion another person has and his purpose for having it diminishes any sense of community or identity that it may have initially provided.
... “Prior to [Captain Auld’s] conversion, he relied upon his own depravity to shield and sustain him in his savage barbarity; but after his conversion, he found religious sanction and support for the slaveholding cruelty” (Douglass 883). This means that slaveholders use Christianity as a tool to show that they are good at heart and are doing God’s work, but they use it as a divine right to brutally beat slaves. This is what Frederick wants other abolitionists to recognize, especially the abolitionist women.
In chapter 9, Douglass writes about his former master, Thomas Auld, who found religion but got harsher to his slaves. He whipped a girl plenty of times and recited Scripture for an excuse, “... and in justification of the bloody deed, he would quote this passage of
Douglass continues to describe the severity of the manipulation of Christianity. Slave owners use generations of slavery and mental control to convert slaves to the belief God sanctions and supports slavery. They teach that, “ man may properly be a slave; that the relation of master and slave is ordained by God” (Douglass 13). In order to justify their own wrongdoings, slaveowners convert the slaves themselves to Christianity, either by force or gentle coercion over generations. The slaves are therefore under the impression that slavery is a necessary evil. With no other source of information other than their slave owners, and no other supernatural explanation for the horrors they face other than the ones provided by Christianity, generations of slaves cannot escape from under the canopy of Christianity. Christianity molded so deeply to the ideals of slavery that it becomes a postmark of America and a shield of steel for American slave owners. Douglass exposes the blatant misuse of the religion. By using Christianity as a vessel of exploitation, they forever modify the connotations of Christianity to that of tyrannical rule and
It was Friedrich Nietzsche who called Christianity a slave morality. How could a religion which is said to teach love of thy neighbor, promote world peace, and avoiding sin be accused of harboring the enslavement of character so feverishly explained by Nietzsche? Many would denounce Nietzsche as an evil crazy person, one whose ideals were in line with the ideals of Nazi Germany. One would be incorrect assuming this of Nietzsche as one would be incorrect to argue that Christianity is not a slave morality. For it is defined as to which constitutes a slave morality that to me in no doubt does it cast that Nietzsche was correct in more ways than one. By cause of withheld and deep resentment for the master, sparked the means of which constitutes Christianity being a utility in which the Master is not conquered but made equal.
In his narrative, Frederick Douglass shows how Christianity was used as a major justification for slavery and for the actions of slave masters, but he also shows how the religion provided hope for slaves themselves. In an appendix added at the end of the narrative, he draws a distinction between “the Christianity of this land” and “the Christianity of Christ,” saying that there is the “widest possible difference” between them. As he puts it, “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.” In other words, Douglass thinks that Christianity has been corrupted in America, where people hypocritically use it to justify their injustices.
Slavery, the “Peculiar Institution” of the South, caused suffering among an innumerable number of human beings. Some people could argue that the life of a domestic animal would be better than being a slave; at least animals are incapable of feeling emotions. Suffering countless atrocities, including sexual assault, beatings, and murders, these slaves endured much more than we would think is humanly possible today. Yet, white southern “Christians” committed these atrocities, believing their behaviors were neither wrong nor immoral. Looking back at these atrocities, those who call themselves Christians are appalled. In Incidents in the Life of a Slave Girl, Written by Herself, Harriet A. Jacobs describes the hypocrisy of Southern, Christian slave owners in order to show that slavery and Christianity are not congruent.
Slave-owners forced a perverse form of Christianity, one that condoned slavery, upon slaves. According to this false Christianity the enslavement of “black Africans is justified because they are the descendants of Ham, one of Noah's sons; in one Biblical story, Noah cursed Ham's descendants to be slaves” (Tolson 272). Slavery was further validated by the numerous examples of it within the bible. It was reasoned that these examples were confirmation that God condoned slavery. Douglass’s master...
In Philosophical Ethics, Utilitarianism is the doctrine that our actions are right if the outcome of our actions generate the greatest happiness amongst the majority. However, in “What is Wrong with Slavery?” some objectors of utilitarianism have tried to dismiss this moral reasoning as to having any importance by blaming the awful actions of slave traders and slave owners on utilitarianism. They attack this doctrine by saying that utilitarianism is a belief system that can either praise or condemn slavery, and utilitarianism easily commend slavery if a majority of the people visualize a slave-owning society as the most beneficial and generate greatest happiness. In this matter, the slave owners and slave traders can say that slavery is the right action because it generates the greatest happiness amongst themselves, because they may be in the illusion that they represent the majority. In response to these anti-utilitarian’s, R.M. Hare defends Unitarianism through the rebuttal of the anti-utilitarian’s claims. Hare agrees that the nature of utilitarianism can either commend or condemn slavery, but a key factor that anti-utilitarians forget is that utilitarianism shows what is wrong with slavery through reasoning, instead of just bluntly saying slavery is wrong without any proof.